The United Arab Emirates is privately encouraging the United States and Israel to continue military operations against Iran until the regime is decisively defeated—even as Iranian missiles strike Emirati territory, according to diplomatic sources.
France 24 reports that Gulf state officials, particularly from the UAE and Saudi Arabia, have been making the case to the Trump administration that this represents a historic opportunity to permanently weaken Iranian military capabilities and regional influence. The private lobbying stands in stark contrast to the UAE's public neutrality and its official statements denying any involvement in strikes against Iran.
The revelation illuminates the complex strategic calculus driving Emirati policy. UAE leadership appears willing to accept domestic missile attacks—and the economic disruption they bring—as an acceptable cost for achieving what they view as an essential regional objective: breaking Iranian power.
For more than a decade, the UAE has positioned itself as Iran's primary Gulf rival, competing for regional influence across multiple domains. The two nations back opposing sides in Yemen, Libya, and Syria. They maintain competing port networks from the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean. Iranian-aligned militias threaten UAE-backed forces and facilities across the region.
From Abu Dhabi's perspective, a significantly weakened Iran would remove the principal obstacle to Emirati ambitions. UAE leadership has invested billions building a modern military, developing port infrastructure, and establishing diplomatic relationships—from the Abraham Accords with Israel to deepening partnerships with India and African nations. All of this strategic positioning depends on reducing Iranian interference.
The current American-Israeli campaign offers something UAE military spending alone could never achieve: the potential destruction of Iranian nuclear facilities, ballistic missile production, and command infrastructure. Emirati officials evidently calculate that enduring a few weeks of missile strikes represents a small price for permanently altering the regional balance of power.
This explains the otherwise puzzling UAE response to being attacked. Rather than demanding de-escalation or threatening to withdraw cooperation with Washington, Abu Dhabi has largely absorbed the strikes while privately urging escalation. The UAE's sophisticated air defense systems, many purchased from the US and France, have intercepted most incoming projectiles—demonstrating both the effectiveness of years of defense investment and the resolve to continue despite attacks.
The strategy carries enormous risks. Iran has already demonstrated its willingness and capability to strike deep into UAE territory, hitting not just military installations but potentially economic infrastructure. Reports indicate strikes on the Habshan gas field, a critical energy facility. Such targeting threatens the diversified economy that UAE leadership has spent decades building.
There are also domestic political considerations. While the Emirates maintains tight control over public discourse, residents—particularly the 90% expatriate population—are questioning whether their leadership's regional ambitions justify the personal risks they now face. Social media shows growing frustration, though open criticism remains dangerous.
The UAE's position also tests its relationships across the Middle East. Qatar, with which the UAE only recently reconciled after a bitter blockade, maintains different views on Iran. Oman, the UAE's neighbor, has historically acted as a mediator with Tehran. Even Saudi Arabia, despite reportedly sharing UAE views on this campaign, has shown more caution about direct confrontation after Iranian drones struck Saudi oil facilities in 2019.
The France 24 reporting also raises questions about the UAE's longstanding insistence that it plays no role in strikes against Iran. Major General Abdul Nasser Al Humaidi recently stated categorically that "UAE territory is not being used for any attacks against Iran." This may technically be accurate—the advocacy is political rather than operational—but the distinction between providing diplomatic support for strikes and hosting the launch platforms may matter less than Emirati officials hope.
In the Emirates, as across the Gulf, ambitious visions drive rapid transformation—turning desert into global business hubs. But this moment reveals how those visions extend beyond economic development to fundamental questions about regional order. UAE leadership is betting that a transformed Middle East without Iranian interference is worth the current costs.
The coming weeks will test whether that calculation proves correct, or whether the UAE has underestimated the price Iran can extract—and the tolerance of residents and businesses for extended conflict in pursuit of geopolitical objectives.
