U.S. Carrier Moving Off Coast Of Yemen To Block Iranian Arms Shipments
Source: USA Today
Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY 2:57 p.m. EDT April 20, 2015
WASHINGTON — The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt is moving toward the waters off the coast of Yemen to prepare to intercept any potential Iranian shipments of weapons to the rebels fighting the U.S.-backed government of Yemen, a Pentagon official said Monday.
Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said the carrier and ships supporting her had been in the Persian Gulf. They moved to the waters near Yemen because of increased instability there, he said.
The Roosevelt is also tracking a convoy of Iranian ships headed to the Gulf of Aden, said a Defense official speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the Iranian vessels. The Iranians have been supporting Houthi rebels in Yemen.
The Pentagon has been tracking the progress of the Iranian ships since last week, the official said.
Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/04/20/carrier-intercepts-iranian-arms/26082755/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)to prevent America shipping more arms to Saudi?
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)A senior commander at Central Command (CENTCOM), speaking on condition of anonymity, scoffed at that argument. “The reason the Saudis didn’t inform us of their plans,” he said, “is because they knew we would have told them exactly what we think — that it was a bad idea.”
Military sources said that a number of regional special forces officers and officers at U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) argued strenuously against supporting the Saudi-led intervention because the target of the intervention, the Shia Houthi movement — which has taken over much of Yemen and which Riyadh accuses of being a proxy for Tehran — has been an effective counter to Al-Qaeda.
Michael Horton, a Yemen expert close to a number of officers at SOCOM and a consultant to the U.S. and U.K. governments, picked up on this debate. Within days of the Saudi intervention’s start, he said in an email that he was “confounded” by the intervention, noting that many in SOCOM “favor the Houthis, as they have been successful in rolling back AQ [Al-Qaeda] and now IS [the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL] from a number of Yemeni governorates” — something that hundreds of U.S. drone strikes and large numbers of advisers to Yemen’s military had failed to accomplish.
Later, in a telephone interview, Horton expanded on that. “These constant reports that the Houthis are working for the Iranians are nonsense, but the view is right out of the neocon playbook,” he said. “The Israelis have been touting this line that we lost Yemen to Iran. That’s absurd. The Houthis don’t need Iranian weapons. They have plenty of their own. And they don’t require military training. They’ve been fighting Al-Qaeda since at least 2012, and they’ve been winning. Why are we fighting a movement that’s fighting Al-Qaeda?”
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/4/17/us-generals-think-saudi-strikes-in-yemen-a-bad-idea.html
samsingh
(17,599 posts)
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)Very confusing. Yemen has had civil wars since the 1960s and before it was "Socialists" vs "Nationalists" there used to be a "North Yemen" & "South Yemen" but they reunified in 1990 partly because USSR aid dried up & the Socialists were purged. The House of Saud is historically anti-communist so I know they wouldn't be their side but they intervened in the 1994 civil war. Probably not the Northeast tribal Houthi rebels because they are Shia.
The powerful organized forces are Houthis, Hadi loyalists, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and the Southern movement. The Southern Movement wants to succeed so both them & the Houthis are fighting the Hadi Government. Houthis are fighting both the AQAP & Hadi loyalists. I don't know if they are fighting each other but I have no idea what the primary goal is for them in the conflict.
So what I know -- Tribal Houthis fighting against the government. AQAP seems to be concerned with stopping the Houthis which the Saudi Coalition is concerned with as well. The Southern Movement is fighting against the Government as well but not sure if the allied or what as the no one talks about the Southern Movement even though they control more territory over anyone
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yemen_war_detailed_map.png
The red Southern movement, Green is Houthis & the gray is either Hadi loyalists or AQAP.
Poverty & corruption is rampant so Southern Movement is probably the "Socialists". Houthis probably motivated by the poverty, corruption, & discrimination. I have no idea what AQAP is fighting for except killing Houthis & who is fighting who outside of that.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)
BlueEye
(449 posts)is why we have generally stayed out of the fray, up to this point. Not that I have insider knowledge or anything, but it appears as though the Navy and Air Force have been sitting this round out, letting the Saudis "move mud" if you will.
But letting Iran freely ship weapons to the Arabian side of the Gulf would set a bad precedent, and I think the U.S. has no choice but to dissuade it with a show of force. It's worthwhile to note that this is reportedly a flotilla of Iranian flagged warships making their way toward Yemen, rather than some sort of half-assed smuggling operation using cargo vessels or speed boats. The U.S. Navy wants to remind Iran there are lines they should not cross, SOCOM's opinions on Yemen notwithstanding.
If the Wall Street Journal is to be believed (and I take that with a grain of salt), the Saudis are concerned that Iran may attempt to supply the Houthis with surface-to-air missiles, which could pose a direct threat to their warplanes over Yemen. The implication is that Saudi Arabia may be willing to engage the Iranian warships to prevent this outcome. Once either side starts shooting, it could escalate dangerously quickly. Frankly, I think it would be better for American warships to handle Iran, since our side's rules of engagement are probably prohibitive and defensive in nature.
I don't see President Obama starting a war here, obviously. Still, this all could scuttle the nuclear deal, and is a generally bad situation.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I take what Saudi Arabia is concerned with, with a grain of salt. They were constantly pressuring the US for tougher sanctions & publicly claim this or that because they were so scared of what they might do. They arranged a deal with Pakistan for them to deliver a nuke when they ask for it & publicly claimed they did this because the US wasn't tougher on Iran so they need a self-defense nuke.
Whenever an oppressed Shia minority has an uprising in Eastern Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, or Yemen they go over there & crackdown while Iran publicly supports them. Iran nationalizes oil production & actually has labor rights while the Yemen government & gulf allies uses slave labor but I don't understand the bad precedent. Wasn't it already set with US war ships already there? Yemen is supported by multiple foreign nations most of them are oppressive themselves but Iran helping an discriminated minority rebel force is bad? For who?
Not to mention the US had everything but the kitchen next on both sides of Iran's border for over a decade so the line Iran must know they cannot cross is its own border. Though US is silent when it comes to Iraq when it comes to Iran backed militias but Iraq has given contracts to US & Britain multinationals to those coveted Southern oil fields.
doxyluv13
(247 posts)1. The drone campaign wasn't very effective in stopping A.Q. and killed enough innocents that it was one of the things that radicalized the normally peaceful Houthis. From a military strategic standpoint, the object in Yemen is to make sure it's not a staging ground for attacks on the West. Yemen has been a perennial basket case so fixing it isn't really an option. The drone campaign was more a matter of servicing out relationship with the Saudis when we're doing so much to piss them off, and for domestic consumption in the U.S. where many see drone strikes as a low cost way to keep their enemies at bay.
2. Another reason:
This puts Saudi Arabia in play in a way it hasn't been before. One big fear of the Saudis is that the Houthis (Shia) will infiltrate and radicalize their minority Shia communities many of which are close to the border. There are reports Riyadh has depopulated Shiite villages along the border to prevent contact with their citizens as the Houthi occupied the border crossings. If they conduct a bombing campaign: how do they stop? They are unlikely to topple the Houthi without direct intervention. But direct intervention might lead to exactly the thing they want to prevent--instability in their own country.
Lastly, why did they feel the need to do this when Saudi Arabia traditionally keeps its jihadis and its interventions as faraway from home as possible. Does adopting a seemingly high risk strategy mean they're particularly scared, or possibly that the new King is inept?
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)The staging ground for attacks on the West is AQAP, not the Houthis plus Iran has heavily assisted the Assad regimes & Shia dominated Iraq Government. Other things I can't really pick a bone with I don't really buy the official explanations or the drones or the targets because the Yemen government strongly supported the drone campaign when AQAP is helping them out with the Houthi forces. Besides, the Sunni south also opposes the government so I think a lot of the "Al-Qaeda targets" were Sunni tribal rebels or Houthis. Everyone has good reason to overthrow the government so the targets killed a lot of civilians probably because the targets of anyone who might be an insurgent & I'm sure the Hadi loyalists were left alone.
---
AQAP is certainly real as Al-Qaeda is easy to find in countries with oppressive regimes because it helps with recruiting. I have no idea what is really going on & would like to know but I think #2 is very unlikely well not for those reasons. Saudi Arabia fears a popular uprising or being overthrown in g
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Iran's trying to muscle in on America's military industrial thingie.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)JonLP24
(29,322 posts)a country which should sponsor an Arms embargo on themselves that is also part of Saudi-coalition -- the sanctions are incredibly hypocritical demanding the Houthis release all "political prisoners" as if the Hadi government doesn't have political prisoners. How do the Houthis have "political prisoners" already but the idea they are singled out when...
Yemen / Human Rights
The government and its security forces, often considered to suffer from rampant corruption,[262] have been responsible for torture, inhumane treatment, and extrajudicial executions. There are arbitrary arrests of citizens, especially in the south, as well as arbitrary searches of homes. Prolonged pretrial detention is a serious problem, and judicial corruption, inefficiency, and executive interference undermine due process. Freedom of speech, the press, and religion are all restricted.[263] Journalists who tend to be critical of the government are often harassed and threatened by the police.[222] Homosexuality is illegal, punishable by death.[264]
Since the start of the Shia insurgency, many people accused of supporting Al-Houthi have been arrested and held without charge or trial. According to the U.S. State Department International Religious Freedom Report 2007, "Some Zaydis reported harassment and discrimination by the Government because they were suspected of sympathizing with the al-Houthis. However, it appears the Government's actions against the group were probably politically, not religiously, motivated".[265]
The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants reported several violations of refugee and asylum seekers' rights in the organization's 2008 World Refugee Survey. Yemeni authorities reportedly deported numerous foreigners without giving them access to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, despite the UN's repeated requests. Refugees further reported violence directed against them by Yemeni authorities while living in refugee camps. Yemeni officials reportedly raped and beat camp-based refugees with impunity in 2007.[266]
Yemen is ranked last of 135 countries in the 2012 Global Gender Gap Report.[267] Human Rights Watch reported on discrimination and violence against women as well as on the abolition of the minimum marriage age of fifteen for women. The onset of puberty (interpreted by some to be as low as the age of nine) was set as a requirement for marriage instead.[268] Publicity about the case of ten-year-old Yemeni divorcee Nujood Ali brought the child marriage issue to the fore not only in Yemen but also worldwide.[269][270][271]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemen#Human_rights
The US should be giving them weapons to protect themselves against Hadi government, AQAP, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt & Morocco.
Want to give themselves up & take the oppression. Not sure which members in favor or against. The safe bets for are everyone that is a Permanent member that isn't Russia or China. I've seen a worst list when it comes to temporary members -- Jordan should embargo & sanction themselves. Nigeria should just rename the country Shell so they are a safe yes vote. It is mind boggling permanent members are top arms traffickers have the power to decide who can't purchase arms. Russia is often sold as the next Hitler but this is what I found on Russia during the negotiations
U.N. Security Council Bans Sales of Arms to Houthi Fighters in Yemen
The gulf countries that are participating in the air campaign against the Iranian-backed Houthis took the lead in drafting the resolution. It passed with 14 votes, with Russia abstaining. The Russian ambassador, Vitaly I. Churkin, said he favored a cease-fire and an arms embargo that would apply to both sides in the conflict.
One of the most contentious issues was whether to call for “humanitarian pauses” in the airstrikes to allow relief to be ferried in and foreigners to be evacuated. Russia had pressed for such a pause. The gulf countries had opposed it, saying privately that it would allow the Houthis to regroup. But the Saudi allies softened their position somewhat in recent days, allowing the secretary general to “facilitate” aid delivery and evacuations, “including the establishment of humanitarian pauses, as appropriate, in coordination with the government of Yemen,” according to the text of the resolution.
<snip>
In Washington, a senior State Department official on Tuesday criticized Iran for increasing its military support to the Houthis in recent months.
“Iran is likely looking to take advantage of Houthi international isolation to expand its influence in Yemen,” the official, Gerald M. Feierstein, who is also a former American ambassador to Yemen, told a House committee.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/world/middleeast/yemen-houthis-saudi-airstrikes-arms-embargo.html
I highly doubt evidence exists Iran has already done this + the "intelligence" & financing as if this is ongoing rather than recent. I wonder if Iranian ships are actually out there but I have no problem if they were since you have Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, & Morocco bombing the hell out of Yemen with US military equipment.
There is no way an embargo is legitimate or morally justifiable. The intention is obviously to cripple a weaker foe in favor of oppressive governments
Trajano
(53 posts)At its worst.
nitpicker
(7,153 posts)US sends aircraft carrier to Yemeni waters
By Kristina Wong - 04/20/15
The Pentagon is sending a U.S. aircraft carrier to waters around Yemen following Iran's deployment of seven to nine ships to the region, some carrying weapons. The U.S. on Sunday sent the USS Theodore Roosevelt and the USS Normandy, a guided-missile cruiser, to the Gulf of Aden, said Pentagon spokesman Army Col. Steve Warren on Monday.
The Pentagon said the U.S. ships are not going to the region to intercept the Iranian ships headed to Yemen. "Certainly it's going there because of Yemeni instability, but it's not going there to intercept any ships," said Warren. He said the Roosevelt -- which was in the Persian Gulf -- was sent through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf of Aden to conduct "maritime security operations."
The deployment comes after The Hill reported on Friday that Iran was sending the armada of ships — some carrying arms — potentially to resupply the Shia Houthi rebels in Yemen. In regards to the convoy, Warren said, "We're keeping a very close eye on maritime activities in that region."
(snip)
The Roosevelt and the Normandy join at least seven other Navy combat ships in the area. The U.S. has deployed the destroyers USS Forrest Sherman and USS Winston Churchill, two minesweepers — the USS Sentry and USS Dextrous — and three amphibious ships — the USS Iwo Jima, USS New York and USS Fort McHenry — according to the Navy. A dry cargo ship, the USNS Charles Drew, is also in the region.
(snip)
