At the recentUN Security Council meeting, both the United States and the United Kingdom defended the legality of their strikes against Houthi rebels in Yemen. The airstrikes were conducted by an international coalition led by the US, with support from Britain, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands. This series of events captured the attention of the international community, instigating a broader debate concerning both the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, as well as compliance with Security Council resolution 2722 (2024), which demands an end to Houthi attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea.
During this pivotal meeting, the United States justified the strikes by asserting they were entirely compliant with international law. The US representative categorically stated that their actions were necessary measures, taken in self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. The continuous threat posed by Houthi attacks on commercial vessels according to them had disrupted maritime navigation and endangered innocent lives. The UK representative echoed these sentiments, stating that these strikes were necessary and proportionate actions in self-defense, and extreme care was taken to avoid civilian casualties.
However, not all council members agreed with this view. The delegate from Russia, for instance, expressed significant concern about the potential for excessive use of force. They maintained that the right to self-defense does not extend to commercial shipping and stressed the importance of freedom of navigation under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. They also cautioned against further military adventurism. Other Council members echoed these concerns, with many advocating for a diplomatic resolution to the tensions in the region. Switzerland’s delegate stated any military action beyond immediate protection would be disproportionate, while the representative from China stressed the need for calm and restraint to avert further destabilization in the Middle East.
The UN Secretary-General António Guterres issued a statement calling for adherence to international law and avoidance of acts that could exacerbate the situation in Yemen. He urged all member states defending their vessels from attacks to do so in accordance with international law.
A section of the global community argue that these airstrikes potentially stand to perpetuate the ongoing cycle of violence. Houthi senior official Hussein al-Ezzi condemned the attacks on social media, and warned of dire consequences. Additionally, Hassan Nasrallah, the General Secretary of Hezbollah in Lebanon referred to these strikes as foolish, a claim further underlined by his statement which noted a contradiction between the strikes and calls for avoiding military escalation.
The Houthis, backed by Iran, have been targeting ships in the Red Sea for months. They claim that they are acting in support of Gaza and their focus is only on Israel-linked ships. However, many of their attacks have been indiscriminate, leading some experts to contend that the group is seeking to strengthen its position in the region. Emilia Pierce, a Rule of Law Program Officer at the DT Institute, advocates for a measured and strategic approach, warning against the reliance solely on military force due to the potential for further escalation that could drive the country into renewed conflict.