During the past few days, Saudi Arabia has been subjected to an escalating wave of Houthi attacks, which included a bloody attack on King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh and targeting facilities belonging to Aramco, the largest oil exporting company in the world.
Experts believe that these attacks go beyond the Yemeni conflict, affecting the Kingdom's image as a safe destination for investment and tourism and raising questions about the future of its economic plans.
Timothy Kaldas, deputy director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy in the United States, believes that the Houthi attacks represent part of “a broader challenge facing Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states regarding their image as stable and safe countries,” an image that has already been affected by the Iran war.
In an interview with DW Arabia, Qaldas said that the Gulf countries, led by Saudi Arabia, "have invested heavily in developing tourism sectors and attracting visitors, which depends on tourists feeling safe."
He added that the attack on Riyadh airport and the resulting deaths and injuries "may reflect negatively on the Kingdom's ability to attract tourists during the coming period."
Manifold repercussions
The repercussions were not limited to the security aspect, but rather extended to the economic field, as the attacks caused the absence of a number of senior oil company officials from the World Petroleum Conference in Riyadh, and the “Future Investment Initiative” provided participants with the option of attending remotely due to security concerns.
Sources told Reuters that global financial institutions, including JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank, allowed their employees in Saudi Arabia to work from home, while Franklin Templeton closed its office in Riyadh temporarily. It was decided to postpone a summit scheduled between the European Union and the Gulf Cooperation Council in the Kingdom due to aviation concerns.
In this, Kaldas said that the matter is not limited to “influencing the mental image of Saudi Arabia, but also extends to its economic plans and efforts aimed at diversifying the economy and reducing dependence on oil.”
Testing future Saudi projects
Riyadh accuses Iran of supporting and arming the Houthis, while Reuters quoted a senior Iranian official as saying that the attacks fall within a broader strategy to reshape the balance of power in the region by targeting energy infrastructure and shipping lanes.
According to sources quoted by Reuters, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman faces a complex dilemma. Military escalation risks expanding the war and undermining economic reform plans, while any concessions may be seen as a gain for the Houthis.
For his part, Simon Fox, an expert in Middle East affairs, believes that Saudi Arabia today is adopting an approach that can be described as “Saudi Arabia First,” which aims to “transform the Kingdom into a global center for aviation, artificial intelligence, and tourism.”
The professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem told DW that the Houthi attacks are already affecting these "ambitions, and narrowing the financial margin available to achieve them," but at the same time he stressed that Saudi Arabia remains an important international player as the world's largest oil exporter and an economic and religious heavyweight as a custodian of the Two Holy Mosques in Mecca and Medina.
Riyadh's bet on the allies
Following the escalation, France announced the start of implementing practical aspects of an agreement aimed at helping protect Saudi oil installations. However, the biggest questions relate to the size of American support.
Sources reported to Reuters last month that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman asked US President Donald Trump for help at the beginning of the Houthi campaign, but the latter did not agree to direct US strikes and offered to help identify targets and exchange intelligence information.
Recent developments indicate increased monitoring of the role that signatory countries may play to the “Mecca Agreement” for joint defense, which was signed by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey last August.
In this regard, Kaldas said that many countries in the world are “watching the steps that the “Mecca Agreement” countries will take to find out what the new defense arrangement means in practice.” He added that Riyadh seeks at least "material support such as defense equipment and ammunition, as well as political and symbolic support that enhances its image as a partner with regional support."
But he said that the main problem in Yemen was never a lack of equipment, noting that many countries are reluctant to join any new military campaign due to doubts “about its chances of success, especially since previous military interventions did not achieve their goals.”
Egyptian support... where are its limits?
The recent attacks raised questions about the nature of the support that Egypt can provide to Saudi Arabia, especially after Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdel Aty’s statements to Bloomberg in which he affirmed Cairo’s readiness to provide various forms of support and respond to “any Saudi request.”
Hussein Bayoumi, an independent economic and foreign policy analyst for the Middle East in Brussels, said that Egypt is already playing an important diplomatic role through its contacts with regional parties, and that it prefers joint security coordination with regional partners “instead of unilateral intervention.”
He said in an interview with DW Arabia that Cairo's potential support may include "intelligence cooperation, strengthening air defenses, maritime participation to protect navigation, and perhaps providing defensive support if Saudi territory is exposed to a direct threat."
'An expensive military quagmire'
Navigation through Bab al-Mandab constitutes a fundamental issue for Egypt. The Strait is the southern gateway to the Suez Canal, which provides a large portion of Cairo's revenues. Abdel Ati had stated that his country was one of the most affected by the navigation disturbances resulting from the war, and that the losses of the Suez Canal amounted to approximately 11 billion dollars.
In light of this, experts said that Egypt may intervene to protect Bab al-Mandab if necessary. However, Kaldas said, "I doubt that Egypt might send ground forces to participate in the fighting. It is likely that any Egyptian support will be similar to what we saw previously of the limited deployment of some military assets without engaging in direct combat operations."
He added that in the case of Egypt, there is also the historical dimension. Yemen was to Egypt in the 1960s what Vietnam was to the United States. “A costly, painful and unsuccessful military quagmire. Therefore, I believe that the Egyptian military establishment does not wish to redeploy its forces in Yemen.”
Hussein Bayoumi agrees with this opinion, saying: “I rule out sending Egyptian ground combat forces to Yemen, given the nature of the conflict, the capabilities of the Houthis, and the risk of involvement in a long war of attrition, as well as the absence of Egyptian popular support for such intervention.”
The expert believes that in light of this, “Cairo will draw its dividing line between defending Saudi Arabia’s security and participating in an open war inside Yemen, which are two different things from Cairo’s point of view.”
