By Mohamad Hammoud

Lebanon – Under the Trump administration, the United States intervened in Yemen’s Red Sea conflict to project strength—to signal to Iran and its allies that American power could still dominate the region, secure global trade routes and neutralize allied groups. Instead, the intervention has backfired. The United States and "Israel" failed to stop the war-torn, impoverished Ansarullah movement from striking American warships and "Israeli"-occupied Palestinian cities—raising a pressing question: how can they confront Iran, a far more advanced and better-armed adversary? This collapse in deterrence is no longer theoretical; it has been made undeniable by a series of bold Ansarullah strikes that exposed critical vulnerabilities in US and "Israeli" military systems.

Vulnerabilities Exposed: Ansarullah Operations as a Game-Changer

Recent Ansarullah operations have starkly exposed vulnerabilities in US and "Israeli" military systems. One notable incident occurred in the Red Sea when the Ansarullah launched an audacious operation on a symbol of American naval dominance: the USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group. This strike damaged the aircraft carrier and destroyed an $18 million US fighter jet. The loss was not only financial—it was symbolic. It demonstrated that US naval air superiority, long considered untouchable, could be challenged by an unconventional resistance group using low-cost, Iranian-supported weaponry.

The second strike landed in “Tel Aviv”, shattering the myth of "Israeli" invulnerability. Despite possessing cutting-edge defense systems and real-time intelligence coordination with the US, "Israel" could not prevent a missile strike on its capital. The Ansarullah fired an Iranian-designed “Hussein” missile that bypassed American THAAD systems and "Israeli" Arrow interceptors, landing dangerously close to Ben Gurion Airport. This strike demolished the perception that "Israel’s" multilayered missile defense network—Iron Dome, David’s Sling, Arrow, and US-integrated radar—was impenetrable.

The psychological and strategic consequences of this operation are profound. It raises questions about the reliability of "Israel's" multi-layered defenses, including the Iron Dome and Arrow systems, which form the bedrock of its security doctrine and lucrative defense exports.

Flipping the Narrative: From Message to Messenger

The political and psychological implications of these operations are significant. The Ansarullah have flipped the deterrence narrative. Rather than being targets meant to send a warning to Iran, they have become the messengers—issuing a bold and direct challenge to American and "Israeli" dominance. Their message is clear: if an impoverished Yemeni militia cannot be stopped, confronting Iran will be an even more formidable task. This shift weakens US diplomatic leverage, particularly in the Gulf, where countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE are rethinking their defense partnerships and strategic dependencies.

The Cost Imbalance: An Unsustainable Cycle

At the heart of this conflict is a staggering cost imbalance. An Ansarullah drone worth less than $20,000 can destroy a US MQ-9 Reaper drone valued at over $30 million. Western militaries are trapped in an unsustainable economic cycle. Since mid-March, over 800 airstrikes have targeted Ansarullah positions, yet the missile launches from Yemen continue unabated. For every inexpensive missile launched, Western nations must respond with interceptors and naval systems costing millions, leading to a strategic quagmire. As retired British Colonel Richard Kemp observed, this asymmetry is not incidental—it is strategic.

The Financial Battlefield: Iran's Strategic Advantage

This economic strategy has transformed the Red Sea into a battleground where financial exhaustion is the ultimate goal. Military analyst Janatan Sayeh emphasizes that Iran's modular support system allows the Ansarullah to assemble their own drones and missiles locally. By supplying parts rather than finished weapons, Iran mitigates the risks to its supply chain and enables the Ansarullah to adapt continuously. Even if some components are intercepted, the existing knowledge and infrastructure in Yemen ensure that production continues, making military success an elusive target.

Tehran’s Strategic Gains

Without deploying a single conventional unit, Iran has opened a low-cost front against its adversaries. Tehran provides guidance, training and parts, all while avoiding direct confrontation. Its plausible deniability shields it from retaliation and complicates negotiations. As Sayeh noted, the Ansarullah are not officially part of Iran’s state apparatus and therefore cannot be easily addressed in nuclear talks.

Conclusion

The Red Sea crisis marks a turning point in global conflict dynamics. The Ansarullah have shown that innovation and persistence, not high-tech supremacy, define power in modern warfare. The failure of Western systems to contain a militia using improvised weapons reflects the limits of military hierarchies based on wealth and hardware. As long as cost asymmetry persists and Iranian support continues, the West faces a drawn-out, draining engagement with no clear exit. The age of overwhelming technological dominance is waning. Strategy, resilience and adaptation now shape the future of warfare.