We briefly unpack those here:
1. US wants compensation from Egypt and Europe
In the course of the discussions, a user identified by The Atlantic as White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller suggested that Trump greenlit the campaign against the Houthis on the condition that Europe and Egypt provide the United States with something “in return.”
“[T]here needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return” for the costs of the US campaign, the person identified as Miller wrote.
Earlier in the chat, the user named Mike Waltz wrote, “Per the president’s request, we are working with DOD and State to determine how to compile the cost associated and levy them on the Europeans.”
While the US economy has largely absorbed the disruptions to Red Sea maritime traffic, the European Union and Egypt have borne the brunt of the impact. Rates on Asia-Europe shipping routes have nearly tripled since the Houthi attacks began in October 2023.
"3 percent of US trade runs through the [S]uez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary," Vice President JD Vance wrote in the chat.
What sort of compensation the administration wants from Egypt, however, remains unclear. The cash-strapped country has lost $800 million per week in revenue owing to reduced traffic through the Suez Canal, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said recently.
2. Israeli pressure played a role in the US’ decision
One key takeaway from the leaked chat is that Vance raised doubts about launching the strikes on short notice, advocating at least a month’s delay. Vance pointed out risks to global oil prices, implying the Houthis could attack Saudi Arabia and its petroleum infrastructure in retaliation, as they did in 2019.
Pushing back on Vance’s hesitation, Hegseth cautioned in the group chat that waiting would pose another risk — namely that “Israel takes an action first — or Gaza ceasefire falls apart — and we don’t get to start this on our own terms.”
In other words, US officials appear to believe the Israelis were weighing striking the Houthis on their own while intent on relaunching the war in Gaza despite the January ceasefire (which Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff helped broker), as Al-Monitor previously reported.
Rather than stand in Israel’s way, the Trump administration decided to get ahead of the action.
3. Trump’s intended audience is Iran
Trump gave his cabinet specific instructions to reopen commercial sea lanes off Yemen’s coast, the chat revealed.
But ultimately, “The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message,” the person identified as Vance wrote in the chat.
“This [is] not about the Houthis,” Hegseth noted separately in the discussion. “I see it as two things: 1) Restoring Freedom of Navigation … and 2) Reestablish deterrence, which Biden cratered.”
The Houthi strikes came as the Trump administration has sought to pressure Iran’s government into negotiating with Washington over its nuclear program — or face US military action.
A second US aircraft carrier is scheduled to head to the region in the coming days.
Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer arrived in Washington on Tuesday with a mission to persuade Trump administration officials to commit to launching military strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites should diplomacy fail.
Yet the US intelligence community this week raised the potential risks of pursuing that option. In the unclassified version of its annual report on global threats released Tuesday, Gabbard’s office noted that Iran’s supreme leader has not approved the pursuit of a nuclear weapon — and noted the risks of attempting to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.
“Iran’s large conventional forces are capable of inflicting substantial damage to an attacker, executing regional strikes and disrupting shipping, particularly energy supplies, through the Strait of Hormuz,” the intel assessment concluded.
