Yemen condemns Israeli strikes on Syria’s Abu al-Duhur airbase as a violation of sovereignty
Yemen Herald News 
Yemen’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates has condemned the airstrikes that struck the Abu al-Duhur military airbase in Syria’s Idlib governorate, calling the attack a violation of Syrian sovereignty and of the principles set out in the United Nations Charter. According to a statement carried by Yemen’s official news agency, the ministry described the raid as a dangerous escalation that threatens what little stability the region retains, and urged international institutions to shoulder their responsibilities and press for an end to hostilities.
The strikes hit the base in the eastern countryside of Idlib province in the early hours of Tuesday. Syrian state media reported eight raids that damaged the airfield’s runway without causing casualties. Abu al-Duhur lies roughly 45 kilometres east of Idlib city, inside territory administered by the government in Damascus, and ranks among the larger military airfields in northern Syria.
Israel did not comment publicly when the raids were first reported. The Syrian government, the United States and Jordan all attributed the attack to Israeli forces, and a senior Israeli official later acknowledged that Israel had carried it out. Israeli officials have generally declined to confirm individual operations in Syria, a practice that has become routine over more than a decade of intermittent strikes on Syrian territory.
The timing drew particular attention. A Turkish military delegation had visited the site a day earlier, in connection with plans to rehabilitate the airfield and convert it into a facility used jointly by Syrian and Turkish forces. It was the first reported attack on Abu al-Duhur since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government in December 2024.
Syria’s Foreign Ministry said it condemned the raids in the strongest terms, describing them as an unjustified act of aggression, a flagrant violation of the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and a dangerous escalation threatening security and stability in the region. The ministry added that the strikes had continued since December 2024 at a time when the Syrian state had exercised restraint and worked to avoid escalation.
Washington’s response was unusually direct. Tom Barrack, the US special presidential envoy for Syria, called the strikes an unnecessary escalation that did not advance regional stability, noting that the Syrian government had not adopted a hostile posture and had repeatedly expressed a desire to de-escalate. He described sustained dialogue and restraint as the more constructive path.
Regional governments moved quickly. Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt condemned the strikes, as did the Gulf Cooperation Council, whose secretary-general, Jasem Mohamed Albudaiwi, said the targeting of Syrian territory was an unacceptable assault on sovereignty. The Turkish Foreign Ministry characterised the raids as part of a pattern of attacks on Syria’s infrastructure and capabilities. Several of those statements called on the United Nations Security Council to take firmer action.
Yemen’s statement places Aden alongside that Arab and Gulf consensus. Yemen’s foreign ministry has issued comparable statements before, including after a bombing near the Syrian Ministry of Defence building in Damascus, when it expressed solidarity with the Syrian government and people.
For Yemen’s internationally recognised government, the language of sovereignty is not an abstraction. The Presidential Leadership Council, seated in Aden, governs a country whose institutions remain divided: the Houthi movement controls Sanaa and much of the north, while the government administers the south and east. Yemeni airspace, ports and waters have repeatedly been the setting for military action by outside powers, and successive Yemeni statements have leaned on international law arguments to contest that record.
Israeli forces have also carried out strikes inside Yemen itself, hitting Houthi-held areas including the port of Hodeidah and targets in and around Sanaa during the exchanges tied to the war in Gaza. That history gives officials in Aden a direct frame of reference when they respond to Israeli operations elsewhere in the region, even where Yemen has no material stake in the outcome.
The humanitarian backdrop at home remains severe. Under the 2026 Humanitarian Needs and Response Plan, the United Nations estimates that 22.3 million people in Yemen require humanitarian assistance and protection services, more than two-thirds of the population. The figure includes 5.2 million internally displaced people. Some 18.3 million people face acute food insecurity, more than 2.2 million children under five are acutely malnourished, and 14.4 million are expected to need water, sanitation and hygiene support. Aid agencies have appealed for 2.16 billion dollars to reach 12 million people this year.
There is a practical diplomatic logic to Yemen’s intervention as well. The government depends heavily on Saudi and wider Gulf political and financial backing, and aligning with positions taken in Riyadh, Kuwait City and the GCC secretariat costs Aden little while reinforcing the same sovereignty principle it invokes over its own territory and coastline. Statements of this kind are also a low-cost way for a government with limited leverage to stay visible in regional diplomacy.
Nothing in the immediate aftermath suggested a change in Israeli operations. The Syrian government has continued to press for de-escalation arrangements, and the calls for Security Council action that accompanied this week’s condemnations have not so far produced measures at the United Nations. For Yemen, the statement functions as a diplomatic marker rather than a shift in policy: the government’s day-to-day priorities remain the front lines, a battered economy and a humanitarian appeal that has consistently fallen short of its targets.
About the Author
