July 2024 Houthi–Israel Attacks

By July 2024, Israel had reported more than 200 Houthi missile and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks since October 2023, before the first Israeli fatality from those attacks occurred in Tel Aviv.[1] Houthi leaders linked their campaign against Israel to the war in Gaza and said that attacks would continue until Israel ended its operations there.[1] Israeli reporting described the great majority of Houthi projectiles as intercepted by Israeli, U.S., or Saudi forces or as missing their targets.[3] These launches formed the immediate military context for the July exchange, which brought a fatal attack on central Tel Aviv and an Israeli retaliatory operation in Yemen.[1]

The Houthis also announced cooperation with the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, including purported joint operations against Israeli targets and shipping.[4] Between June 6 and July 28, the two sides announced 12 joint attacks: nine involving UAVs and three involving cruise missiles.[4] Their claimed targets included Haifa, Eilat, and vessels in the Mediterranean.[4] The announcements placed attacks on Israeli cities and attacks on maritime targets within the same publicly described campaign.[4]

On July 2, the Houthis and the Islamic Resistance in Iraq claimed that they had jointly launched cruise missiles at a “vital target” in Haifa and that the operation had achieved its objectives.[5] Six days later, they announced a joint UAV attack against a “vital target” in Eilat.[4] During the July 8 incident, an Israeli fighter intercepted a suspicious aerial target approaching from the Red Sea region before it entered Israeli territory.[4] On July 14, the Houthis separately claimed that UAVs had attacked “military targets” around Eilat and again declared that the operation had succeeded.[5]

Houthi pressure also extended to Red Sea shipping and regional diplomacy.[6] In a July 2 commentary, the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs portrayed attacks on shipping as pressure on Israel and regional governments, asserting that more than 150 ships had been hit with missiles and UAVs while the Houthis claimed they were bound for Israel.[6] The same commentary reported Israeli security officials’ concern about Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi and his warnings against Saudi normalization with Israel.[6] It said he had characterized such an agreement as a threat to Yemen’s national security and that the Houthis had warned of consequences for the Saudi-Houthi ceasefire if normalization proceeded.[6]

Hodeidah, the eventual target of Israel’s response, was both an important commercial port and a facility that Israeli officials said served Houthi military supply routes.[1][3] Its civilian functions included the movement of goods, food, humanitarian supplies, and fuel into Yemen.[1] Israeli officials described the port as an entry point for weapons supplied by Iran to the Houthis.[3] These military and commercial functions became central to the explanation of Israel’s targeting decisions and to subsequent concern about the operation’s effects on civilians.[1]

At approximately 3:12 a.m. on July 19, a drone exploded in a residential area of central Tel Aviv near Ben Yehuda and Shalom Aleichem streets, close to the United States diplomatic mission.[3] The attack killed Yevgeny Ferder, aged 50, and Israeli government figures recorded eight other people wounded.[7][1] Ferder lived and worked in an apartment hotel near the intersection where the explosion occurred.[8] Medical treatment included care for shrapnel injuries and the effects of the blast’s shockwave.[7] It was the first Houthi attack to kill an Israeli on Israeli soil since October 7, 2023.[1][9]

The Houthis claimed responsibility and called the aircraft “Yafa,” or Jaffa.[7] Military spokesman Yahya Sare’e described it as a new drone capable of bypassing radar and interception systems and characterized the attack as a precision operation against an important target in the area the group called “occupied Jaffa.”[5] He said attacks would continue unless the war and siege in Gaza stopped.[5] The group framed its campaign as support for Hamas during the Gaza war.[3]

The Israeli military identified the aircraft as an Iranian-made Samad-3 modified to extend its range.[7] Its account described a journey of approximately 2,600 kilometers over roughly 16 hours, rather than the approximately 1,800-kilometer direct distance between Yemen and Israel.[10] The route took the aircraft west toward Sudan, north across Sudan and Egypt, and then over the Sinai Peninsula and Mediterranean before it approached Israel from the west.[10] The extended approach brought the drone toward Tel Aviv from the sea rather than directly from Yemen.[10]

The modifications included a replacement engine and the use of some space otherwise available for explosive payload to carry additional fuel.[11] The aircraft flew autonomously at low altitude, with a reported speed of 80–100 kilometers per hour.[11] Israeli reporting described its warhead as relatively small so that it could carry more fuel.[8] These changes were part of the military explanation for how a Samad-3 could complete the long route to central Israel.[10][11]

The initial Israeli inquiry found that the drone had been detected but was not engaged because of human error.[7][10] A more detailed account described its signal appearing on a radar screen over the Mediterranean without initially being treated as a threat; an operator may have missed or dismissed it among numerous false blips.[10] The system recognized the aircraft as a threat only when it was approximately five minutes from Tel Aviv.[10] Another account placed its appearance on control-room screens at six minutes and said that no interception attempt was made and no warning was issued to residents.[11]

A separate aerial threat approached Israel from the east that night and was intercepted.[4] The Houthis and the Islamic Resistance in Iraq issued separate launch claims, with the Iraqi group announcing that it had fired a cruise missile at a “military target” in Haifa.[4] The Israeli investigation also described another drone appearing on monitoring screens around the same time as the Tel Aviv-bound aircraft.[10] The simultaneous appearance of more than one aerial threat became part of the investigation into the missed interception.[10]

Houthi political council member Hazem al-Assad called the Tel Aviv attack the first of many “escalating actions” and said Yemen had entered a “new strategic phase” in its attacks on Israel.[5] He described the fronts in Lebanon, Iraq, and the Palestinian arena as integrated and said attacks would increase while the Gaza war continued.[5] The group’s military spokesman also threatened further strikes on “vital targets” and said Tel Aviv was not safe; a senior Houthi source separately threatened Haifa’s port.[8]

Israel’s response was Operation Long Arm, or Yad Aruka, launched against Hodeidah on July 20.[1][11] Senior military officials made a decision in principle on Friday morning, followed by approximately 36 hours of preparation and approval by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.[11] The first aircraft took off at about 3 p.m. on Saturday, roughly half an hour after the cabinet formally convened to approve the operation.[11] The strikes occurred at about 6 p.m., according to the military briefing.[12]

The mission involved F-15 and F-35 fighters as well as other aircraft supporting intelligence collection, aerial refueling, command, rescue, and defense.[11][12] Dozens of aircraft either participated or stood ready, although the military briefing did not disclose an exact total.[11][12] One operational account gave a round-trip distance of approximately 3,400 kilometers and a flight time of two hours and 50 minutes in each direction.[11] Combat and refueling aircraft traveled more than 1,000 miles from Israeli bases, making aerial refueling an important element of the operation.[1]

The Israeli military described approximately ten airstrikes against targets around the port.[12] Reported targets included fuel depots, oil-refining facilities, a power station, dockside cranes, and Yemeni air-force assets.[1][12] Additional reporting identified a military-police building and the Ras Kathib power station among the sites struck, and described fires at oil facilities and a power outage in Sana’a.[8] The military characterized the targets as military or dual-use infrastructure, including energy infrastructure.[2]

One account identified two central port cranes as the principal targets and described precision weapons being directed against their control carriages.[11] The stated aim was to disrupt the port’s activity for months by damaging equipment associated with what Israel described as the Houthis’ main supply route.[11] Cockpit footage subsequently released by the military appeared to show the destruction of port cranes and an oil terminal.[2] The reported strikes therefore combined attacks on cargo-handling equipment with attacks on fuel and energy facilities.[1][2]

Netanyahu presented the operation as a response to the fatal Tel Aviv attack and to months of Houthi launches against Israel.[3] He said Hodeidah was not an “innocent port,” describing it as an entry point for Iranian weapons supplied to the Houthis.[3] An Israeli military official characterized the targeted installations as dual-use infrastructure used for terrorist activities.[9] The stated military objective included disrupting Iranian weapons transfers to Yemen.[12]

The operation was Israel’s first publicly acknowledged airstrike against Houthi targets in Yemen.[9] The Israeli military said it had acted alone.[8] The White House likewise said that the United States had not participated, while reaffirming Israel’s right to self-defense; Israel had informed Washington before the operation.[8][12] The United States and Britain also denied claims that they had participated in or assisted the strike.[8]

On July 21, the Houthis said they had launched a ballistic missile toward Eilat.[13] The Israeli military said its Arrow 3 system intercepted a surface-to-surface missile launched from Yemen before it entered Israeli territory.[2] Sirens sounded in Eilat because of the danger from falling shrapnel, although the interception occurred outside Israeli airspace.[2]

Fires burned at Hodeidah’s fuel-storage installations after the Israeli strikes, and successive reports gave rising casualty totals.[14][13] An initial July 20 account, citing Houthi-run media and Yemen’s health ministry, reported three people killed and 87 wounded.[14] The following day, medical sources in Yemen reported six deaths and 80 injuries, without specifying whether those killed or wounded were civilians or Houthi members.[15] Another contemporary account reported at least six deaths, more than 80 injuries, and at least three missing people.[5]

A later report put the death toll at 14, with six people missing and approximately 90 injured, citing sources speaking to Sky News Arabic.[13] The Yemeni Oil Company confirmed that six of those killed were its employees.[13] The same report described continuing fires in the fuel-storage area.[13] Houthi-appointed port officials nevertheless said that operations had resumed within 24 hours and that the port was operating at full capacity.[13]

The port’s role in supplying Houthi-held areas made damage to its infrastructure a humanitarian concern.[1][15] Millions of people depended on aid delivered through Hodeidah, which was also a major entry point for fuel imports.[15] While fires burned at storage tanks and a power plant, analysts and a port employee raised concerns about prolonged burning, possible damage to nearby food storage, and higher fuel and transport prices.[15] Those statements described anticipated risks rather than established economic outcomes.[15]

Damage to port infrastructure could restrict the flow of goods, food, humanitarian supplies, and fuel until affected functions were restored.[1] More complete economic and humanitarian estimates depended on further damage assessments.[1] The United Nations Secretary-General referred to “considerable damage to civilian infrastructure” and called on all parties to exercise “utmost restraint.”[1] Hodeidah’s importance to both Houthi forces and Yemen’s basic import needs meant that damage to its facilities had implications beyond the immediate military exchange.[1]

The Houthis condemned the Israeli operation as an attack on civilian facilities and threatened retaliation.[15] Spokesman Muhammad Abd al-Salam said the response would be “without red lines and without borders” and warned that sensitive Israeli facilities could be targeted.[5] In a July 21 speech, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi described the Tel Aviv drone attack as the beginning of a “fifth phase” in the conflict with Israel.[5] Houthi leaders continued to connect their attacks to demands that Israel end its operations in Gaza.[1]

Israel’s air-defense response also changed after the Tel Aviv strike.[10][11] The military said the failure reflected human error rather than an inability of radar to detect the drone.[10] It announced that the number of radar operators monitoring screens would be doubled.[10] Another account described an increase in controllers and additional air patrols, while the military ordered an intelligence and technical investigation into the mistaken assessment of the modified aircraft.[11][8]

Israeli officials framed the Hodeidah operation as both retaliation for the death in Tel Aviv and a demonstration of Israel’s ability to reach distant threats.[16] Gallant said that the Houthis had attacked Israel more than 200 times and that Israel acted after the first attack to kill an Israeli civilian.[16] Netanyahu similarly described the operation as demonstrating Israel’s reach.[16] The combination of a fatal strike in central Israel, a long-range Israeli air operation in Yemen, and subsequent Houthi missile launches raised concern about a wider regional war.[1]

The July exchange marked two documented thresholds: the first Israeli death in the Houthi campaign reported since October 2023 and Israel’s first publicly acknowledged airstrike on Houthi targets in Yemen.[1][9] The Tel Aviv attack demonstrated the consequences of a failure to act on a detected aerial threat, while Operation Long Arm demonstrated Israel’s ability to carry out a refueled combat mission more than 1,000 miles from its bases.[10][1] Israeli officials emphasized the latter as a message to Iran-aligned groups as well as a response to the immediate attack.[16]

The record of Houthi-Iraqi joint operations requires a distinction between announced attacks and confirmed events.[4] Of the 12 joint attacks announced between June 6 and July 28, only the July 8 interception was identified as confirmed in the available review; the other claims had not been independently verified.[4] This limitation applies to the July 2 claim concerning Haifa, while the separate July 14 Houthi claim concerning Eilat likewise lacked verification.[5] A possible connection between launches on the night of the Tel Aviv strike remained an assessment rather than an established coordination finding, and the Israeli investigation did not establish that the eastern drone was a deliberate distraction.[4][10]

The Houthis’ presentation of the “Yafa” as an advanced drone differed from the Israeli investigation’s finding that the aircraft appeared on functioning detection systems but was not correctly classified or engaged.[7][10] That distinction separates the group’s claims of a new capability from the military’s account of an operational failure.[10] Contemporaneous Israeli and U.S. reporting placed the preceding campaign above 200 Houthi attacks or projectiles, although descriptions of the weapon categories varied.[1][9]

The most substantial dispute concerned the Hodeidah strike’s military justification and civilian effects.[17] Israel described the port as a weapons-supply asset and the targets as military or dual-use infrastructure, while the Houthis characterized the sites as civilian facilities.[3][15] Human Rights Watch later assessed that the strikes appeared indiscriminate or disproportionate and might amount to a war crime; this was an organizational legal assessment, not a court judgment.[17] Its findings cited satellite imagery showing damage to more than two dozen oil-storage tanks, two port cranes, and a power plant in Salif district, with oil tanks burning for at least three days.[17] NGO Monitor disputed that assessment and emphasized Israel’s stated military rationale.[18]