An unexpected ceasefire agreement between The United States and the Houthi rebels brokered through Omani mediation, appears on its face to pause the dramatic escalation of U.S. military strikes and Houthi maritime assaults in the Red Sea. The big question, however, is whether this ceasefire is anything more than a tactical timeout in a war that now radiates well beyond Yemen’s borders, according to an opinion article published by The Hill.
Imran Khalid, the writer of the opinion thought “For nearly a decade, the Houthis have not just survived but entrenched themselves in Yemen’s northern highlands, fending off a combined Saudi-Emirati blitzkrieg backed — militarily and politically — by Washington.
In this latest chapter, it was Operation Rough Rider, a costly American campaign initiated in mid-March, that aimed to dislodge or at least deter the Iran-backed movement from targeting international shipping and American naval assets.
The result? Seven downed U.S. drones, two lost fighter jets, over $1 billion sunk into the sand — and no discernible strategic gain.
So, Trump pulled the plug. Not with the grace of strategic recalibration, but with a bluntness that makes his transactional worldview painfully clear. The Houthis, he declared, had earned a chance. Translation: They withstood the barrage; we’ve run out of options. But this so-called ceasefire is already a study in contradiction.
For starters, it notably excludes Israel — a fact that has not only rattled Tel Aviv but exposed a fissure in the traditional U.S.-Israel axis.
The Houthis, emboldened by what they frame as a David-versus-Goliath triumph, have vowed to continue their missile and drone campaigns against Israeli targets in “solidarity with Palestine.” Days before the ceasefire, Houthi rockets reached the outskirts of Ben Gurion Airport. Israel’s response — striking Sanaa International Airport — did little to dull the group’s resolve.
From the Israeli vantage point, Trump’s maneuver reeks of betrayal. There was no consultation, no forewarning.
More broadly, what this ceasefire signals is not so much peace as exhaustion. Trump, ever the salesman of “America First,” appears to have recognized that the returns on military investment in Yemen are nil. The U.S. campaign not only failed to neutralize the Houthis but may have actually amplified their stature — both regionally and symbolically.
From their vantage point, forcing the world’s most powerful military into a truce without conceding on Israel is nothing short of a propaganda coup.
Yet, any celebration may be premature. This is not a ceasefire in the classical sense but a “tactical arrangement” — an ephemeral truce that could collapse at the first provocation.
So where does this leave the Middle East? In flux, as usual. Trump’s decision may temporarily reduce American exposure in the Red Sea, but it has done little to advance a broader regional settlement. It may, in fact, deepen the fragmentation of U.S. alliances.
In typical Trumpian fashion, the ceasefire is being sold as a triumph of strength. But beneath the bluster lies an uncomfortable truth: it is a retreat cloaked in bravado, a transactional pause in a conflict that is far from over.
As with so many of Trump’s foreign policy decisions, it is less about peace and more about optics — more about momentary relief than strategic resolution. Whether this arrangement holds is beside the point. Its very existence has shifted the terrain. And in the volatile calculus of Middle Eastern geopolitics, that alone is a development worth watching.