In the weeks before the U.S.-Iran war began, the Houthis promised that in the event of conflict, the Red Sea would run with the blood of their enemies. In speech after speech, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the group’s leader, told his followers that any attack on Iran would trigger an immediate and devastating response. The movement that had spent two years disrupting global shipping, launching ballistic missiles at Israel, and branding itself as the most committed member of the “axis of resistance” staked its credibility on a single proposition: If Iran is hit, we strike.

Iran has been hit constantly for more than a week. The Houthis have not struck.

In the span of months, the Houthis watched Israel kill their prime minister, a dozen cabinet members, and their chief of staff. They saw fellow proxy leader Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah die in Beirut and then saw their patron’s supreme leader die. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) infrastructure that built their arsenal is being dismantled in real time. The movement that spent two years projecting invincibility is now calculating from a significantly weakened position.

At the same time, popular sentiment is running high: On March 6, thousands filled al-Sabeen Square in Sanaa, chanting in Persian for a dead Iranian leader. Rallies were staged across every governorate. Abdul-Malik al-Houthi seemingly met the moment when he pledged to join the fight “at any moment.” But no missile has been fired, no ship has been struck, and no drone has crossed the Red Sea.

The reasons why have to do with the structural changes that the Houthis have undergone over the past decade, as well as the group’s strategic goals for the future.

---

Between August and October 2025, Israeli airstrikes in Sanaa killed Houthi Prime Minister Ahmed al-Rahawi, approximately a dozen cabinet members, and Chief of Staff Mohammed al-Ghamari. These were precision operations targeting individuals, not area bombardments targeting infrastructure. They used the same intelligence-driven methodology that was deployed to kill Nasrallah in Beirut.

Members of the group’s senior leadership now understand that the moment they launch a visible military operation, they generate the signatures that enable targeting: communications, movement, and electronic emissions. Holding rallies does not produce those signatures. Firing missiles does.

Case in point, the Red Sea campaign of 2023-2025 was the most consequential military operation that the Houthis had ever conducted. It disrupted global shipping, forced a multinational naval response, and elevated the movement from a regional insurgency to a global security concern. But it also consumed their best weapons systems and exposed the infrastructure that supported them.

Consequently, by late 2025, sustained American and Israeli strikes had degraded launch sites, storage facilities, and command nodes. The loss of Ghamari was not merely symbolic; technical commanders with irreplaceable expertise were killed alongside him. Naval interdiction complicated the resupply of advanced components from Iran. And the arrests of alleged members of a Saudi-U.S.-Israeli spy network in November demonstrated that the Houthis’ operational infrastructure had been compromised—regardless of its actual scope.

Then there’s the degraded arsenal. Between September 2024 and early July 2025, United Nations experts counted 101 Houthi ballistic missiles fired at Israel, of which 38 failed outright. In a single interdiction that July, U.S. Central Command seized more than 750 tons of Iranian-origin materiel bound for the Houthis, including hundreds of missiles, warheads, seekers, drone engines, and radar systems. A 2026 supply chain study by Century International found that more than 80 percent of items seized before they could reach the Houthis in 2024-2025 were manufacturing inputs rather than finished weapons. This was evidence that the pipeline had shifted from smuggling complete systems to sustaining domestic assembly. But seekers, guidance electronics, and engines remain the bottlenecks, and every one of those requires an import.

The Houthis can still launch. Their capacity, however, is diminished, and every launch reveals positions that have already been mapped. The movement has pushed a “local manufacturing” narrative, but the specifications of their most effective weapons still trace to Iranian lineages requiring external components. With Iran itself under sustained bombardment, the pipeline that built the Houthi arsenal is under more pressure than at any point since the movement’s founding.

Compounding matters is that the Houthis are not an independent group that merely receives Iranian support. They are beholden to Tehran. Their military capability was built by Iran and Hezbollah. Their strategic posture was shaped by Tehran’s priorities. Their place in the axis of resistance was assigned by Iran. None of this erases the movement’s Yemeni roots, but those roots alone did not produce the arsenal, the doctrine, or the regional profile that defines them today.

But now Iran’s supreme leader is dead, and his son has replaced him. The selection of Mojtaba Khamenei as the new supreme leader on March 8 gave the Houthis reason to believe the regime would survive. Within hours, Houthi media addressed him as “Imam,” and pledged allegiance. The appointment was a signal that the IRGC could reconstitute itself.

But even if the relationship is rebuilt, the political landscape the Houthis are fighting in has shifted. Across the Arab world, during the Red Sea campaign, a Zaydi militia from the northern highlands of Yemen became the face of resistance to Israel at a moment when every Arab state looked away. But the Iran war has scrambled that equation. Iranian missiles are now landing on Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, killing Arab civilians in Arab capitals. Israel and the United States are striking Iran, not Arab countries. If the Houthis retaliate on behalf of Tehran in this context, they are no longer fighting for Palestine. They are fighting for the country that is bombing Arab cities. The same Arab public that celebrated them for standing up to Israel is unlikely to celebrate them for standing with the power raining missiles on their neighbors.

With Iran’s position so shaky, the Houthis are now starting to look toward their future. Over the past several months, the group has conducted a nationwide mobilization that has received almost no attention in Western media. Across every governorate they control in northwestern Yemen, the movement has been running military training courses branded as “Al-Aqsa Flood” programs. Hundreds of fighters have graduated from these courses. Government ministries, universities, hospitals, telecommunications companies, water authorities, airport staff, and sports teams have all been cycled through. Armed tribal gatherings have declared “general mobilization.” Mass public stands numbering in the hundreds per governorate have been organized on a weekly basis.

This is not a missile force. It is a ground force designed to produce mass—not precision—operations, and it is designed for a war that has not yet started, over who controls northwestern Yemen’s coastline, its territory, and its 20 million people. The rhetoric points seaward. The mobilization points landward.

The anti-Houthi coalition has also been fracturing in ways that favor the movement’s long-term positioning.

The Southern Transitional Council’s (STC) statehood announcement in January exposed the depth of dysfunction between Saudi and UAE-backed forces in southern Yemen. The Houthis gleefully covered every detail of this collapse—the closure of STC headquarters, Saudi officers effectively governing Aden from the Bir Ahmed military base, STC leaders confined to Riyadh hotels.

The Iran war has pushed Riyadh and Abu Dhabi closer together as Iranian missiles rain on both their territories. Saudi Arabia has reportedly warned Tehran that continued strikes could lead it to open bases to U.S. operations. A coalition tearing itself apart over Aden closes ranks when missiles hit Riyadh, but launching Red Sea attacks now would risk unifying that coalition against the Houthis at precisely the moment when it is at its most divided.

Every day that the Houthis hold back while maintaining the posture of imminent action, the threat generates value without expenditure. Shipping insurance premiums remain elevated. Saudi planning must account for a possible southern offensive. A mobilized Houthi ground force remains positioned to exploit any opening—in Marib, toward Aden or Shabwa, wherever the vacuum deepens. The group’s mobilization built credibility. Its restraint extracts the value.

---

None of this means that the Houthis will not act in defense of the IRGC. But consider what they are protecting. The Houthis of 2015 were insurgents; they had territory but no state, no institutions, no international profile, no Red Sea leverage. The Houthis of 2026 run ministries, control ports, operate a tax system and a university network, maintain a diplomatic track with the United Nations, and negotiate indirectly with Riyadh through Muscat. There is no exile option for Abdul-Malik al-Houthi. The mountain caves that sheltered an insurgency cannot shelter a state apparatus. The rational calculus, for the moment, is that subjugating Yemenis is safer than fighting Americans.

There is also the matter of governing what they hold. The Houthi economy is brittle, sustained in part by coercive tools that depend on military credibility: the oil embargo that they imposed on Hadramout’s ports by attacking tankers with drones to prevent exports from government-controlled territory; the implicit threat to Red Sea shipping; the capacity to punish rivals who challenge their revenue streams.

If that capacity appears significantly diminished, the coercive architecture that funds and disciplines their state begins to crack. After all, the Houthi governance model runs on two currencies—coercion and conviction.

For years, the Houthis shared the burden of governing 20 million people with the United Nations and international nongovernmental organizations, who delivered health services, distributed food, and provided basic infrastructure that the movement could not or would not provide. That arrangement suited the Houthis, as they kept control while others bore the cost of keeping the population alive. But their campaign of detentions, obstruction, and hostility toward international organizations has driven most of them out. The Houthis now bear the full weight of governance alone, facing a population that is not loyal so much as exhausted.

Meanwhile, the Houthis see a patron in free fall, an arsenal under pressure, a leadership under surveillance, and a coalition of enemies focused on Iran rather than Yemen. The question that should concern policymakers is not why the Houthis are quiet. It is what they have been building while they were quiet, and what it will cost to confront it.