A Distant Sound Draws Near: Who Is Knocking on Israel’s Southern Door?

NYN | Reports and Analyses 

Amid rapidly unfolding developments in the region and the outbreak of direct confrontation between Iran and Israel late last week, Hebrew media outlets have begun intensifying their coverage and analysis of other regional actors that could join the conflict—chief among them, the Sana’a forces, which recently announced missile strikes on Israeli targets in the occupied city of Tel Aviv (Jaffa).

Prominent Israeli outlets have posed a striking question in their security reports and analyses: Will the attack on Iran also impact the Houthis (Ansar Allah)? This suggests the possibility that the scope of retaliatory responses could expand to new fronts in the region—from Yemen to Lebanon and Iraq.

Don’t Bet on Their Withdrawal

In unofficial commentary circulated by journalists and analysts close to Israel’s security establishment on Israeli television channels, a notably pessimistic tone emerged regarding the possibility of “neutralizing” the Sana’a forces—especially now that direct confrontation between Iran and Israel has entered its early stages.

One Israeli analyst said in a televised appearance: “The Houthis are showing no signs of wanting to step back. Don’t expect them to raise a white flag even if Israel wraps up its conflict with Iran.”

This perspective reflects a growing recognition in Israeli circles that the Sana’a forces are no longer merely an Iranian proxy, but an independent actor in the conflict. Their military decisions are increasingly driven by their own political and security objectives—chief among them, retaliating against what they describe as Israeli crimes in Gaza.

There is growing concern in Israeli discourse about the formation of a multi-front confrontation that could simultaneously involve the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen.

Intelligence assessments published in Hebrew media stress that striking Iran may not bring the conflict to an end. Instead, it could trigger an open-ended and multi-directional escalation—especially from actors that no longer await direct orders from Tehran.

In this context, an Israeli security expert warned against the illusion of resolving the crisis by focusing on a single front, stating:
“An attack on Tehran could ignite fires that are hard to extinguish, because the other arms of resistance will not remain idle—foremost among them the Houthis (Ansar Allah) in Yemen.”

Sana’a’s Statement: A Clear Stance and Dual Messaging

Just hours ago, Sana’a forces announced a missile operation targeting sensitive sites in Tel Aviv, declaring it an act of solidarity with both the Palestinian and Iranian peoples, and a direct response to the crimes of siege and starvation in Gaza. The operation, they said, was coordinated with simultaneous actions carried out by the Iranian military and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

In their statement, the Sana’a forces asserted that their involvement in the escalation is part of their longstanding pact with the resistance in Gaza. They affirmed that strikes will continue as long as the aggression and blockade persist—showing no signs of backing down or de-escalating.

Conclusion: A Shift in the Nature of the Conflict

Observers believe that what is unfolding is no longer merely a series of reciprocal strikes but a significant shift in the nature of regional engagement. Traditional fronts are no longer the only active ones—new players have joined the fray, each according to its own timing and strategic calculus.

In this evolving context, Sana’a forces are now under the spotlight—not only for their military capabilities but also for the nature of their political decision-making and its growing independence from Tehran’s direct command.