A Deep Rift Threatens the Anti-Houthi Coalition in Yemen UAE Expansion Swallows What Remains of Saudi Influence

NYN | Reports and Analyses 

Signs of division within the camp opposing Sana’a are accelerating, as the power structures established by the coalition in the south begin to unravel.

The Southern Transitional Council (STC), the UAE’s military arm, has seized vital oil sites in Hadhramaut and large parts of the southern governorates—reshuffling the political deck and revealing the collapse of the Saudi-backed government’s ability to retain any meaningful influence on the ground.

Field developments show that the government nurtured by Riyadh for years is now incapable of defending even its own headquarters in Aden. This weakness is no longer a secret: STC sources confirmed to Reuters that government members left Aden without an official decision—an incident reflecting a total loss of control and full dependence on Riyadh, which is now unable to protect its allies.

These successive failures reinforce the view that the coalition has not succeeded in building an independent Yemeni authority but instead created a fragile system built on loyalties and interests—quickly collapsing in its first real test against Abu Dhabi’s ambitions and its rivalry with Riyadh.

UAE Expansion and the Proxy-Control Model

According to regional and international reports, the UAE treats the south as a zone of direct influence, clearly reflected in the STC’s military and political maneuvers.

The recent expansion in Hadhramaut was not a sudden move but part of a long-running strategy that included building a large Abu Dhabi-aligned military force exceeding 120,000 fighters.

The STC’s takeover of oil areas and ports represents a strategic step for the UAE, enabling it to broaden its maritime and land influence in one of the region’s most critical geostrategic areas.

This type of control relies not on direct administration but on empowering local proxies— a model the UAE has proven able to implement in several countries.

Observers argue that Abu Dhabi has succeeded in achieving what Riyadh failed to accomplish throughout years of war.

While Saudi Arabia bet on a loyal government, the UAE built influence rooted in armed power—making it today the strongest actor in southern Yemen, capable of imposing new realities without significant resistance.

The STC Narrative and Attempts to Justify Its Control

STC leaders attempt to justify their actions by presenting them as part of “restoring stability” and combating “smuggling and terrorism.”

But field data exposes contradictions in this narrative: the STC took control of areas where the Houthis had no presence or activity, and Hadhramaut was among the most stable governorates before STC forces entered.

The Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth notes that the STC uses an inflated security narrative to legitimize its control, while in reality the move is part of a power struggle between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi over oil wealth in the south.

Thus, the STC’s justifications appear more like an attempt to cover a wide-ranging military and political takeover.

Analysts, meanwhile, believe the STC is seeking to cement a de facto authority—advancing its long-standing aspiration for secession.

However, this trajectory may lead to further internal confrontations, particularly with local forces refusing to submit to the UAE’s southern project.

Sana’a’s Interpretation: External Power Struggle and “An Occupation Collapsing from Within”

In Sana’a, the ongoing developments in the south are seen as a clear manifestation of the coalition’s collapse.

Ansar Allah officials argue that the Saudi-UAE conflict has become deeper than the confrontation with Sana’a itself, and that the south has turned into an arena for settling scores between two powers that failed to achieve their objectives after nine years of war.

Sana’a maintains that these events represent a redistribution of control zones between the Saudi and Emirati “occupations,” and that the local forces aligned with them are merely tools that will be discarded later.

Leader Mohammed al-Bukhaiti argues that the flight of officials from Aden and the power struggle in Hadhramaut reveal a truth the coalition tried to hide for years: “There is no legitimacy—only authorities run from abroad to serve non-Yemeni interests.”

Across Yemen, north and south, there is growing public belief that the coalition is entering a phase of genuine disintegration, and that what remains is little more than a struggle over spoils and resources.

Meanwhile, Sana’a continues to consolidate its position as a unified force holding the initiative, in contrast to a fragmented camp torn between the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

A Collapsing Coalition and a People Paying the Price

Current developments show that the coalition formed in 2015 under the slogan of “restoring legitimacy” is today at its weakest point.

The conflict between its factions is no longer hidden; it is now manifested in the disintegration of the government it sponsors and the collapse of Riyadh’s influence in the face of rapid and sweeping Emirati moves.

While coalition powers remain preoccupied with dividing influence and resources, Yemenis face harsh economic and living conditions, amid service deterioration, declining security in the south, and worsening humanitarian crises across the country.

This reality strengthens Sana’a’s narrative that the current situation is the natural outcome of foreign intervention that has brought nothing but war and division.

As the fragmentation continues, indicators point toward rising tensions in the south—at a time when Sana’a appears to be the biggest beneficiary of its rivals’ disunity, presenting itself as the only force that has maintained cohesion throughout the long years of war, while the coalition that came to defeat it collapses from within before losing on the battlefield.