On Wednesday the State Department ordered non-emergency U.S. government employees and their families to leave Saudi Arabia. Within hours, Saudi Arabia’s civil aviation authority reported that an attack on King Fahd International Airport in Dammam had killed one person and injured eight. Earlier the same day, the Saudi energy ministry said two people were killed when air defenses intercepted a drone aimed at the Shaybah oilfield, Reuters reported.
We have written before about Congress’s constitutional role in the war with Iran. This is a different question, and an urgent one: what does America owe its own people overseas, what should it expect from its partners, and how should it protect the energy routes that set the price of gasoline at home?
What the State Department did, and why
“Iranian-supported Houthis have increasingly engaged in hostilities against Saudi Arabia, including attacks on civilian airports and other critical infrastructure resulting in civilian casualties and severe travel disruptions,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said in a post on X. The BBC reported that a department spokesperson also warned that “the hostilities have the potential to escalate rapidly.”
Pigott stressed that the order applies to “Saudi Arabia only,” and called an earlier report of a Gulf-wide departure “inaccurate,” according to Al Jazeera. Reuters, however, reported that four U.S. officials said missions in other Gulf states would also be ordering family members to leave. CBS News reported that several other embassies have reduced staffing under a “restricted operations” status the department introduced in August, short of a mandatory ordered departure. CBS also reported that the U.S. military has been quietly reducing its footprint at posts in the region because of Houthi and Iranian threats.
The danger is real. CBS reported that a Houthi strike on Riyadh’s King Khalid International Airport earlier this month killed 12 people and injured more than 300, and that one American was among the dead.
How we got here
The Houthis have been at war with Yemen’s government since they seized the capital, Sanaa, in 2014, and a Saudi-led coalition intervened in 2015. According to the BBC, an informal ceasefire held for about four years before unravelling in July, when the Houthis announced a “maritime embargo” against Saudi Arabia and began attacking Saudi airports, oil facilities, and tankers. The Houthis say they are retaliating for what they call a Saudi blockade and an air strike on Sanaa airport. Some Saudi officials blame Iran for the escalation, CBS reported; Iran denies any role.
The fighting is spreading. Xinhua reported that on Wednesday the Houthis launched drones and ballistic missiles toward the Al-Dhabba oil export terminal and the main airport in Yemen’s government-held Hadramout province. The conflict data group ACLED assesses that the Houthis are using “calibrated coercion rather than maximum disruption,” focusing their attacks on Saudi-linked targets while limiting the risk of a broader international response, and warns that this restraint “appears tactical” and “should not be understood as moderation.”
Why Americans should care: the oil math
This is not a faraway quarrel. With the Strait of Hormuz disrupted by the war with Iran, Saudi Arabia has leaned on its Red Sea coast to get oil to market. The Africa Center for Strategic Studies reports that Saudi shipments through the Red Sea port of Yanbu rose from roughly 1 million to 4.9 million barrels a day, and that the Houthis attacked the kingdom’s key East-West crude pipeline in September. As CBS put it, the Houthis sit next to the Bab al-Mandab Strait, a chokepoint that has become more important precisely because of the disruptions at Hormuz.
Markets have noticed. Reuters, via Baird Maritime, reported that Brent crude stood at $110.03 a barrel on Monday and U.S. West Texas Intermediate at $103.09, after last week’s rally to a five-month high. Analytics firm Kpler said crude flows through the region fell to a seven-day average of about 8.5 million barrels a day last week, down from more than 20 million the week before. SEB analyst Bjarne Schieldrop predicted that any rise in Hormuz exports may prove short-lived because Iran could escalate attacks ahead of the November 3 midterm elections.
First duty: protect Americans
The first obligation of any government is the safety of its own people. Ordering families and non-essential staff out of harm’s way is prudent, not weak, and the department deserves credit for acting after the deadly Riyadh strike rather than waiting for another. But clarity matters too. When an official spokesperson calls one report inaccurate while four officials tell Reuters that other missions will also send families home, Americans living and working in the Gulf are left guessing. The State Department should publish plain, consistent guidance for private citizens in the region, including how and when to leave.
Second duty: allies must carry their share
Conservatives have long argued that America’s partners should bear the primary burden of their own defense. That principle is being tested now, and some partners are stepping up. CBS reported that the United Kingdom has offered Saudi Arabia support, including defensive air operations. Xinhua reported that Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi said Egypt’s military efforts would be limited to defending Saudi territory and borders and would not involve attacking Yemen. Egypt has its own stake: the Africa Center estimates it has lost 30 to 40 percent of the $9.4 billion a year it collects from Suez Canal fees.
This is the right model. Saudi Arabia is a wealthy country with a large military. Regional powers that benefit most from a secure Red Sea should lead its defense, with the United States supplying intelligence, logistics, and air defense where our interests are directly engaged.
Third duty: decide before drifting
It is not clear what Washington intends. CBS reported that it is not known whether the administration plans to assist Saudi Arabia directly, and that President Trump did not rule out strikes on the Houthis after the October 10 Riyadh attack, telling reporters, “We may.” He also said, “We have communication with the Houthis, and we’ll see what happens. But what they did was very bad.”
Keeping options open is reasonable. Drifting into a second front without stated objectives is not. If the administration concludes that American lives or vital shipping lanes require force against the Houthis, it should say so plainly, explain the goal and the limits, and bring Congress along. A drawdown of diplomats and troops while threats rise can be wise, but only if it is part of a strategy rather than a substitute for one.
Fourth duty: energy security begins at home
Finally, the crisis is a reminder that America’s exposure to two narrow waterways half a world away is a policy choice that can be reduced over time. Producing, refining, and moving more energy here at home, and building it out under sensible permitting, will not stop the Houthis. It will make American families less hostage to them the next time.
Protect our people, expect our partners to lead in their own neighborhood, state our aims before we act, and strengthen the home front. That is a foreign policy of prudence and strength, and it is what this moment calls for.
