The Islamic Republic of Iran has consistently emphasized the principles of peaceful coexistence, good-neighborly relations, and stronger ties with neighboring countries. However, some Arab states along the southern shores of the Persian Gulf, disregarding these principles, have relied on US security support and cooperation with the Israeli regime while pursuing policies that have fueled regional insecurity and instability. Tehran views the newly released US Department of Commerce document, which eases export control regulations and upgrades the UAE's export status as a reward for supporting military aggression against Iran, not merely as an economic measure, but as an official acknowledgment of Abu Dhabi's role in backing US and Israeli military actions against Iran. Iranian officials argue that this entails clear political and legal responsibility for the UAE.

From Cooperation with Tel Aviv to Greater Regional Instability

Despite the heavy costs Arab countries have borne from regional conflicts, evidence suggests that the UAE leadership continues to pursue policies that not only fail to enhance regional security but also contribute to escalating geopolitical crises. The Israeli regime's transport minister's acknowledgment that the Iron Dome air defense system was deployed in the UAE during the recent war against Iran is cited as an example of bilateral security cooperation that Abu Dhabi had previously sought to keep from public view.

Continuing this approach, the UAE submitted what Iran describes as an anti-Iran document to the Council of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), seeking to use the specialized body to advance its political objectives regarding the Strait of Hormuz. The move faced opposition from several countries, including China and Russia. At the same time, Israeli media reported that the UAE had proposed a trilateral meeting of the energy ministers of Israel, Jordan, and the UAE to sustain the normalization process, even as global condemnation of the Israeli regime and public pressure to hold it accountable have intensified.

Meanwhile, satellite imagery showing construction and excavation near Berbera Airport in Somaliland, along with speculation about the possible military use of the facilities, combined with the UAE's role in the crises in Yemen, Sudan, and other regional issues, is viewed by critics as evidence of a continuing policy that expands mistrust and tensions rather than promoting regional stability.

Internal Strains and the Rising Costs of Abu Dhabi's Foreign Policy

While the UAE's leadership seeks to project the country as an influential regional power, some developments point to growing domestic concerns and the consequences of Abu Dhabi's foreign policy. Mohamed bin Zayed's recent post on X, emphasizing responsibility, avoiding self-centeredness, and prioritizing the country's broader interests, coincided with speculation about disagreements among some of the emirates. Some observers interpreted the message as carrying implications beyond routine administrative advice.

Critics also argue that continued overt or covert cooperation with the US and the Israeli regime could further distance the UAE from public opinion across the Muslim world and even parts of the broader international community, imposing significant long-term political and security costs.

Washington's Admission and the Legal Consequences for UAE

From the perspective of Iranian officials, the US Department of Commerce document goes beyond a commercial decision and constitutes confirmation of the UAE's participation in supporting military aggression against Iran. Kazem Gharibabadi, Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs, described it as "Washington's official admission" and "a document exposing Abu Dhabi," arguing that it creates direct international legal consequences and liabilities for the UAE.

Accordingly, Tehran maintains that, under its interpretation of international law and the right of self-defense, any country that makes its territory, airspace, or facilities available to an aggressor bears responsibility for the consequences of that action. From this standpoint, the region's security landscape has fundamentally changed, and reliance on US support or cooperation with the Israeli regime is no longer viewed as a guarantee of security but rather as a source of greater vulnerability.

Within this framework, Iranian officials argue that Abu Dhabi must explain why the US Department of Commerce issued such a document and clarify the nature of its relations with the Israeli regime.

They contend that the UAE cannot simultaneously claim to play a constructive role in the Persian Gulf while pursuing policies that Tehran considers incompatible with regional security and stability. Iran therefore maintains that the region's security dynamics will not return to the previous status quo and that countries that aligned themselves with US and Israeli actions will inevitably have to bear the political, security, and legal consequences of their decisions.