Helping an Ally, Risking a War: How Far Should the U.S. Go to Help Saudi Arabia?

Following the October 10 Houthi strike on Riyadh Airport amid a larger ongoing Houthi-Saudi conflict, President Trump stated that he is "going to look at" joining the Saudis in their strikes against the Houthis. 

The Iran-backed Houthis declared a blockade of the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait in July, citing retaliation for Saudi strikes against Yemen. In early September, the Houthis captured the port city of Mocha, which brought them closer to effectively blockading the strait. The Houthi capture of the strait poses a dire constraint on Saudi shipping routes: given the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait remains the main viable shipping route for Saudi oil. Saudi Arabia ships millions of oil barrels each day through the Bab-el Mandeb Strait.

On October 10, the Houthis struck Riyadh Airport, killing at least 12 and injuring over 300 people, demonstrating their increasing capabilities and escalating the conflict. In September, the Saudi crown prince requested direct air strikes from the United States, which at the time Trump declined, opting instead to offer intelligence sharing and targeting assistance.

Trump’s consideration of direct intervention thus represents a potential turning point in the conflict. In the past, the Trump administration has launched strikes against the Houthis, and in 2025 there was a ceasefire deal between the Houthis and the United States. While questions about U.S. capabilities to significantly hinder the Houthi advance remain, the bigger concern is the Houthis continuing to gain strength and dealing worse blows to the Saudis and furthering the instability in the Middle East. 

The potential closure of the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait would hurt American national interests, because another oil shipping route closure would likely lead to yet another increase in gas prices. Additionally, given the presence of U.S. troops and bases in the Middle East, it would be in American interests to help the Saudis against the Houthis. 

Iran is another consideration: despite blows to their capabilities, they continue to spend resources funding the Houthis. This leads to the conclusion that they are banking on the Houthis to close off more shipping routes to impose further costs on the American and Israeli coalition against continuing the war in Iran. Iranian funding of the Houthis thus represents a potential leverage point for Iran in the war. 

Given all of this, it would be understandable and reasonable for the United States to provide greater aid to the Saudis. However, the ongoing and expensive war against Iran that has no end in sight should be weighed heavily before decisively helping the Saudis: can the United States afford and justify to the public starting yet another full-blown conflict? Additionally, while U.S. military and expat presence in the Middle East is a reason to help the Saudis, it also is a liability because the Houthis would then be motivated to attack Americans in the region. Thus, in helping our ally, we might risk a war. 

The president should weigh all of these considerations before making a decision on intervention. Further, there should be a clear line drawn between Houthi deterrence and starting a war against the Houthis: the United States could afford and justify the first, but the second is too dangerous and expensive to consider. The question remains, how far will we go to help Saudi Arabia against the Houthis?