The story of the Trump-Houthis agreement

The last thing Middle East observers expected was for US President Donald Trump to announce a halt to military operations against the Houthis during his meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney.

After a skirmish over the purchase of Canada, Trump swiftly moved to the far east, announcing the Houthis’ surrender.

This raised many questions about the nature of the agreement, who was mediating it, what the concessions were, and whether the halt to targeting included all ships in the Red Sea, or US vessels.

As soon as Trump finished speaking, Oman came out to add some clarity to the ambiguous agreement.

The Omani Foreign Minister Badr al Busaidi said that Washington and the Houthis had reached a ceasefire agreement after discussions and contacts his country had conducted with both parties.

He explained in an initial statement posted on X that under the agreement, both parties would stop targeting each other, specifically “US ships in the Red Sea and Bab al Mandab to ensure freedom of navigation and the smooth flow of international commercial shipping”.

But the Omani minister followed up with a post claiming that mediation efforts had ended the conflict between the two sides, likely indicating that the United States was moving to end operations against the Houthis.

When the US president was asked about reports that the Houthis had no intention of stopping targeting Israeli ships, he replied that he was unaware of that, explaining that he was certain that the Houthis would stop targeting US interests or anything related to us, as he put it.

The US announcement came as a surprise to Israel, as a senior Israeli official told Axios website that the US hadn’t informed them of the ceasefire.

This isn’t the first time the US president has surprised his country’s ally in the Middle East.

Last month, Benjamin Netanyahu was shocked by Trump’s intention to negotiate with Tehran over a new nuclear agreement, less than 24 hours after their meeting at the White House.

The Israeli prime minister had tried to push Washington to adopt a military option against Iran’s nuclear program.

The recent agreement raised questions for former US envoy to the Middle East Dennis Ross, who wrote on X, “President Trump says we will stop striking the Houthis because they will stop fighting, but the mediating countries, Oman, say the agreement applies to attacks on US ships… What does it mean for ships of other countries and attacks on Israelis? It’s not clear at all”.

Less than 16 minutes after Ross’s post, the Omani foreign minister wrote a third, saying, “I reiterate that today’s news about the situation in the Red Sea means that diplomatic efforts have brought an end to the conflict between the United States and the Houthis in Yemen”.

He added, “This means that both sides will cease mutual targeting, ensuring freedom of navigation for international commercial shipping in the Red Sea”.

The Omani minister’s third post is identical to his first in confirming the cessation of mutual attacks.

However, this time, it was worded in a way that did not explicitly identify US vessels, as was the case in the initial statement.

This raises the question of whether the Houthis had secretly pledged to halt their attacks on all vessels, whether American or otherwise.

The Houthis publicly explained, through their political bureau member, Abdulmalik al Ajri, to Agence France-Presse, that “Israeli ships are vulnerable to targeting, while American and other vessels are subject to the agreement”.

Based on the group’s behavior in the coming days, it will become clear whether this statement was merely populist rhetoric for media consumption, or whether the agreement with Washington will truly represent the end of their attacks on various vessels in the Red Sea.

US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff reportedly led the negotiations with the Omani side over the past few days.

Witkoff was sworn in at the White House on Tuesday, officially assuming his duties, despite having led sensitive negotiations in the Middle East and with Russia and Ukraine for several months.

With his latest announcement, Trump appears to have left the ball in Israel’s court.

Last Sunday, Israel faced a Houthi missile attack targeting Ben Gurion Airport before responding by targeting Sanaa airport.

A day after the agreement with Washington, Israeli media reported the interception of a ballistic missile launched by the Houthis from Yemen over the Red Sea.

This week, Israel escalated its direct attacks against the Houthis after they targeted Ben Gurion Airport.

The Israeli military announced Monday that it had bombed Houthi targets in western Yemen, including the port of Hodeidah.

On Tuesday, it also launched airstrikes targeting Sana’a International Airport, putting it out of service, as well as several power stations around Sanaa.

A few days ago, the Atlantic Council published an analytical paper warning that the United States is trapped in a strategic trap in the Red Sea.

It’s using its military resources to secure navigation, while China quietly benefits from this, without intervening militarily.

The paper also indicates that Washington needs to work to expel China from strategic areas such as the Red Sea, stressing that Beijing has supported the Houthis as part of a deliberate policy that has enabled it to protect itself from the consequences of attacks on ships in the region, while continuing to reap commercial gains.

Today, the Houthis are working with Chinese satellite technology and carrying out their attacks using guidance systems built on Chinese electronics, a model that reflects Beijing’s use of its technological tools to enhance its regional influence while maintaining a safe distance from direct confrontation.

US forces have carried out more than 800 airstrikes since the beginning of the year, averaging 50 per week.

The cost of the operation in just under three weeks has exceeded nearly $1 billion, according to CNN.

However, the latest agreement brings to an end one of the rarest and most extensive military operations under Trump, who is known for his opposition to US involvement in long and costly wars.