LETTER OF HAPPINESS

Upon taking office, Donald Trump resumed the confrontational posture towards Iran that defined his Middle East policy during his first term. His thunderous declarations regarding the need to compel Tehran to abandon its nuclear programme were accompanied by intensified political and diplomatic pressure on the Iranian leadership.

Most recently, the US President threatened Iran with unprecedented bombings should it fail to sign an agreement pledging not to develop nuclear weapons. While sceptics doubt that such threats will intimidate Iran, there remains a fragile hope that they may prompt both sides to intensify diplomatic efforts to resolve ongoing tensions. Iran has already stated that it has replied to the letter. He did not however disclose the nature of the response, preferring instead to leave Washington to interpret it independently.

The countdown begins

In early March, the US President sent a letter to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in which, according to leaked media reports, he gave the latter two months to finalise a new agreement on Iran's nuclear programme. Tehran promised to review the letter and provide a detailed response.

However, the starting point of the two-month deadline remains unclear — whether it counts from the date of delivery or the commencement of nuclear deal negotiations. Notably, Ali Khamenei received the letter on March 12, several days after Washington had publicly announced its dispatch.

From the outset, however, Tehran warned that it was unlikely to offer a favourable reply to the ultimatums outlined in the letter. It appears that the White House itself harbours little faith in dialogue with its Iranian counterpart and remains committed to exerting pressure.

This rationale may have motivated Donald Trump's decision to declare war on the Houthi group Ansarallah, the most active pro-Iranian faction in the Middle East today. The formal justification for this move was the obstruction of maritime traffic in the Red Sea.

"Iranian-funded Houthi thugs have fired missiles at American planes and targeted our troops and allies," Trump wrote on social media, adding that their "piracy, violence and terrorism" have cost "billions" and endangered lives.

In response, the group stated that it would continue to disrupt shipping in the Red Sea until Israel lifts its blockade of Gaza and the Houthis respond to attacks from the US and its allies.

Although this Iranian-backed rebel group — which identifies Israel as an adversary — controls the capital Sana’a and northwest Yemen, it is not recognised as the country’s legitimate government.

The Houthis as a lever of pressure on Iran

Since the outbreak of Israel’s war with Hamas, all major pro-Iranian factions in the region have declared support for Hamas and initiated hostilities against the Jewish state. These actions have been interpreted as proof of Iran’s engagement in a widespread proxy war with Israel. However, the military setbacks suffered by Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and Syria have severely undermined Tehran’s regional aspirations. The Yemeni Houthis remain the only relatively effective armed force still advancing the objectives of the pro-Iranian "axis of resistance".

The Houthis have launched numerous rocket and drone attacks on Israel in retaliation for its severe actions in Gaza, southern Lebanon and the West Bank. After Israel halted humanitarian shipments to Gaza, the Houthis resumed assaults on Israeli and Western commercial vessels in the Red Sea and the strategically vital Bab el-Mandeb Strait. US airstrikes, in turn, have provoked retaliatory Houthi attacks on merchant vessels and US naval forces, a response unlikely to resolve the issue.

While mediating efforts persist in Ukraine and supporting Israel’s campaign against Hamas in Gaza, President Trump appears to be opening a new military front in Yemen. However, the precise objectives of this campaign remain ambiguous. It is unclear whether Washington intends to dismantle the Houthis as a military entity or merely weaken them to the point of operational impotence.

Since mid-March, US naval forces stationed near the Red Sea have conducted dozens of targeted strikes against Houthi positions — including radar systems, mobile missile launchers, drone sites, training camps, and command centres. Media sources report that these strikes have resulted in significant casualties, including the deaths of several Houthi leaders.

"While we won't talk about it publicly, just know that the operation has a plan," General Alexus Hrynkiewicz, Director of Operations for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during a Pentagon briefing. He added that the operation would continue "until we achieve the president's objectives", though he did not specify what those objectives were.

Administration officials have stated that the campaign aims to diminish the Houthis’ capacity to obstruct global shipping — a disruption ongoing since late 2023. Repeated efforts by the Biden administration to cut the group’s supply chains from the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) have failed.

Trump's team also aspires to subdue the insurgent group as a means of delivering a forceful message to Iran that its strategic leverage has been significantly compromised. Washington anticipates that such a message could bolster the prospects of reaching a new agreement on Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

A new regional conflict

Further measures in this direction may include granting Israel authorisation to resume extensive bombing campaigns in Gaza.

In 2015, after the Houthis seized Yemen’s capital, Saudi Arabia — supported by the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and other allies including the United States — initiated a protracted and unsuccessful military campaign against the group. Having failed to accomplish their strategic goals, the Saudis suspended active hostilities several years ago. This allowed the Houthis to consolidate their influence both within Yemen and across the region. Their power was further augmented by the Stockholm Agreement (2018), a diplomatic accord that granted them de facto control over Hodeidah, one of the country’s largest ports, which they have transformed into a hub for arms and financial smuggling.

Despite years of heavy combat, the Yemeni conflict largely remained confined to the southern Arabian Peninsula. However, since autumn 2023 — following Hamas's attack on Israel and the subsequent Israeli military response — the Houthis began targeting international shipping through one of the world’s most critical maritime corridors, citing solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.

Notably, Trump has characterised the conflict with the Houthis as a war to restore "freedom of navigation". This comes despite his previous stance against assigning the US responsibility for maritime security, having publicly advocated for Asian and other states — more reliant on Middle Eastern oil — to assume the burden.

This stated aim now appears more of a pretext for the administration’s actual goal: weakening Iran’s regional proxies and compelling Tehran to reassess its strategic ambitions.

Still, a crucial question lingers: can the escalation of military pressure by the US truly neutralise the Houthi threat, or will it devolve into yet another drawn-out, costly campaign with ambiguous results?

The core issue is that the Houthis are a transnational militant network backed not only by Iran but also by a significant portion of Yemen’s population and several powerful political factions in the region. They wage asymmetric warfare, expertly adapted to local terrain and conditions.

The Houthis operate in small, agile units with access to fortified shelters, subterranean communication lines, munitions depots, and makeshift missile factories. They are, in short, a formidable opponent.

Are compromises on the table?

Washington appears to recognise this reality and is signalling a potential willingness to negotiate with Tehran regarding the Houthis — possibly in exchange for Iranian concessions on the nuclear file.

Furthermore, the matter is reportedly being discussed within the context of US-Russian diplomacy. Given Moscow’s relatively strong ties with Tehran, the White House hopes Russia might help facilitate dialogue in exchange for US flexibility on the Ukrainian issue.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has reportedly discussed the military operation to restrain the Houthis with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

Rubio specifically asserted that "the ongoing attacks by the Houthis on US military and commercial vessels in the Red Sea will be stopped."

Lavrov, in turn, underscored the need for an "immediate cessation of the use of force" and stressed "the importance for all sides to engage in political dialogue to prevent further bloodshed."

As for Tehran, it appears to be taking a cautious approach, intermittently denying direct ties with the Houthis.

"We will definitely not go for direct talks under pressure, threats and increased sanctions. We will respond to Trump's letter in the coming days and pass it on through the necessary channels," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on Iranian state television.

Commenting on the letter’s contents, Araqchi noted that it primarily consisted of threats. "But it also suggests that there may be some opportunities. We will assess both aspects and respond accordingly," he added.

Subsequently, Iran’s Foreign Minister stated that reviving the 2015 nuclear agreement was no longer feasible due to altered geopolitical circumstances. Nonetheless, he acknowledged that the deal might still serve as a framework for future negotiations — indicating that an accord between Tehran and Washington is not entirely off the table. Araqchi also reiterated that Iran would not enter into talks unless the US revised its current policy stance.

At present, however, there are few indications that Washington is contemplating such a shift. On the contrary, the White House has intensified its rhetoric. Secretary Rubio has gone so far as to suggest that the Trump administration may pursue regime change in Iran should it refuse to negotiate on the nuclear issue. If diplomacy fails, Rubio warned, responsibility for the Iranian dossier will be handed entirely to the Pentagon.

The Trump administration believes that escalating sanctions combined with military pressure will provoke mounting domestic unrest in Iran, potentially setting the stage for a shift in power.

The ongoing protests suggest that Iran’s leadership lacks effective mechanisms to suppress dissent. These demonstrations are steadily eroding the system’s foundations and could eventually catalyse regime change. Fearing this outcome, Tehran may be compelled to adopt a more pragmatic stance and reconsider its approach to negotiations with Washington.

Just recently, Iran’s Foreign Minister announced that the United States had received and reviewed Tehran’s response letter. However, hopes that this reply might satisfy Washington appear slim. What remains is the realisation that a flawed peace is still preferable to a disastrous conflict — especially one involving nuclear stakes.