Saudi intervention in southern Yemen between security concerns, reshaping influence, and shifts in regional policy
Since the outbreak of the Yemeni war in 2015, the Saudi intervention has officially been framed as a military operation aimed at restoring “legitimacy” and preventing the expansion of the Houthi movement. However, the trajectory of this intervention in southern Yemen has, over time, revealed far more complex layers of objectives and calculations, extending beyond the immediate military dimension to encompass a broader effort to reshape the political and security landscape of the South. It has also imposed new realities on the ground, the consequences of which continue to unfold to this day. Southern Yemen was never a marginal arena in this war; rather, it became a central stage for the reconfiguration of influence, whether through local instruments or undeclared regional arrangements.
In the early years of the intervention, Saudi Arabia focused on consolidating its military presence in strategically significant southern governorates, notably Aden, Lahj, Abyan, and Hadramout, relying on the narrative of “liberation” from the Houthis, an objective that was indeed achieved militarily across most southern areas. Yet the post-liberation phase opened the door to far more complex challenges. The internationally recognized Yemeni government failed to establish effective control, while new local forces, backed by regional actors, emerged. Some of these forces entered into direct confrontation with state institutions themselves, making the South appear to have shifted from a single confrontation to a series of overlapping conflicts.
The Saudi intervention in the South cannot be separated from deeper security concerns, foremost among them the protection of the kingdom’s southern borders and the prevention of the emergence of a hostile or chaotic entity that could evolve into a long-term threat. Accordingly, Riyadh devoted particular attention to governorates such as Al-Mahra and Hadramout, where it strengthened its military and security presence and oversaw local arrangements related to land and maritime crossings. These moves, while presented as efforts to support stability, were met with local criticism, as they were perceived as infringements on Yemeni sovereignty and attempts to impose indirect guardianship over local decision-making.
Over time, it became clear that southern Yemen had turned into a space of delicate balances between Saudi Arabia and its partners on one side, and competing local forces on the other. The Southern Transitional Council, which advocates the restoration of a southern state, imposed itself as a key actor that could not be bypassed, successfully gaining control over sensitive security and administrative levers, particularly in Aden. Although Saudi Arabia attempted to position itself as a mediator between the Council and the government, many observers argue that its intervention came too late, after power realities had already become entrenched on the ground.
The Riyadh Agreement, signed in November 2019, marked a pivotal moment in the course of Saudi intervention in the South. Through this agreement, the kingdom sought to contain internal divisions within the anti-Houthi camp and prevent the complete collapse of the southern front. Nevertheless, despite its political significance, the agreement faced serious obstacles in implementation, with many of its provisions remaining unfulfilled for extended periods. This highlighted the limitations of Riyadh’s ability to impose sustainable solutions in an extremely complex environment, where local, regional, and international interests intersect.
In recent years, Saudi intervention in southern Yemen has undergone a noticeable shift, moving from a direct military approach to a more cautious strategy based on reducing military presence, strengthening the diplomatic role, and supporting de-escalation pathways. This transformation has coincided with broader regional changes, particularly the Saudi-Iranian rapprochement and the kingdom’s efforts to reorder its security and economic priorities within a wider regional vision. Nonetheless, this reduction in presence does not amount to a complete withdrawal, but rather a calculated repositioning aimed at maintaining influence through less costly means.
Recent developments suggest that southern Yemen has become a central axis in any future political settlement. Saudi Arabia, increasingly aware of the complexities of the landscape, is attempting to strike a balance between supporting the official government and engaging pragmatically with influential local forces, without being drawn into new confrontations that could undermine stabilization efforts. However, this approach faces real challenges, most notably the absence of an inclusive national project and the divergence of agendas among allies themselves.
At the popular level, Saudi intervention in the South has left a mixed legacy. While some view it as having helped prevent the total collapse of the state, others regard it as a factor that prolonged the crisis, deepened divisions, and fostered the emergence of power centers outside the framework of official institutions. This divergence reflects the reality that the intervention was not merely a military operation, but a complex political process that reshaped relations between the state and society, as well as between the center and the peripheries.
Today, Saudi intervention in southern Yemen stands at a crossroads. It may either evolve into a genuine catalyst for a comprehensive settlement addressing the root causes of the conflict, including the southern question, or remain a mechanism for managing the crisis without resolving it, carrying the inherent risks of renewed escalation in new forms. Experience has shown that stability in the South cannot be imposed by force alone, but requires deep political compromises and the rebuilding of trust among local actors, a challenge that remains open to all possibilities.
