Playing Whack-a-Mole in the Red Sea

What is the strategy to re-open the Red Sea to all commercial shipping?

Operation Prosperity Guardian - the US-led coalition that aims to provide maritime security in the Red Sea - is now nearly a year into its mission. Since it commenced, at least 30 ships have been hit by the Houthis, and large container ships are still being routed around Africa.

I experienced firsthand the resulting delay and increase in insurance costs when we shipped our belongings from Australia to the UK.

The US Navy in particular has been taking the fight to the Houthis, attacking launch sites as they appear, but how sustainable is this? They’re just playing whack-a-mole, and the Houthis keep adapting their strategy to avoid being detected.

Coalition warships have been pretty effective, but they can’t be everywhere. A few rough calculations (with the help of ChatGPT) tell me that the area of the Red Sea that needs to be patrolled off Yemen, taking into account the range of the current ballistic missile threat, is up to 94,000 square miles (300 miles offshore x 400 miles along the coast * 0.785 for an ellipse approximation).

Warship Defensive Capabilities

Coalition warships have so far shown the effectiveness of their drone and ballistic missile defence.

When I was in the Royal Navy in the 90s, we would look at the US Arleigh-Burke destroyers, with their AEGIS naval combat system, in awe. They always looked to be far more capable than our Type 42 Destroyers, but they had never really been tested in combat. Well, now we know, they’re the real deal.

Today’s RN’s Type-45 destroyers, with the Sea Viper air defence system and SAMPSON radar, have also proven their capability. Both HMS Duncan and HMS Diamond have rotated in and out as part of the task force.

What worries me is that it only takes a mechanical/software failure or human error, and sooner or later, one of the missiles could hit a warship. What happens then?

Aircraft Carriers operate in a Carrier Strike Group, with warships around it providing layered fleet protection. I’m not so worried about a strike on a Carrier, despite the rubbish you read in the press.

What concerns me is the destroyers and frigates in isolation. Perhaps leaving a tasking for shore-leave or heading home.

The official strategy is to provide maritime security while letting sanctions do their work to erode the Houthis’ capability, whilst also pursuing diplomatic efforts with Iran to stop them arming the Houthis.

This could take years. Meanwhile, Iranian drone and missile development continues to advance, no doubt with Russian assistance. The whole strategy seems flawed to me, especially when you consider the cost of sending a missile up to shoot down a drone.

Could Trump Make a Difference?

It will be interesting to see if the strategy changes with the new US administration. It could get worse. The America First approach could see the US Navy withdraw from the Red Sea completely.

Then again, Trump’s first term shows that he likes to be a player on the world stage, and he did have some real foreign policy wins. I also suspect, because everything ultimately is about money to him, that he will not like the cost of Operation Prosperity Guardian. That doesn’t necessarily mean a withdrawal. It could be a strategy to try and defeat the Houthis sooner rather than later. This could mean a harder approach on Iran, combined with tougher military action to defeat the Houthis.

Let’s look at his first-term approach to defeat ISIS. Much of the groundwork was laid by Obama, but Trump can credibly claim that he expanded the air campaign, increased support to local partners in the region, and loosened some of the rules of engagement for regular and special forces. This resulted in significant losses of territory for ISIS and diminished them as a fighting force.

Trump seems to love strategic ambiguity. Whether this is by design is up for debate. What it does mean is that anything can happen in the next four years.