UN Security Council adopts strongly-worded resolution condemning Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping

The United Nations Security Council on Wednesday evening (10 January) adopted a resolution condemning Houthi attacks against international maritime shipping in the Red Sea.

The resolution condemns “in the strongest terms” multiple Houthi attacks on ships in the Red Sea over the past two months, which have raised concerns over disruptions in global trade and regional security. 

The council demanded that the group immediately cease such behavior and release the Galaxy Leader, a Japan-operated cargo ship with links to an Israeli businessman, and its 25 crew members.  

Authored by the US and Japan, the resolution stated that there should be respect for international law that upholds the exercise of navigational rights and freedoms by operators of merchant and commercial vessels. It also noted that member states have the right to defend their vessels from attacks. 

Since mid-November 2023, the Houthi rebels have repeatedly attacked commercial vessels in the Red Sea, at last count 24 times, and threatened to continue to do so until Israel ends its war on Gaza.  

The capture of the Galaxy Leader was followed by an attempt to seize another commercial ship in the Gulf of Aden on Nov. 26. There have now been almost daily, and indiscriminate, attacks in the Red Sea. 

Prior to voting on the draft resolution, Council members voted on three amendments to the text that Russia had proposed, none of which were adopted. In all three votes, four members voted in favor (Algeria, China, Russia, and Sierra Leone), two members voted against (the UK and the US), and nine members abstained.

The Council then voted on the Japan-US draft text, without any of the Russian amendments, which received 11 votes in favor and four abstentions (Algeria, China, Mozambique, and Russia). The draft text was adopted as resolution 2722.

Background

The co-penholders formally circulated an initial draft of the resolution on 4 January. The text was based on a draft presidential statement proposed on 26 December 2023 by Japan and the US, on which members were unable to agree. China and Russia broke silence on a revised version of the draft resolution on Monday morning (8 January). The co-penholders subsequently placed a second revised version of the text under silence later that night, until yesterday morning (9 January). Algeria and Russia broke silence, after which the co-penholders placed a further revised text in blue later in the day.

In response to the Israel-Hamas war that broke out on 7 October 2023, the Houthi rebel group in Yemen has conducted repeated attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea since mid-November 2023, severely disrupting international shipping. These attacks followed the group’s initial missile and drone attacks in October 2023 against Israel, which the Houthis threatened to continue until Israel ended its military campaign in Gaza. The Houthis first targeted Israeli ships, capturing on 19 November 2023 the Galaxy Leader, a Japanese-operated cargo ship with links to an Israeli businessman, and its 25 crew members. Such attacks in the Red Sea became almost daily events, and subsequently more indiscriminate: Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Sare’e announced on 9 December 2023 that the group would target ships from any nationality heading to Israel, if “the food and medicine keep not accessing the Gaza Strip”. On 18 December 2023, the US announced the establishment of a multinational task force, called Operation Prosperity Guardian, to operate in the Red Sea to deter and counter the attacks. The assaults have nonetheless continued, including an attempted hijacking of a commercial vessel on 31 December 2023, which led to a confrontation with US helicopters that resulted in the sinking of three small Houthi boats and the deaths of ten Houthi fighters.

Council members condemned the Houthi attacks and demanded the release of the Galaxy Leader and its crew in a 1 December 2023 press statement Having been unable to agree on the draft presidential statement in late December and as the attacks continued, the Council held a briefing and consultations last week (3 January) on the situation, at the request of Ecuador, France, Guyana, Japan, Malta, the Republic of Korea (ROK), the UK, and the US. During the consultations, Japan and the US announced their intention to propose a resolution. 

The draft resolution in blue condemns in the strongest terms the at least 24 Houthi attacks on merchant and commercial vessels since 19 November 2023, demanding that the group immediately cease all such attacks, as well as release the Galaxy Leader and its crew. The draft text in blue affirms that the exercise of navigational rights and freedoms by merchant and commercial vessels, in accordance with international law, must be respected. It further takes note of the right of member states, in accordance with international law, to defend their vessels from attacks, including those that undermine navigational rights and freedoms.

Although Council members appear to be united in their concern about the Houthi attacks and their impact on global maritime shipping, several members had reservations about the proposed text. An overarching issue since members first considered the draft presidential statement has been the link between the Houthi attacks and the conflict in Gaza. Several members raised this point at the 3 January briefing. China, for example, highlighted that only by achieving a ceasefire in Gaza and easing the humanitarian crisis on the ground could a further escalation in the Red Sea and other parts of the Middle East be averted. During the consultations, when the discussion focused more on the co-penholders’ plan for a resolution, members apparently raised such questions as how a product condemning the Houthi attacks would be perceived in parts of the world when the Council cannot call for a ceasefire in Gaza.

The draft resolution in blue reflects several members’ proposals aimed at indicating the link with the broader regional context. While language specifically referencing Gaza that Algeria and Russia apparently proposed was not accommodated, the draft resolution was updated to emphasise the need to address “the root causes, including the conflicts contributing to regional tensions and the disruption of maritime security”. Slovenia also apparently proposed language acknowledging the “regional” context. Along with a suggestion by Switzerland, which sought to strengthen the text’s call to avoid an escalation of the situation, these proposals are reflected in the draft resolution in blue, which urges “caution and restraint to avoid further escalation in the Red Sea and the broader region”. Based on proposals by Algeria and China, the draft text in blue also includes language encouraging enhanced diplomatic efforts by all parties to avoid escalation, including continued support for dialogue and Yemen’s peace process under UN auspices.

It seems that Russia initially pushed back against the need for a Council product, in part by contending that Council members already issued the 1 December 2023 press statement which contained several of the key messages first set out in the presidential statement and later incorporated in the draft resolution. The co-penholders countered that there was a need, given that attacks had continued since the press statement was issued.

One matter that seemed to be of particular concern for Russia was language on the right of states to defend their merchant and naval vessels and the apparent endorsement that this provides for Operation Prosperity Guardian. Other members also voiced concerns about this paragraph, including its ambiguous language. Over the course of the negotiations, the contested paragraph was revised, first to highlight the navigational rights and freedoms of merchant and commercial vessels. It was also amended, among other changes, to “take note of”, instead of “recognizing”, the right of member states, in accordance with international law, to take appropriate measures to defend their vessels from attacks. But requests by Russia, as well as China, to delete completely the language about states’ right to defend their vessels has not been accommodated. 

Another issue for Russia was language in the text related to the origins of Houthi arms. The US appeared keen to indicate Iran’s responsibility in supplying arms to the Houthis, which violates resolution 2216 of 14 April 2015 that established a targeted arms embargo against the group. Identifying Iran in Council products on Yemen, however, has been a longstanding red line for Russia. The draft resolution in blue reiterates the need for all member states to adhere to their obligations, including the arms embargo on the Houthis; condemns the provision of arms and related material of all types to the Houthis in violation of resolution 2216; and calls for additional practical cooperation to prevent the Houthis from acquiring material necessary for further attacks. An explicit reference to Iran is not included, however. The text recalls indirectly that the Yemen Panel of Experts latest report, dated 2 November 2023, noted large-scale violations of the arms embargo. (The most recent Panel of Experts report is among several panel reports which since 2018 have regularly reported on the Houthis’ use of arms of Iranian origin or of interdictions of arms that appear to have come from Iran.)

To address China’s concerns related to a paragraph on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the draft resolution was revised to state that the UNCLOS sets out the legal framework applicable to activities in the oceans, including countering illicit activities at sea. This is instead of stating that the UNCLOS sets out the legal framework applicable to “all” activities in the oceans. Language in Council products on the UNCLOS has proven contentious for China in recent years, presumably stemming from its claims in the South China Sea. Ultimately, the co-penholders settled on language from an August 2021 presidential statement on maritime security.

Among other points, the draft resolution in blue requests the Secretary-General to provide, through 1 July 2024, written monthly reports to the Security Council on any further Houthi attacks on merchant and commercial vessels in the Red Sea. In addition to informing future Council discussions on the issue, another apparent aim of such reports is to separate Council discussions on the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea from developments in Yemen, including its peace process, which has been a concern of the Office of the UN Special Envoy for Yemen and Council members.

source: commonspace.eu with Security Council Report (New York) and agencies
photo: Houthi boats surround the Japanese Cargo ship Galaxy Leader before seizing it in November 2023

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
King calls slave trade a 'shameful chapter' during Commonwealth address

King calls slave trade a 'shameful chapter' during Commonwealth address

King Charles has described the transatlantic slave trade as a "shameful chapter of history" that filled him with "profound sorrow" as he opened a summit of Commonwealth leaders in the Caribbean. He said the trade in enslaved persons "still casts a shadow" over the association of nations. There have been calls from some for the UK to make a formal apology for its historic role in the slave trade ahead of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (Chogm) in Antigua and Barbuda, but there was not one in the King's address. Prime Minister Andy Burnham, also at the summit, has said that he is open to Britain issuing a formal apology but has ruled out financial reparations. While there was no direct apology, the King did offer some contrition - and there was also an acknowledgement that he had personally learnt more about the legacy of the slave trade. He said: "The transatlantic trade in enslaved persons still casts a shadow over these islands and other members of our Commonwealth. "As I have said before, that shameful chapter of history is one that fills my heart with horror and my soul with the most profound personal sorrow." (click image to read more).

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)