On May 6, 2025, President Donald Trump announced the United States would cease its bombing campaign against Yemen’s Houthi rebels, marking a significant shift in the military operations that began in mid-March. This development comes as part of a ceasefire agreement brokered by Oman, focusing specifically on maritime security while leaving several critical regional tensions unresolved. The agreement represents a targeted de-escalation in one aspect of a complex Middle Eastern conflict landscape, but questions remain about its durability and broader implications.

Background and Context of the Conflict

The US military campaign against the Houthis was launched in response to the Iran-backed group’s attacks on shipping in the Red Sea, which intensified following the outbreak of conflict in Gaza in October 2023. The Houthis claimed these attacks were in solidarity with Palestinians110. Since November 2023, there have been 111 attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea, leading to a 90% decrease in cargo vessels transiting through this crucial maritime corridor5. Many shipping companies were forced to reroute vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, adding up to 17 days of transit time and millions of dollars in increased fuel costs5.

The US military response, while extensive, faced significant challenges. Within just seven weeks, militants successfully downed at least seven American drones valued at millions of dollars, complicating the transition to the next phase of operations13. The effectiveness of the strikes against Houthi capabilities was also limited, as the group demonstrated unexpected resilience13.

Historical Context of Yemen’s Conflict

The situation in Yemen represents one layer of a complex regional conflict that began in 2014 when Houthi rebels seized control of significant portions of the country, including the capital Sanaa. In March 2015, a coalition led by Saudi Arabia began a military campaign against the Houthis811. Despite various attempts at peace, including a significant truce in April 2022 that was extended twice, lasting conflict resolution has remained elusive1115.

Terms of the US-Houthi Ceasefire

According to the announcement by Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi, following ”recent discussions and contacts conducted by the Sultanate of Oman with the United States and the relevant authorities in Sana’a,” both sides have agreed to a ceasefire2. The key provisions include:

  1. Neither side will target the other, including American vessels in the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandab Strait
  2. Freedom of navigation and the smooth flow of international commercial shipping will be ensured
  3. The US will halt its bombing campaign against Houthi targets in Yemen1210

President Trump characterized the agreement by stating that the Houthis ”have surrendered, but more importantly, we will take them at their word…they have indicated they will no longer target ships”1. A defense official confirmed to CNN that the US military was directed on Monday night to suspend its strikes against the Houthis1.

Stakeholder Reactions and Perspectives

US Administration Response

The Trump administration has portrayed the ceasefire as a diplomatic victory. National Security Adviser Marco Rubio characterized the agreement as ”a significant development,” noting that ”This has always been a matter of freedom of navigation. These are individuals equipped with advanced weaponry threatening international shipping, and our goal was to put an end to that”1. The cessation of US military actions is anticipated to bolster broader discussions related to the Iran nuclear deal1.

Houthi Position

The Houthi response has been more nuanced. Mohammed Ali al-Houthi, a member of the Houthis’ Supreme Political Council, indicated that ”Trump’s declaration to end American aggression in Yemen will first be assessed on the ground”10. More significantly, he noted that ”The operations in Yemen were and continue to be support for Gaza to halt aggression and facilitate aid,” implying that the group would not cease its actions against Israel10.

This position was reinforced by Mahdi al-Mashat, the head of the Houthi Supreme Political Council, who explicitly stated that the Iran-aligned group will continue their attacks to support Gaza12. He urged Israeli citizens to ”stay in their shelters as their government will be incapable of safeguarding them,” clearly indicating that the ceasefire with the United States did not encompass a cessation of the group’s operations against Israel12.

Israeli Perspective

The ceasefire announcement came shortly after Israel conducted significant military operations against Houthi targets. The Israeli military executed airstrikes on Sanaa’s airport, causing substantial destruction and rendering the facility non-operational, and launched multiple waves of strikes on Yemen’s port city of Hodeidah10. These operations were in retaliation for a Houthi missile attack that breached Israel’s missile defense system and struck near Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv1.

The US State Department has clarified that the ceasefire agreement does not pertain to the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Houthis, stating, ”It was made explicitly clear that the arrangement directly relates to Houthi activities along the Yemeni coast, particularly concerning U.S. shipping”10.

Devil’s Advocate Analysis: Limitations and Challenges

Questionable Sustainability

The ceasefire agreement faces several challenges that may limit its effectiveness and longevity:

  1. Selective Application: The agreement specifically addresses US-Houthi interactions but does not encompass the broader regional conflict, particularly the ongoing hostilities between the Houthis and Israel1012. This selective application creates an artificial boundary in what is effectively an interconnected regional conflict.
  2. Contradictory Messaging: While Trump characterized the agreement as a Houthi ”surrender,” Houthi officials have presented it differently, emphasizing their continued commitment to operations against Israel11012. This disconnect in public messaging reflects potentially incompatible understandings of the agreement.
  3. Verification Mechanisms: The agreement appears to lack robust verification mechanisms to ensure compliance. The ”take them at their word” approach mentioned by Trump suggests limited formal enforcement procedures1.
  4. Political Motivations: The timing of the agreement, amid ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran and following challenges in the US military campaign, raises questions about whether political and strategic considerations may have influenced the decision to accept a limited ceasefire1210.

Historical Precedent

Previous attempts at ceasefires in Yemen have demonstrated the fragility of such agreements. The UN-brokered truce of April 2022, while initially successful in reducing violence and improving humanitarian conditions, ultimately expired in October 2022 when parties rejected an extension proposal15. This historical pattern suggests caution in assessing the durability of the current US-Houthi ceasefire.

Future Scenarios: Potential Trajectories

Scenario 1: Sustained Maritime Peace with Continued Regional Tensions

In this scenario, the ceasefire between the US and Houthis holds regarding maritime security, leading to a gradual return of commercial shipping to the Red Sea routes. However, Houthi attacks against Israel continue, potentially prompting further Israeli military responses. The disconnection between maritime security and the broader conflict creates a paradoxical situation where peace and conflict coexist in different domains.

Key Indicators:

  • Resumption of commercial shipping through the Red Sea
  • Continued Houthi attacks on Israeli targets
  • Israeli military responses limited to specific Houthi capabilities targeting Israel

Scenario 2: Gradual Regional De-escalation

The US-Houthi ceasefire serves as a starting point for broader regional de-escalation. Progress in Iran nuclear negotiations, potentially facilitated by Oman, creates momentum for reducing tensions across multiple fronts. In this scenario, the Houthis gradually reduce operations against Israel as part of a comprehensive regional understanding.

Key Indicators:

  • Successful progress in US-Iran nuclear negotiations
  • Reduced frequency and intensity of Houthi attacks on Israel
  • Diplomatic engagement between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis building on previous efforts
  • Increased humanitarian access and economic recovery in Yemen

Scenario 3: Ceasefire Collapse and Renewed Escalation

The ceasefire proves short-lived as continued Houthi attacks on Israel and subsequent Israeli retaliation create an untenable situation. US interests are drawn back into the conflict either through direct targeting of ships despite the agreement or through support for Israeli operations. The collapse of the ceasefire leads to intensified military operations by all parties.

Key Indicators:

  • Renewed Houthi attacks on commercial shipping
  • Escalation of Israeli strikes deeper into Yemen
  • US resumption of military operations against Houthi targets
  • Increased Iranian material support to the Houthis

Scenario 4: Limited Maritime Stability with Progressive Normalization

The ceasefire holds specifically for maritime commerce, allowing for a carefully managed return of shipping to the Red Sea. While Houthi-Israeli tensions continue, they remain below a threshold that would trigger US re-engagement. Over time, economic incentives created by resumed trade flows generate pressure within Yemen for broader normalization.

Key Indicators:

  • Formal security arrangements for commercial shipping in the Red Sea
  • Gradual reduction in insurance premiums for vessels transiting the area
  • Economic recovery in Houthi-controlled areas tied to port operations
  • Decreased intensity of Houthi-Israeli exchanges without full cessation

Implications for Global Shipping and Regional Security

Maritime Commerce

The ceasefire agreement, if sustained, could have significant positive implications for global shipping. The return to Red Sea and Suez Canal routes would reduce transit times by up to 17 days compared to the Cape of Good Hope alternative, lowering fuel costs and potentially easing global supply chain pressures5. However, shipping lines are likely to approach any return cautiously, with Maersk noting it is ”still too early to speculate about timing” regarding route changes7.

Industry analysts suggest that any return to the Red Sea would trigger a phased series of re-routings that would likely take several weeks to prepare and another 1-2 months before normal schedules were operational7. An industry-wide return would also initially spark weeks of port congestion and disruption to global supply chains before normalizing7.

Regional Power Dynamics

The ceasefire reflects and potentially reinforces several shifts in regional power dynamics:

  1. Iranian Influence: The agreement may signal Iran’s strategic flexibility in managing its proxy relationships while pursuing diplomatic objectives regarding sanctions relief through nuclear negotiations10.
  2. Saudi Disengagement: The US-Houthi agreement follows a pattern of Saudi Arabia’s gradual disengagement from direct military involvement in Yemen, following earlier communication channels between Saudi Arabia and the Houthi rebels11.
  3. Omani Diplomatic Role: The successful mediation by Oman enhances its status as a regional diplomatic player, demonstrating its capability in brokering deals between adversaries2. Oman’s Foreign Minister explicitly noted that he hopes this outcome ”will lead to further progress on many regional issues”2.

Conclusion

The US-Houthi ceasefire represents a targeted diplomatic intervention focused specifically on maritime security in the Red Sea. While potentially significant for global shipping if sustained, it addresses only one dimension of a complex regional conflict landscape. The agreement’s selective application-covering US-Houthi maritime interactions but not Houthi-Israeli hostilities-creates an inherently unstable situation that may limit its long-term effectiveness.

The divergent characterizations of the agreement by US and Houthi officials highlight the challenges ahead. Where the Trump administration portrays it as a Houthi capitulation, Houthi leaders emphasize their continued commitment to operations against Israel in support of Gaza. This fundamental disconnect in understanding, combined with the lack of comprehensive regional approach, suggests the ceasefire may prove more of a tactical pause than a strategic resolution.

As global shipping companies cautiously evaluate the security situation, and regional powers adjust to this latest diplomatic development, the true test of the ceasefire will be whether it can withstand the pressures of ongoing regional tensions or serve as a foundation for broader de-escalation efforts.

(AI-supported summary of sources)