Biden Administration Backs Away From Terrorist Designation For Houthis

I saw a couple articles this morning complaining that the Biden Administration is not designating the Houthi rebels as a terrorist organization:

• "State Department to Redesignate Houthis As Terrorists; Except Not As Real Terrorists"--Red State.
• "'Bait and Switch': Biden Decision To Water Down Houthi Terror Designation Draws Outrage"--The Washington Free Beacon. 

As the Red State article explains, rather than designate the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), as Trump had previously done, Biden is instead declare them to be Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGT). As the article explains:

    The difference between the two designations is more than semantic. 

    Doing business with an FTO subjects you to sanctions, or if you are an American, to a lengthy prison term for material support of terrorism. Collaborating with an SDGT means nothing.

    Key to the issue here--and why the weaker the SDGT designation--is that banks are required to seize the funds of FTOs. As I recently explained, Saudi Arabia is at a delicate juncture in its attempts to reach a peace deal with the Houthis; a deal that would involve Saudi Arabia transferring substantial sums to the Houthis. If the Houthis were designated as FTOs, requiring banks to seize those funds, it would scuttle the whole peace deal. And since Biden has sabotaged the U.S. oil industry so that we are again dependent on Saudi Arabia for oil, the U.S. has no choice but to act to protect the Saudi deal with the Houthis.

Related: And speaking of Biden sabotaging the oil industry: "Forest Service pulls right-of-way permit that would have allowed construction of Utah oil railroad."  

    The U.S. Forest Service on Wednesday withdrew its approval of a right-of-way permit that would have allowed the construction of a railroad project through about 12 miles (19 kilometers) of roadless, protected forest in northeastern Utah.

    The decision affecting the Ashley National Forest follows a U.S. appeals court ruling in August that struck down a critical approval involving the Uinta Basin Railway, a proposed 88-mile (142-kilometer) railroad line that would connect oil and gas producers in rural Utah to the broader rail network. It would allow them to access larger markets and ultimately sell to refineries near the Gulf of Mexico.