In the discipline of International Relations, the “emotional turn” has challenged the traditional assumption of state rationality by foregrounding how emotions—such as fear, anger, pride, and humiliation—shape not only the perceptions of policymakers but also the collective identity of states. From this perspective, foreign policy is not merely a product of material interests or strategic constraints; it is also an expression of how states feel about themselves and others within a social and historical context. This study investigates the emotional foundations of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy during the Yemen conflict (2011–2024), arguing that emotions—rather than material rationality alone—shaped Riyadh’s strategic behavior. Drawing on Markwica’s Logic of Emotion and an extensive discourse analysis of official speeches, coalition statements, and state-aligned media, the article identifies four dominant affective drivers: fear, pride, anger, and humiliation. The findings reveal that fear of Iranian encirclement triggered the 2015 intervention, pride sustained Saudi leadership narratives, anger fueled escalation during periods of military stalemate, and humiliation after 2019 facilitated diplomatic recalibration. The study contributes to psychological constructivism by demonstrating how emotions become institutionalized in state discourse and operate as causal mechanisms in foreign policy decision-making. The article concludes that Saudi Arabia’s Yemen strategy cannot be understood without recognizing its affective logic, which shaped not only policy outcomes but also the kingdom’s evolving regional identity.