U.S. Study Acknowledges That Sanaa Has Transcended Geography: A Rising Power Redrawing the Region After Supporting Gaza

NYN | Articles 

First Axis: A U.S. Reading of the “Post-Gaza Calm”… A Misleading Impression

The American magazine Foreign Affairs published an extensive analytical study prepared by April Longley Alley, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute and former political adviser to the UN Special Envoy to Yemen. The study addresses what it describes as the most dangerous regional threat being ignored in the post–Gaza war phase: Yemen and the rising role of the Sanaa government’s forces.

The study argues that the ceasefire in Gaza last October created a false impression of de-escalation, both in the Red Sea and within Yemen itself. Following Sanaa’s announcement of a halt to its operations against ships linked to the occupying entity, and the decline in direct attacks on U.S. naval assets, Washington assumed that the Yemeni file had entered a period of stagnation that could be managed through traditional tools such as sanctions and limited containment.

However, according to the author, this “calm” was merely temporary and quickly dissipated. Deeper transformations were accumulating beneath the surface, and Sanaa was not in retreat but rather in the process of repositioning itself and maximizing the political and military gains it had accumulated during the phase of supporting Gaza.

The study notes that the narrow U.S. reading of the situation overlooked the fact that Sanaa’s forces treated this period as a strategic opportunity rather than a fleeting truce, making any attempt to contain them from a distance a fragile gamble, prone to collapse at the first serious field test.

Second Axis: Fractures Within Sanaa’s Adversaries and Shifts in Eastern Yemen

In early December, southern and eastern Yemen witnessed, according to Foreign Affairs, a dramatic shift when the UAE-backed Southern Transitional Council launched a broad campaign to seize control of strategic areas in Hadramawt and al-Mahra—two regions of critical importance due to their energy resources and their direct links to the Saudi and Omani borders.

The study considers this move a de facto upheaval in the balance of power within the coalition-aligned camp, reigniting deep contradictions inside what is known as the “internationally recognized government.” The separatist agenda backed by Abu Dhabi has come into direct conflict with Riyadh’s security and political interests.

This situation, the analysis argues, created favorable conditions for the Sanaa government’s forces to expand their movements eastward, particularly toward oil-rich areas, amid open rhetoric about “completing control over all of Yemen.” The author notes that Sanaa is closely monitoring these internal fractures and recognizes that conflicts among its adversaries represent a strategic opportunity rather than an immediate threat.

The study also warns that any internal escalation between Saudi- and Emirati-aligned factions could create a wide strategic vacuum that Sanaa’s forces could exploit militarily or politically—strengthening their negotiating position while weakening their opponents on multiple fronts.

Third Axis: Military Capabilities and Support for Gaza — From Experience to Regional Reconfiguration

Foreign Affairs points out that Sanaa’s forces invested years of a fragile truce in developing their military capabilities through local production, enabling them to manufacture ballistic missiles and advanced drones. This provided them with an unprecedented level of technical independence compared to earlier phases of the war.

The study views the support for Gaza as a qualitative turning point in the operational experience of the Sanaa government’s forces. While missiles in the early stages of the conflict failed to reach deep into occupied territory, by mid-2025—according to the study—they had become capable of striking strategic targets, including Lod Airport, known under occupation as Ben Gurion Airport, as well as penetrating air-defense systems in Umm al-Rashrash (Eilat).

The author emphasizes that this leap was not merely a technical upgrade but the result of real combat experience, allowing for the testing of new weapons and improvements in targeting accuracy. This, in turn, enhanced Sanaa’s standing as a regional player possessing effective tools of pressure.

At the same time, the study warns that reliance on financial pressure alone could backfire, pushing Sanaa’s forces to compensate for losses by seizing additional resources—most notably oil-rich Marib—or by imposing new deterrence equations. These could include forcing Saudi Arabia to release withheld Yemeni funds or to provide compensation for years of war.

The study notes that Sanaa’s public threats toward Riyadh, along with the re-circulation of footage from previous attacks on Aramco facilities, signal a clear readiness to resort to force again if circumstances require it—particularly as Saudi confidence in the U.S. security umbrella continues to erode.

The analysis concludes that the U.S. bet on containing the Sanaa government’s forces from afar, or relying on the occupying entity to serve as a deterrent, is highly risky. Sanaa, according to the magazine, is entrenched in rugged mountainous terrain resistant to decisive military resolution, and any additional Israeli strikes may strengthen its domestic legitimacy rather than weaken it.

In the absence of a long-term U.S. strategy, the author warns that Yemen is on track to become a new regional center of gravity—reshaping power balances in the post-Gaza era in ways that may surprise Washington and its allies, and cementing a reality in which Sanaa is no longer merely an arena of conflict, but an influential actor in regional equations.

Source:
Foreign Affairs (United States)