Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet News

Underwater Cables in Red Sea Damaged Months After Houthis Threatened To Do Just That (theregister.com) 131

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
Undersea data cables in the Red Sea have reportedly been damaged, months after Yemeni Houthi rebels threatened to do so. From a report: At least 15 submarine cables pass through the Bab al-Mandab Strait at the southern end of the Red Sea, a body of water just 26km wide at some points. Yemen is the Strait's northern shore. The first reports of damage to submarine cables off the coast of Yemen began emerged on Monday morning, with Israeli news outlet Globes claiming that four cables (EIG, AAE-1, Seacom and TGN-EA) had experienced damage. Seacom has reportedly confirmed damage to a cable it operates on a stretch between Kenya and Egypt.

"The location of the cable break is significant due to its geopolitical sensitivity and ongoing tensions, making it a challenging environment for maintenance and repair operations," Seacom said. "The team is currently working towards restoration timelines and will communicate these plans with our clients." Globes attributed the outages to the Iran-backed Houthis, and claimed the damage was "significant, but not critical," because several other undersea cables serve the region. Seacom has already reassured customers it has re-routed traffic onto other cables. While the world has a decent supply of cable repair ships, they are booked up well in advance so finding one ready to work is not always possible. Nor are cable repairs easy: it takes time to find and retrieve a damaged segment and reconnect it.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Underwater Cables in Red Sea Damaged Months After Houthis Threatened To Do Just That More

Underwater Cables in Red Sea Damaged Months After Houthis Threatened To Do Just That

Comments Filter:

  • Eh (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Let Allah fix the cables

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by t0qer ( 230538 )

      These guys are luddites up until the point where technology can make them have strength over other warlords in the region, then it's "Let's get an AI SAM system from China!"

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ls671 ( 1122017 )

        Let them cut themselves from the world and simply re-route packets via a safer route. A few milliseconds won't hurt anybody IMHO.

        • Redirecting the traffic through different channels is not as simple as changing an entry in a routing table. These cables don't exist because the capacity isn't needed, after all, and deploying new ones has a slightly longer lead time than walking into a datacenter and pulling a new 200G fiber between switch A and switch B.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ls671 ( 1122017 )

            There is something called BGP which takes care of exactly that easily, it's not like you have to manually change routing tables:
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

            Some links might have their capacity upgraded simply with fiber light transmitter upgrades or using dead "black" fiber already present in those links. Also, maybe invest in new links instead of fixing the ones that are going to be repetitively attacked and disabled.

            Anyway, re-routing around Internet traffic is much easier than re-routing a gas pipel

  • So...seriously... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2024 @02:15PM (#64272996) Homepage Journal
    Why hasn't someone "smoked" the houthis already?

    How difficult could it be?

    At this point, isn't even much/most of the arabic world except Iran tired of the trouble these fucks are causing?

    This is hurting their incomes too....

    • Couldn't agree more, this needs to be handled as expediently and efficiently as possible.

      • This means dealing with Iran.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by registrations_suck ( 1075251 )

          Just carpet bomb the whole area. 24 hrs/day for a month.

          • Re:So...seriously... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Malenfrant ( 781088 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2024 @02:57PM (#64273138)
            Saudi Arabia has been doing that for the last 10 years. It doesn't appear to have worked so far.

            • Use bigger guns.

            • This entire business started off as a revolt against the Yemeni government around 10 years ago. I never worked out what the revolt was about, if it was along tribal or religious lines (or quite possibly both), the Saudis have been bombing whatever they feel like for those 10 years and some of the Gulf States have also got themselves involved - afaik on both sides. The US and the UK have been the ones supplying the Saudis with their bombs and also training them, the Houthis have no reason to be friendly wi

              • Re: (Score:3)

                by HBI ( 10338492 )

                The Saudis are playing nice with the Houthis because they see a threat to their own nation. It is real.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            Even if that had a hope of working (it doesn't), right now is not the best time to start mass civilian casualties. War crimes are a hot topic, and the whole area is a powder keg ready to go off.

            Any sustained campaign would give other countries an opportunity to defend the civilian populations, and escalate the war. That's why the US and UK like to just send some missiles/drones in as a one-off attack, which is over before anyone can respond.

        • This means dealing with Iran.

          Iran would last as long as Iraq did if the west put their mind to it. Would eliminate a source of arms for Putin as well. It has a lot to recommend it.

    • Have you ever smoked a Houthi? They taste terrible, and do not get you high. If you really must inhale a Houthi, a vaporizer is much less damaging to your lungs.

    • The Saudis were bombing them after Houthis started making asses of themselves by firing rockets at Saudi oil fields. The Saudis were widely criticized for their bombing campaign.

    • Why hasn't someone "smoked" the houthis already?

      Well, there are these things called the Geneva Conventions...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Why hasn't someone "smoked" the houthis already?

      How difficult could it be?

      At this point, isn't even much/most of the arabic world except Iran tired of the trouble these fucks are causing?

      This is hurting their incomes too....

      Why hasn't anyone "smoked" these Taliban already... Said a Russian commissar in 1978.

      I can tell you're an American because you think that you can just waltz in there with bombs and everyone will just surrender to you.

      Awaken from your dreamy state, if it were that simple the Yemeni government would have done so ages ago as they've been around since the 90s. Yes, the current govt of Yemen is no friend of the Houthis of course, and the Yemeni government isn't exactly the most western friendly to begin wi

    • The Saudis were trying to do just that. Biden nixed it.

    • The problem is that the houthis do not stay in military installations separate from the rest of the population. You can't kill lots of houthis at one fell swoop without also killing a lot of non-combatants. To destroy the houthis would require the use of ground troops, which means taking good-guy casualties and risking collateral damage to the civilians among whom the houthis are embedded. The problem is similar to what Israel has faced in Gaza, though easier since the houthis apparently don't have extensiv

  • Remember when the Saudis were accused of targeting civilians in Yemen?

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/... [hrw.org]

    Guess what, now we get to do the same thing.

    • Yeah, sure, you're right - the thing to do is indiscriminately slaughter everyone there - including innocent civilians.

      • It will certainly put an end to a lot of problems.

      • Re:Funny (Score:4, Insightful)

        by DrMrLordX ( 559371 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2024 @03:47PM (#64273328)

        Who said anything about indiscriminate slaughter? If you attack Houthis, you're going to hit civvies since like many ragtag terrorist militia types, they store military hardware and house "freedom fighters" in the same locations as civilian infrastructure. Or you warn them in advance of strikes to like civilians get out of the way which means you spend millions on ammon blowing up abandoned, empty buildings.

        Take your pick.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        "innocent civilians" -> the biggest lie of the late 20th century.

        Even the Iranian Revolution was at least at one point popular. With the few exceptions of places that are truly still ruled by Monarchs/Dear leaders - the civilians bear responsibility for the actions of the their leaders.

        Palestine is a good example. They elected those people, even if it was 20 years ago. Their leadership decided to wage total war on Israel, they are now being collectively curb stomped. Is that good? No! Its horrible, bu

        • Re: Funny (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by drinkypoo ( 153816 )

          ""innocent civilians" -> the biggest lie of the late 20th century."

          True. Every American for example is complicit in the holocaust occurring in Gaza.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mspohr ( 589790 )

          Sounds like a justification for genocide.

          "If you are not willing to break the enemies ability to make war - that means targeting things like manufacturing plants, fuel supplies, yes food production, etc you should evaluate you justification for going to war in the first place, and ideally chose F'ING PEACE instead. You are killing and maiming people, uniformed or otherwise that should be to actually achieve some end or it is just EVIL."
          civilians grow the food the feed the armies
          civilians pay the taxes that

        • "innocent civilians" -> the biggest lie of the late 20th century.

          Exactly. It's why the 9/11 attacks were justified. No civilian is innocent.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by DarkOx ( 621550 )

            No war is ever justified for the point of view of one belligerent considering the actions of the other.

            At least not in any modern conflict. Even the earliest tribes fighting over territory probably would have said, some form of we would not fight them if they would just go and forage on the other-side of the mountain; why must they be here.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by Zak3056 ( 69287 )

          civilians are often complicit in being human shields, even if its just treating combatants in hospitals

          Whoa, whoa, whoa, back the truck up here. The issue with e.g. Hamas and hospitals isn't that their wounded are treated there, it's that Hamas uses the hospitals themselves for activities that result in their protected status being compromised.

          There is absolutely, positively, nothing at all wrong with combatants being treated at civilian hospitals, period, full stop. Hospitals, even military hospitals, hospital ships, etc, are protected from being legitimate targets regardless of who is being treated there

  • Time to deal with Iran (Score:3)

    by BishopBerkeley ( 734647 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2024 @02:19PM (#64273012) Journal
    Iran has perfected its shenanigans to divide people in the west. It must be dealt with directly. The task is easy. Just make their failed economy collapse by blocking them out of SWIFT.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This likely wouldn't be a problem today had the US and Britain not overthrown the elected government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by hdyoung ( 5182939 )
        It's a shame that you have to mention that as an AC. More US citizens should study the consequences of the US overthrowing the Shah. It's the epitome of "the end justifies the means" and "we're not gonna think through the consequences of our actions".

        Don't get me wrong. It's in the past, and we have to deal with the present. Iran is absolutely hostile and the US is not gonna be a pushover because of 50-year-old mistakes. But the US needs to remember past errors in order to avoid repeating them in the f

        • You think that's a doozy?

          Ponder what happened after the Ayatollah overthrew our guy in 1979 and who we hired to do our dirty work back then. Wonder how many people in the US know.

          • Pretty much everyone knows. What isn't often discussed is:

            1). The American effort to overthrow Mossadegh was likely ineffective. Mossadegh was on his way out with or without American intervention.
            2). The Ayatollahs initially backed the Shah.

            Americans give ourselves too much credit (and blame) for the present situation in Iran.

        • The US did not overthrow the Shah, they installed him.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mjwx ( 966435 )

          It's a shame that you have to mention that as an AC. More US citizens should study the consequences of the US overthrowing the Shah. It's the epitome of "the end justifies the means" and "we're not gonna think through the consequences of our actions".

          Don't get me wrong. It's in the past, and we have to deal with the present. Iran is absolutely hostile and the US is not gonna be a pushover because of 50-year-old mistakes. But the US needs to remember past errors in order to avoid repeating them in the future. Forced regime almost never goes well. Last time it went as planned for the US was close to a century ago.

          This.

          We cant change the mistakes of the past but can we please, pretty please, with sugar on top... Stop trying to make the same mistakes over and over and over a-fucking-gain.

          The very best we can hope for by attacking them is a repeat of Libya in 2011... which caused a wave of asylum seekers crossing the Mediterranean. Worse, we'll end up in another Iraq/Vietnam, fighting a war in a place we're not wanted to support corrupt arseholes.

    • Their economy won't collapse. In the publications that smart people read (the ones that actually require a subscription) there are tons of articles discussing the strengths and weaknesses of western sanctions. Bottom line is that they have limits, and if a country is willing to endure a demotion to middle-income status (Iran is already there) and do business with people outside the western world (like Iran), financial sanctions are pretty ineffective.

      I really wonder how long we can hold back a third wor
      • We have leverage over China in its dealings with Iran. This is how Iran was compelled to sign the nuclear deal. It was the threat of their exclusion from SWIFT that brought them to the bargaining table. Iran will not want to deal with China and Russia because they are, in truth, its mortal enemies: secular dictatorships that don't believe in religion and do not want Iran to compete with them for influence. Russia and China will ultimately want to turn Iran into a puppet regime. This will not sit well with t
        • The world has changed since then. China has been building up the yuan as an alternative currency, along with alternatives to SWIFT. They aren’t even a tenth as powerful as SWIFT (and probably never will be, at least in our lifetime). But they are good enough that a middle-income country can do enough business with non-western-aligned countries to get by. Add in transactions that get done with gold, suitcases of cash, or old-timey barter, and you’ve got a kinda-sorta-healthy economy happening out

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Cyberax ( 705495 )
      Iran was kicked out of SWIFT more than 10 years ago.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      That would just encourage more direct action from Iran. More attacks on shipping, and probably an attack on Israel in the name of defending the Palestinians. Create some demand for their oil, and try to gain the upper hand before it either escalates or Iran is so weak that Israel attacks them.

  • Anyone worth conducting meaningful global business can access a satellite for communications. Terrorist can't bomb satellites (yet). Perhaps the infrastructure needs to move to space versus cables underwater.

  • Slow internet (Score:3)

    by tgibson ( 131396 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2024 @03:02PM (#64273148) Homepage

    Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are.
    — Will Ferrell

    There is a corollary here involving the Houthis and nation-states.

  • Yay! The Adults are back in charge! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    WW3 here we come!

    Not even 4 years ago we were looking at "peace" in the Middle East with The Abraham Accords thanks to a guy that is lied about nonstop by the corporate-war-pigs:
    https://www.state.gov/the-abra... [state.gov]

    WW3 will be made possible by stupid people who also suffer from TDS. Morons that will call for war with Iran, but can not survive without the state. According to the global elites, there are too many people. It just so happens that they are also pushing us into WW3 which fun fact, wars redu

    • But Orange Man Bad! Didn't you get the memo?!?!

    • The Abraham Accords thanks to a guy that is lied about nonstop by the corporate-war-pigs

      The guy you claim is lied about, lies everytime he opens his mouth. You can't be serious here.

  • The Middle East (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fjo3 ( 1399739 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2024 @03:48PM (#64273338)
    â¦is a complete mess, but the West needs to stay out of it. We have been killing people over there almost non-stop since WW2, and what have we got to show for it? Debt, and a lot of blood on our hands. Let China try to fix it. Or India. As we slowly but steadily reduce our oil consumption, the Middle East (or Southwest Asia, if you prefer) is going to become less and less important with each passing year.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ksw_92 ( 5249207 )

      So, the easiest transit route between western Asia and Europe is not important? I think Egypt might have an opinion there...

      The ME is more than just oil and Ayatollahs.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mjwx ( 966435 )

        So, the easiest transit route between western Asia and Europe is not important? I think Egypt might have an opinion there...

        The ME is more than just oil and Ayatollahs.

        There has to be a better solution than war... War rarely results in anything better, the last 100 odd years of western powers fucking about in the Arab world sure as shit hasn't.

  • It is so much easier to destroy than to create. Fscking barbarians.

    What I don't get, is why Iran provides them with high-tech weaponry.

    • Because they can then cause chaos that Iran doesn't have to admit they started, and a jumbled, chaotic middle east is one that Iran thrives in.
  • The section of this article that digresses into whether the Houthis have the capability to damage these cables is just dumb. Cables are damaged all the time by accident when ships anchor where they are not supposed to. Dragging an anchor a few miles is not a sophisticated capability.
  • Joe Biden also said it would prevent North Stream 2 to happen, that does not prove US destroyed the pipeline.

Slashdot Top Deals

God doesn't play dice. -- Albert Einstein

Close