US keeps striking a blow for shipping

Protection of commercial shipping has historically been part of the mission of the U.S. Navy, from pursuing the Barbary pirates in the Mediterranean in the early days of the republic to quelling Somali privateers in the Indian Ocean more recently.

The use of military force against Yemen’s Houthi rebels, who have been firing on commercial ships in the Red Sea, fits that history.

The Red Sea matters. Some 12% of global trade traverses its waters going to or from the Suez Canal. The alternative — sailing around the southern tip of Africa — adds thousands of miles of distance and millions in expense. The United States and its allies have an interest in keeping the Red Sea open to shipping.

Yet retaliatory airstrikes — led by the United States but also involving forces from such allies as Great Britain, Netherlands and Bahrain — have drawn congressional criticism from both the right and left wings.

Few issues unite Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-GA., and Rashida Tlaib, D-mich., but this is one. The strikes were, notably, supported by the leadership of both the House and Senate.

The risk is of triggering a broader Middle East war, which today remains largely localized to the Gaza Strip. But it is the Houthis, not Biden, who are broadening the conflict with indiscriminate attacks on commercial traffic. Doing nothing is not an acceptable alternative.

The response was deliberately limited. The initial strikes by the U.s.-led coalition is reported to have targeted 30 sites and to have destroyed or damaged 93% of the targets — but that same reporting said the U.S. believes that the Iranian proxy group had lost less than a third of its overall offensive capabilities.

And, indeed, U.s.-owned cargo ships were hit Monday and Wednesday by the Houthi. Clearly, the initial strikes were not enough to deter the Houthis (and certainly not their suppliers and mentors in Tehran). The U.S. and its coalition cannot afford to back down.