Yemen's Houthis likely to be persistent problem for US, senior military official says
U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Alexus Grynkewich, nominated to be commander of United States European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, testifies before a Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 24, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Mohatt
Yemen's Houthis likely to be persistent problem for US, senior military official says
WASHINGTON - Yemen's Iran-aligned Houthi movement will likely be a persistent problem for the U.S. in the future, a senior U.S. military official said on Tuesday, even after Washington and the Houthis reached an agreement last month that ended a U.S. air campaign against the group.
"The Houthis are likely to be a persistent problem... that we'll be dealing with in the future a few times again," Air Force Lieutenant General Alexus Grynkewich, director for operations of the Joint Staff, told lawmakers. Grynkewich has been nominated to lead the U.S. military's European Command.
Last month, President Donald Trump announced the U.S. would stop bombing the Houthis, who had been firing at U.S. warships and commercial vessels off Yemen's coast. The group, which had said it was acting in solidarity with Palestinians during Israel's military campaign in Gaza, stopped firing at U.S. ships under the agreement.
Rights groups had voiced concerns about civilian casualties during the nearly two-month-old U.S. bombing campaign in Yemen.
Last week, the Houthis said they would again target U.S. ships in the Red Sea if Washington became involved in Israeli attacks on Iran. Still, they have not resumed attacks after the U.S. struck three Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend.
On Monday, Trump announced an Israel-Iran ceasefire deal. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
28 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Nigeria and Brazil sign $1 billion agreement to boost agriculture
A drone view shows ships and containers at the Port of Santos, in Santos, Brazil April 3, 2025. REUTERS/Amanda Perobelli/File Photo ABUJA - Nigeria and Brazil signed a $1 billion agreement on Tuesday to boost agriculture, food security, energy and defence in the West African nation, Nigeria's vice president Kasim Shettima said. Both countries aim to "deploy over $1 billion to deliver mechanised farming equipment, training, and service centres across Nigeria," Shettima said in a statement posted on X. Much farming in Nigeria is subsistence and land is owned by families or individuals which makes large-scale acquisition problematic. Nigeria also imports food for its 200 million plus population. "We are moving from subsistence to scale in agriculture, and in energy, we are taking long-overdue steps to attract serious investment into gas production, refining, and renewables," Shettima added. The agreements were signed in Abuja during a visit by Brazil's vice president Geraldo Alckmin to Africa's most populous nation. Shettima told his Brazilian counterpart that reforms embarked upon by President Bola Tinubu have helped reshaped Nigeria's economy. Nigeria is targeting a $1 trillion economy by 2030, with reforms to agriculture, energy, education, and public finance. The country has also asked banks to recapitalise to attract foreign investments. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
CNA
34 minutes ago
- CNA
US strikes may have set back Iran nuclear program only months, sources say
WASHINGTON: A preliminary US intelligence assessment has determined that US strikes over the weekend on Iranian nuclear facilities have set back Tehran's program by only a matter of months, three sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. The initial report was prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon's main intelligence arm and one of 18 US intelligence agencies, said two of the sources, who requested anonymity to discuss classified matters. The classified assessment is at odds with the statements of President Donald Trump and high-ranking US officials - including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. They have said the weekend strikes, which used a combination of bunker-busting bombs and more conventional weapons, essentially eliminated Iran's nuclear program. Trump has said the attacks were necessary to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Iran denies it is seeking such a weapon and says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. Hegseth on Sunday said that the strikes had "obliterated" Iran's nuclear ambitions, while Trump said Iran's crucial nuclear sites had been "completely and fully obliterated". Assessing the damage at the Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites is expected to be a difficult task, and the DIA is not the only agency tasked with the job. One source said the assessment was not universally accepted and had generated significant disagreement. A US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the US did not know the extent of the damage yet. Still, the initial assessment indicated the strikes may not have been nearly as successful as the Trump administration has claimed. One of the sources said Iran's enriched uranium stocks had not been eliminated, and in fact the country's nuclear program may have been set back only a month or two. The Pentagon disputed the notion that the damage to Iran's nuclear program was minor, though it did not dispute that the DIA assessment exists. "Based on everything we have seen — and I've seen it all — our bombing campaign obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons," Hegseth said in a statement provided to Reuters. "Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target—and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran; so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the President and the successful mission." The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But in a statement to CNN, which first reported the intelligence assessment, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the conclusion was incorrect. "This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong," Leavitt said, according to CNN. "Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration." Initial military assessments can change as more information comes to light, and it is not uncommon for opinions to vary across different US intelligence agencies. Democrats have previously said Trump's claims that the weekend strikes eliminated or seriously set back Iran's nuclear program were not yet backed by evidence. "There's zero evidence that I've seen that the nuclear program was completely and totally obliterated as Donald Trump has claimed," House of Representatives Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on Monday.
Straits Times
43 minutes ago
- Straits Times
US strikes may have set back Iran nuclear programme by just months, sources say
A satellite view showing the site of Iran's Fordow Fuel Enrichment plant, after the US struck the nuclear facility on June 21. PHOTO: REUTERS US strikes may have set back Iran nuclear programme by just months, sources say WASHINGTON - A preliminary US intelligence assessment has determined that US strikes over the weekend on Iranian nuclear facilities have set back Tehran's programme by only a matter of months, three sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. The initial report was prepared by the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Pentagon's main intelligence arm and one of 18 US intelligence agencies, said two of the sources, who requested anonymity to discuss classified matters. The classified assessment is at odds with the statements of President Donald Trump and high-ranking US officials - including Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth. They have said the weekend strikes, which used a combination of bunker-busting bombs and more conventional weapons, essentially eliminated Iran's nuclear programme. Mr Trump has said the attacks were necessary to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Iran denies it is seeking such a weapon and says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. Mr Hegseth on June 22 said that the strikes had 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear ambitions, while Mr Trump said Iran's crucial nuclear sites had been 'completely and fully obliterated.' Assessing the damage at the Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites is expected to be a difficult task, and the DIA is not the only agency tasked with the job. One source said the assessment was not universally accepted and had generated significant disagreement. A US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the US did not know the extent of the damage yet. Still, the initial assessment indicated the strikes may not have been nearly as successful as the Trump administration has claimed. One of the sources said Iran's enriched uranium stocks had not been eliminated, and in fact the country's nuclear programme may have been set back only a month or two. The Pentagon disputed the notion that the damage to Iran's nuclear programme was minor, though it did not dispute that the DIA assessment exists. 'Based on everything we have seen - and I've seen it all - our bombing campaign obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons,' Mr Hegseth said, in a statement provided to Reuters. 'Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target - and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran; so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the President and the successful mission.' The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But in a statement to CNN, which first reported the intelligence assessment, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the conclusion was incorrect. 'This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong,' Ms Leavitt said, according to CNN. 'Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.' Initial military assessments can change as more information comes to light and it is not uncommon for opinions to vary across different US intelligence agencies. Democrats have previously said Mr Trump's claims that the weekend strikes eliminated or seriously set back Iran's nuclear program were not yet backed by evidence. 'There's zero evidence that I've seen that the nuclear programme was completely and totally obliterated as Donald Trump has claimed,' House of Representatives Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on June 23. Classified briefings on the matter for members of the House of Representatives and Senate were cancelled on June 24. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
