EDIT: I’ve finished it (long article). All I can take away from that is that the current situation and short and long term outlooks are all extremely bleak.
The non-explodey solution is most likely going to require *both* sending enough money to Houthi leadership to save face, plus turning up with enough muscle to ensure an agreement to remove the oil is honoured.
The US military has never been a force for good, nor a force for evil either. The US military, like all other militaries, is a force for its own country's purposes and goals only. The rest is propaganda.
History has put the US in such a position this propaganda, and the area of control of its military, is extremely widespread.
Of course, and for everyone but contrarians, sometimes the US has goals that are a net good. Sometimes the US doesn't, and sometimes the US uses the military inappropriately for commendable but open-ended goals. This isn't open-ended, and not having the tanker is a net good, and you'll notice I emphatically did not suggest using only the US military. I suggested the US military provide security for whatever deal is struck.
Assuming we're living in reality, what non-force-backed solution do you propose that doesn't end with "Thankyou for $ASSET. There has been problem. Send more $ASSET."... Forever?
We also have some odd policies regarding SA - the recent transfer of ownership of the UK Football (Soccer) club Newcastle United is shrouded in mystery because the UK government granted special secrecy to the incoming Saudi owners. No, this is not fiction.
There's a whole history of unpopular decisions regarding SA, and the wider UAE in general, in the UK. Many times trade (notably arms) sanctions have been called for and routinely ignored. E.g. when the tragic living and working (read: slave) conditions of much of the immigrant workforces were revealed.
Whataboutism would instead say something like: Well France is supporting it too, why are you focusing so much on the U.S.?
The overthrow of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh by Obama which was the first step to destroy Yemen:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/04/world/middleeast/04yemen....
We're talking the same Obama who got a Nobel peace prize, right?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trial_of_Henry_Kissinger
The same Kissinger that the Clintons embraced:
https://www.vox.com/world/2016/2/12/10979304/clinton-sanders...
Kissinger continued to violate the signed truce after being awarded the Nobel.
[0] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/nobel-p...
Obama is commander-in-chief of the US military and therefore ultimately responsible for the AC-130 gunship that repeatedly bombed and strafed a field hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, a week ago.
Weirdly, the aircraft was almost certainly using a 40mm cannon made by Bofors, a company that was once owned by Alfred Nobel, the founder of the peace prize.
Two dozen people were killed, including three children. Among the adults were the staff and patients of the charity that runs the hospital, Médecins Sans Frontières. Doctors Without Borders, as it is also known, was given the Nobel in 1999 for its “pioneering humanitarian work on several continents”.
So a Nobel Peace Prize-winning President is being condemned for sending a gunship to kill the staff of a Nobel Peace Prize-winning charity using weapons made by the company that the founder of the Nobel Peace Prize used to own.
It didn't? As the article describes, people have been aware of the problem for years already.
It was also discussed here last year
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25486995
Here is another report from 2018
https://ceobs.org/is-an-ageing-oil-tanker-threatening-an-env...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/decaying-yemen-oil-tanker-at-ri...
Just tell the Saudis that while we might not approve of their war in Yemen, they can go get the oil and sell it at regular market price.
That said I am curious if anyone would buy the oil if someone went there with a tug boat and fetched the ship.
The problem with colonial forces installing democracy in 3rd world countries is that eventually they leave, and then all the old problems come back, AND the native liberal and progressive movements are completely compromised as traitors.
ISIS exists because of USA (and other countries - including my own) involvement in the middle east.
Britain was in India for 150 years and it was barely enough.
It’s been reported on for a while, I first noticed article about it last year.