Real estate attorney Martin Edelman, a key advisor to the ruling family of the United Arab Emirates, was awarded the country’s Order of the Union, the second-highest civilian honor, on Thursday by UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

WAM, the Gulf state’s official news agency, reported that the honor bestowed on Edelman, who has long served as a senior advisor to the UAE’s ruling family, came “in recognition of his role in advancing the UAE’s global strategic partnerships and supporting its economic development vision.”

In a profile last year, Bloomberg described Edelman as “Abu Dhabi’s ‘Man in Manhattan,’” who has been the “American face in the boardroom, helping smooth concerns and solve problems around cross-border investments.”

Edelman told the “Four Star Leadership” podcast in 2022 that his relationship with the Emirati royal family began after meeting former CENTCOM head Gen. (ret.) Tommy Franks, who in 2002 introduced Edelman to MBZ, then the head of the UAE’s military. “That dramatically changed my life,” Edelman said.

Edelman played a key role in the establishment in 2010 of New York University’s Abu Dhabi campus and more recently served as an interlocutor between the U.S. and the Emirati AI firm G42, which is overseen by National Security Advisor Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

The New York attorney’s relationship with President Donald Trump goes back years, with roots in their real estate work. White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff told Bloomberg that Edelman is “trusted by both sides of the aisle and across different cultures.”

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz traveled to the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain this week, marking the highest-level public visit by a U.S. official to the Middle East since the war with Iran began on February 28.

In the UAE, Waltz held separate meetings with Emirate President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. Emirates News Agency reported that Waltz and the president “discussed UAE-U.S. strategic ties and ways to further strengthen cooperation across various fields in support of both countries’ mutual interests.”

On Wednesday, Waltz met with Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Abu Dhabi. A readout from the UAE Foreign Ministry said that Waltz and the foreign minister “discussed cooperation between the UAE and the United States, particularly within the framework of multilateral action and international organisations” and “reviewed regional developments and the repercussions of the unprovoked Iranian attacks that targeted the UAE and a number of sisterly countries.”

Waltz shared the UAE Foreign Ministry’s X post about the visit, adding that the two officials had a “Great meeting.” Emirati Ambassador to the U.S. Yousef Al Otaiba also attended the meeting.

The UAE has been targeted by Iran more than any other country in the region — including Israel — since the start of hostilities in February.

Waltz traveled on to Bahrain from the UAE, where on Wednesday he visited the country’s main oil refinery. Twice this week, Iran has fired ballistic missiles at a U.S. military base in Bahrain, in addition to bases in Jordan and Kuwait. Shrapnel from the interceptions of the missiles fired toward Bahrain caused property damage in parts of the small Gulf state.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in late March that he had quietly traveled to the region days prior to meet with troops amid the Trump administration’s Operation Epic Fury, but did not provide details on where he traveled.

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) revealed on Tuesday that senior Emirati leaders expressed concern to him about rising antisemitism in the United States during his trip to the United Arab Emirates last week.

Gottheimer made the comments while appearing alongside Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) at the American Jewish Committee’s Global Forum in Washington, where the two delivered remarks to the crowd about their work combating antisemitism.

“I returned from the UAE a couple days ago, and one of the most shocking parts of my meeting with some of their senior leadership was when they said to me in the middle of the meeting, ‘What is going on with antisemitism in your country?’” said Gottheimer, who visited the Gulf nation in his capacity as a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

“Think about that: You have a leader of a Gulf nation saying to us, ‘What is going on with antisemitism in your country?’” he continued. “This is not who we are as a country, it’s not our values, it’s not what we’re based on, but it is the reality right now. We can beat this back, I know we can, and we must.”

The duo warned in their remarks that antisemitism has been normalized in U.S. politics, with both lawmakers referencing a recent incident involving Lawler being verbally accosted by William Paul, the adult son of Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), at a bar on Capitol Hill last month.

“When you look at the challenges we are facing today politically in an ever-divided country, it is the Jewish Americans who are under attack — whether you talk about antisemitism, the fact that people are under attack simply for going to shul, going to Yeshiva, being physically violated. Hate crimes are on the rise when it comes to Jewish Americans,” Lawler said. “Sadly, this has been normalized in the halls of Congress. People are being elected to public office on both sides of the aisle that think it is okay to traffic in antisemitic tropes.”

Gottheimer noted that, “The good news about this moment in history is we can see the field clearly. We know who’s with us and who’s against us. We see the challenges, whether they’re in the halls of Congress or online, the massive disinformation being put out there, whether it’s by our foreign adversaries or people in the United States. We see what they’re doing and what their intentions are and what their tactics are.”

About the incident with Paul, Lawler told the crowd that he is “no stranger to experiencing antisemitism firsthand.”

Gottheimer also took a dig at the younger Paul while discussing “how shocking it is, of how blatantly naked it is, to be an antisemite right now in this country.”

“When you see the numbers — and it’s not just in a bar when Rand Paul’s son is accusing Mike of being a Jew, it’s in every corner of our country — those numbers are astounding,” Gottheimer said. “As we saw, antisemitic incidents are up 75% since the 7th [of October 2023]. There’s not a single Jew in America who can avoid this right now.”

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) visited the United Arab Emirates in his capacity as a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence last week, meeting with National Security Advisor Tahnoun bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

The trip included discussions on the war in Iran, regional security, artificial intelligence, energy security and rising antisemitism.

“The United States and the UAE are close partners, and I am grateful for the warmth our hosts extended throughout this trip,” Gottheimer said in a statement to JI. “The UAE has stood firm throughout Iran’s relentless missile and drone attacks on Emirati cities and demonstrated the enduring strength of the Abraham Accords by engaging in a deeper partnership with Israel than ever before. We are completely aligned that Iran cannot continue threatening its neighbors.”

Gottheimer said that he also had “productive discussions” on AI and energy cooperation, highlighting possibilities for “a partnership that will define the future of AI and energy innovation.”

Tahnoun said on X last week that the pair “reviewed the distinguished strategic relations between the UAE and the USA, and ways to strengthen cooperation in various fields of mutual interest. We also discussed regional and international issues, and affirmed the commitment of both friendly nations to deepening the strategic partnership in support of peace, stability, and prosperity in the region and the world.”

Gottheimer’s trip also included stops in Thailand and the Philippines, where he discussed Indo-Pacific security issues including China, North Korea and Iran.

The U.S. is nearing a deal with Iran to end the war, President Donald Trump announced on Saturday, though the precise parameters of the agreement remained unclear.

After holding a call with officials from the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan, Jordan, Bahrain and Egypt, as well as a separate discussion with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump said on Truth Social on Saturday afternoon that an agreement has “been largely negotiated” with “final aspects and details … currently being discussed.” 

“In addition to many other elements of the Agreement, the Strait of Hormuz will be opened,” the president said.

While Trump did not offer any further details, Iranian officials had told The New York Times that a memorandum of understanding under discussion with the U.S. would end fighting on all fronts, including between Israel and Lebanon; lift the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports and allow for free movement of commercial traffic without any tolls; leave nuclear issues to be negotiated within 30 to 60 days; and see the release of $25 billion in frozen Iranian funds. 

U.S. officials told the Times that, under the current agreement, Tehran has committed to giving up its stockpile of already enriched uranium, an issue that Trump has frequently stated is a U.S. priority, but the specifics as to how that transfer will occur are set to be worked out in subsequent negotiations.

A senior Iranian official denied to Reuters on Sunday that Iran’s nuclear program was a part of the initial agreement, and said that Tehran had not agreed to hand over its enriched uranium. “The ​nuclear issue will ​be addressed in negotiations for ‌a ⁠final agreement and are therefore not part of the ​current deal,” the official told Reuters.

A U.S. official told Axios’ Barak Ravid that the agreement involves a 60-day ceasefire extension during which the Strait of Hormuz would be reopened and Iran would be able to sell oil freely. The draft MOU, according to Axios, includes commitments from Iran that it will never pursue nuclear weapons and to negotiate a suspension of its uranium enrichment program and the removal of its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. The draft also includes an end to the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Netanyahu said in a statement on Sunday regarding his conversation with Trump the day prior that the two leaders “agreed that any final agreement with Iran must eliminate the nuclear danger,” including dismantling Tehran’s nuclear program and removing enriched uranium from the country. Trump also “reaffirmed Israel’s right to defend itself against threats on every front, including Lebanon,” Netanyahu said.

Some hawkish Senate Republicans expressed outrage on Saturday over the reported terms of the deal, calling it a defeat for the United States filled with major concessions to the Iranian regime.

While some geopolitical relationships have been tested by the Iran war, others have been strengthened: Emerging alignments between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and India are creating new opportunities for cooperation among three countries increasingly bound by shared defense and economic interests, experts said.

During the war, Israel provided the UAE with an Iron Dome defense battery and IDF operators to help protect the Gulf nation from Iranian attacks, officials have confirmed. But India also moved to support the Emiratis, establishing an air bridge to allow the country to import and export goods amid disruptions caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, according to Hussain Abdul-Hussain, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. 

The growing cooperation between India and the UAE predates the war, experts said, but the conflict has accelerated it. On Friday, the two countries agreed on the framework for a strategic defense partnership, a step that could deepen ties between New Delhi and Abu Dhabi amid the regional fallout from the war.

Abdul-Hussain told Jewish Insider that the partnership also extends to Israel, which has remained a key ally of both countries. He said the emerging alignment is rooted in overlapping economic and strategic interests and shared adversaries.

“Absolutely there’s an alliance that’s emerging,” Abdul-Hussain said. “I think the three of them are like three pieces of a puzzle that fit neatly together.”

Abdul-Hussain said the UAE’s expected expansion of oil production could bring it even closer to India, one of the world’s largest energy importers. He argued that the UAE’s departure from OPEC and its ambition to increase oil output could position India as Abu Dhabi’s “biggest customer.”

He said the partnership is also driven by the defense and technology strengths of India and Israel, as well as the UAE’s position as a regional hub.

“If you add all these things together — energy and technology and military, and the size of the population of India, the dynamic technological economy of Israel, and then you put the UAE in the middle between them — I think the three of them can really help one another and push each other up,” Abdul-Hussain said. “They have a lot of mutual interests and they can get a lot of benefits from the cooperation.”

Edmund Fitton-Brown, a former British diplomat and senior fellow at FDD, said the new strategic defense framework between India and the UAE could allow New Delhi to provide Abu Dhabi with “significant help” in several areas, including cyber, communications, training and technology.

He said the partnership could include “joint patrols to defend against Iranian threats to cables and shipping lanes,” as well as broader military cooperation. 

Experts also said the deeper significance of the emerging alignment lies in how Israel, the UAE and India are responding to rival powers that are increasingly coordinating in ways that threaten their interests. For India and the UAE, Pakistan has become a key point of overlap: New Delhi views Islamabad as its chief regional adversary, while Abu Dhabi has grown increasingly wary of Pakistan’s ties to Iran and its deepening defense relationship with Saudi Arabia.

“They understand that there’s an alliance of enemies,” Abdul-Hussain said, pointing to Iran and Saudi Arabia as UAE adversaries, Pakistan and Iran as Indian adversaries and Iran and Turkey as Israeli adversaries. “Each one in this alliance is happy to be in this alliance because they understand that their enemies are also ganging up together against them.”

Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, similarly said the new alignment “reflects how shared threats from Iran are driving deeper cooperation within, and beyond, the region.”

“Recent deals to strengthen Emirati-Indian trade, technology and security cooperation pick up on initial progress that preceded Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack and its disruptions to regional integration,” Ruhe said. “They also reflect how our Middle East partners don’t automatically look to American leadership like they used to.”

Abdul-Hussain pointed to the UAE’s shifting posture toward Pakistan as an example of how the war has reshaped regional alignments. Before the conflict, he noted that Abu Dhabi had grown closer to India while still avoiding an explicit break with Islamabad — a calculus that has since changed.

“Until this war, the UAE, even though they had become close with India, had not really taken sides between India and its traditional rival Pakistan,” he said. “Shortly after the war stopped, the Pakistanis had $3 billion in loans from the Emiratis that had matured, and the Pakistanis asked the Emiratis to extend the time or to reissue the debt again, and the Emiratis refused,” he said.

Abdul-Hussain said Pakistan’s warm ties with Iran, including its role hosting mediation between Washington and Tehran, added to Abu Dhabi’s frustration.

“We know that Pakistan is — even though they’re hosting the mediation between the U.S. and Iran — much closer to Iran,” he said. “They’re friends with Iran, and I think this friendship didn’t go well with the Emiratis.”

Ruhe said there is “logic to the Pakistan-Saudi angle of closer UAE-India ties,” but argued that China remains “India’s abiding concern here.” He pointed to Beijing’s weapons sales to Islamabad, which he said “inflicted real damage on Indian forces last year.”

Simon Henderson, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, was more skeptical, saying the “so-called pact seems to be words rather than substance” and that the current state of Gulf politics remains “hard to define.”

“Everything has been thrown up in the air and we are waiting to see how they land,” Henderson said.

The United Arab Emirates denied a report by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office on Wednesday that the Israeli leader secretly traveled to the UAE during the war with Iran to meet with Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed, which would have marked the first known meeting between the two leaders since the signing of the Abraham Accords in 2020.

The Prime Minister’s Office said that the meeting “resulted in a historic breakthrough in relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates.” However, the UAE’s ministry of foreign affairs released a statement hours later calling the claims “entirely unfounded.” 

“The United Arab Emirates denies reports circulating regarding an alleged visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the UAE, or receiving any Israeli military delegation in the country,” the statement read. “The UAE reaffirms that its relations with Israel are public and conducted within the framework of the well-known and officially declared Abraham Accords, and are not based on non-transparent or unofficial arrangements.”

According to Ziv Agnon, who was Netanyahu’s chief of staff until early April, bin Zayed picked Netanyahu up in his own car and drove him to the palace.

During the conflict in Iran, Israel and the UAE have seen a marked increase in military and intelligence cooperation. Mossad chief David Barnea also quietly visited the UAE at least twice over the course of the war with Iran to directly coordinate regional security strategies, sources told The Wall Street Journal.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee confirmed this week that Jerusalem dispatched an Iron Dome missile-defense battery to the UAE along with Israeli military personnel to operate it in order to shield the Gulf nation from Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks. 

Two Israeli jets landed in the city of Al-Ain in Abu Dhabi in late March, according to flight radars, and headed back to Israel after an apparent four-hour visit. 

The Israeli and Emirati leaders also reportedly met in secret in 2018, two years prior to the signing of the Abraham Accords.

The tenuous ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran came close to collapsing overnight after the Islamic Republic fired 15 missiles and four drones at the United Arab Emirates. The question now is whether hostilities will resume in the coming days — just before next week’s major summit between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, slated to take place in Beijing.

Monday’s Iranian missile fire came amid ramped-up rhetoric from both Tehran and Washington over the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and as the U.S. launched “Project Freedom” to assist vessels attempting to transit through the waterway. One of the drones fired yesterday by Iran hit the UAE’s Fujairah Oil Industry Zone, sparking a fire that injured three Indian workers. 

Iran’s attack on the UAE was widely condemned, with Saudi, Qatari, British and Indian officials denouncing the renewed strikes.

CENTCOM head Adm. Brad Cooper touted the initial success of the Project Freedom naval effort, which on its first day protected two U.S.-flagged ships traveling through the strait. It’s unclear the degree to which the endeavor will help with the resumption of normal activities in the waterway, which normally sees some 120 vessels passing through each day.

Later Monday, two U.S. naval ships came under heavy fire from Iran as they navigated through the passage. Iran claimed to have hit a warship, which CENTCOM denied. Trump told Fox News’ Trey Yingst that Iran would be “wipe[d] off the face of the earth” if it targeted ships being escorted through the strait. The Wall Street Journal reported that the president “for days has toggled between two competing impulses: severely punishing Iran for failing to abandon its nuclear work, and avoiding a significant escalation that could draw the U.S. deeper into a Middle East conflict.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, for his part, criticized Project Freedom — which he referred to as “Project Deadlock” — claiming that Pakistan-brokered talks between Washington and Tehran “are making progress” and warning that the U.S. and the UAE “should be wary of being dragged back into quagmire by ill-wishers.”


Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif condemned the strikes on the UAE — albeit without mentioning Iran. “It is absolutely essential that the ceasefire be upheld and respected,” Sharif posted on X, “to allow necessary diplomatic space for dialogue leading to enduring peace and stability in the region.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is expected to address the situation with Iran when he speaks to reporters from the White House briefing room at 3 p.m. on Tuesday, the first press briefing since White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt went on maternity leave.

Later this week, Rubio is set to head to the Vatican to meet with Pope Leo XIV amid tensions between the Holy See and the Trump administration over the pontiff’s comments on the war in Iran. It’s unclear if the trip will still happen if the situation in the Gulf further devolves.

The bigger question is what will happen next week, when Trump is slated to meet with China’s Xi Jinping in Beijing — a summit already delayed once due to the war. Over the weekend, Beijing told Chinese firms to ignore U.S. sanctions on five Iran-linked oil refiners in the country.Beijing has attempted to play both sides of the conflict, encouraging Iran to pursue diplomacy while also providing the Islamic Republic with commercial support for use in the event of a resumption of hostilities. Should the summit take place, all eyes will be on Xi to see if he attempts to play Trump, as well.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said he would support “big, strong and short” U.S. military action against Iran following Tehran’s latest strikes on the United Arab Emirates on Monday — the first such attack on the critical American ally since the fragile U.S.-Iran ceasefire took hold in early April.

On Monday, Iran launched 15 missiles and four drones at the UAE and targeted key infrastructure and maritime assets. Authorities in Fujairah reported a fire at the Fujairah Oil Industry Zone after a suspected Iranian drone strike. 

Additionally, the U.K. military’s Maritime Trade Operations Center said it received reports of a commercial vessel on fire off the UAE coast and warned nearby ships to keep a “safe distance.” The UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also condemned an Iranian drone attack on a tanker belonging to the state-owned ADNOC energy company as it attempted to pass the Strait of Hormuz as an “act of piracy.”

Graham, a staunch ally of President Donald Trump and supporter of the war effort, said that Iran’s “attack against UAE’s vital infrastructure and continued attacks on international shipping … justifies a big, strong and short response to inflict further damage on Iran’s war machine” in a statement on X.

“A forceful response on behalf of our ally, UAE, will reinforce that America is back as a reliable ally, helping to further wash away the damage caused by the Biden administration on this front,” Graham continued. “The UAE has been a champion ally in this fight, doing everything that’s being asked of them and beyond. Iran’s recent brazen attack against the UAE tells me a lot about who’s in charge in Iran and the chance of a diplomatic solution any time soon.”

Trump has said the U.S. would help guide and protect commercial ships navigating the strait in what he called “Project Freedom,” telling Fox News on Monday that Iran will be “blown off the face of the earth” if it tries to interfere – while also writing on Truth Social that Iran has already done so. 

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz said on Monday that Washington is working with Bahrain and other Gulf allies to draft a U.N. Security Council resolution aimed at “holding Iran to account” for its actions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Lawmakers said that the United Arab Emirates’ decision to withdraw from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries could yield positive economic benefits for the U.S. and is a sign that the regional alignment of the Gulf countries is shifting.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) told Jewish Insider that the recent move shows “the continued fragmentation of the Gulf Cooperation Council and of the relations between our Gulf partners as Saudi and the Emirates are pursuing different security paths.”

“I think it is a reminder that the Gulf is under enormous pressure because Iranian attacks have knocked out a fair amount of oil and gas production capability,” Coons said. “The closure of the Strait of Hormuz continues to threaten the stability of their economies, and some of the underlying tensions between our allies and partners in the region are becoming more evident.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told JI he was “trying to understand” what the move would mean, noting that if the UAE “wouldn’t be limited in terms of what they can produce into the world’s oil supply,” it would be a positive development.

“That would probably be a good thing in terms of increasing the supply and hopefully bringing down prices,” Cornyn said. “I think all they [OPEC countries] care about is themselves. As long as they can make money, they’ll do it. And they’re a cartel. We call them a cartel for a reason, but I think right now, more supply would be good and hopefully bring down gas prices.” 

OPEC, which coordinates production policies among major oil producers to influence global supply and prices, is de facto led by Saudi Arabia with members including Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Venezuela and Algeria.

Cornyn added that he believes Iran has, through the course of the war, “done an amazing thing, which is to unify a bunch of countries in the Gulf that used to try to fight each other.”

“I’m hopeful after the Strait of Hormuz is open — which I think President [Donald] Trump should not stop until that happens — that we’ll hopefully see an increased normalization of relationships between Saudi Arabia and Israel,” Cornyn said. “And it looks to me like it could end up being a really positive thing in the long run.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) also said that Abu Dhabi’s departure from OPEC “may signal that the cohesion of OPEC is splintering and its power may be lessening … and there may be a freer market ahead.” 

Experts said that the UAE has considered making such a move in the past, but it was the ongoing war with Iran that accelerated Abu Dhabi’s decision to break from the bloc and chart a more independent path. 

Analysts also conveyed that the shift reflects both long-standing economic frustrations within OPEC and a broader geopolitical recalibration following the conflict — one that is likely to strengthen the UAE’s ties with the United States and Israel while widening its divide with Saudi Arabia.

“The political and economic predicates for this move have been building for a while, and events of the last two months accelerated the decision,” said Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America.

Ruhe noted that the UAE had long been constrained by OPEC production quotas, often “bearing the brunt” of cuts while other members failed to comply.

“All of this foregone revenue could have been spent on further diversifying the Emirati economy and pursuing ambitions to be a world leader in AI and other technologies,” Ruhe said, adding that tensions were compounded by political strains with Saudi Arabia over regional issues including conflicts in Yemen, Sudan and Israel.

“The UAE’s spare production capacity is at an even greater premium now, and it can bypass the Strait of Hormuz with some of these seaborne exports. And with no production cap, it can invest more in additional Hormuz bypass routes,” he added. 

While those pressures have existed for years, experts said the Iran war proved to be a turning point. Hussain Abdul-Hussain, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the UAE was “dismayed” by the lack of response from regional organizations during the conflict, particularly after Iranian strikes on Gulf energy infrastructure.

“The UAE was expecting at least some sort of move by OPEC to denounce all the strikes against energy facilities from a fellow OPEC member [Iran], and this didn’t happen,” Abdul-Hussain said, with a similar dynamic occurring in the Arab League. 

Experts said the fallout from the war is also expected to bring the UAE closer to Washington and Jerusalem. Abdul-Hussain pointed to reports that Israel deployed an Iron Dome battery to the UAE during the conflict — a potential sign that the nations could share increased goodwill moving forward.

“The UAE has been adamant on saying that they will not forget those who took their side in the war, and they will not forget those who didn’t take their side,” Abdul-Hussain said. “On Israel, I think [their ties] … will grow much, much stronger moving forward.”

Beyond shifting regional ties, Abdul-Hussain said the move is likely to be welcomed by Washington, noting that in “the United States, regardless of who’s in the White House, we don’t like OPEC.” 

“We call them an oil cartel,” he added. “They try to regulate oil prices and not always in our favor. So we’ll be happy to see the market play its role without having someone putting their thumb on the scale.”

Abdul-Hussain also noted that Saudi Arabia was “always trying to control the price of the market.” He said that the UAE’s decision “undermines the positions of both Saudi Arabia and Iran.”

“Before the war with Iran broke out, a schism had shown between the Saudis and the Emiratis,” Abdul-Hussain said. “Some thought that the war would bring them closer together, but I think the war didn’t, because you could see that the posture during the war and after the war was completely opposite.”

Kristin Diwan, a senior resident scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute, echoed that “differences over strategy confronting Iran is driving the Gulf states in different directions.” She added that the UAE is willing to chart its own path, free from deference to Saudi Arabia. “I expect this will extend to other Arab and Islamic multilateral organizations as well.”

Steven Cook, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that Abu Dhabi’s decision is a reflection of a broader regional realignment underway in which there will be “roughly two different blocs.” He noted in a statement that one such bloc might consist of “Israel, UAE, Bahrain, Kenya, Greece, Cyprus, Ethiopia, Somaliland, maybe Lebanon and Egypt,” with another consisting of “Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.”

“You have discussions among the Turks, Saudis, Egyptians and Pakistanis for a security pact. This is a long-held dream among Turkish Islamists and the others seem interested. On the other hand, the Emiratis, Israel and the rest are drawing closer to each other,” Cook said. “This does not bode well for regional integration that the Saudis, Americans, Israelis and others have been seeking, but CENTCOM will hold the GCC Plus and Israel together on security issues so it won’t be a total split,” Cook said.

The United Arab Emirates announced on Tuesday it will withdraw from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) effective May 1, dealing a significant blow to the oil-producing bloc and its de facto leader, Saudi Arabia.

OPEC, which coordinates production policies among major oil producers to influence global supply and prices, accounts for roughly 36% of global oil output and nearly 80% of proven reserves.

Saudi Arabia is widely viewed as the group’s leader, but the UAE has been a key contributor, producing the third-largest output within OPEC behind Saudi Arabia and Iraq. The organization was founded in 1960 by Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela and Kuwait. Abu Dhabi joined in 1967, with the UAE maintaining membership after its formation in 1971.

In a statement, the UAE’s state-run news agency said the decision reflects the country’s “long-term strategic and economic vision and evolving energy profile” and serves its “national interest.”

The statement also pointed to regional instability amid the Iran war, including tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, as a factor shaping global energy dynamics.

Following its exit, the UAE said it will continue to act “responsibly,” gradually increasing production in line with market conditions.

“This decision does not alter the UAE’s commitment to global market stability or its approach based on cooperation with producers and consumers,” the statement said. “Rather, it enhances the UAE’s ability to respond to evolving market needs.”

The United Arab Emirates has been publicly expressing its disappointment in Arab League countries like Egypt for not showing or expressing very little support for Gulf states under attack from Iran, a dynamic playing out more quietly in other Gulf states, as well.

In a post on X on Sunday that received significant attention, Anwar Gargash, an advisor to the UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed, said that “Iran’s brutal aggression against the Arab Gulf carries profound geopolitical repercussions … and the result is to bolster our national capabilities and the joint security, as well as to solidify our security partnerships with Washington.”

When French former diplomat Gérard Araud criticized Gargash’s approach, writing on X that “it means deepening your dependence on a country that has led yours into a disastrous conflict without caring about your interests,” Emirati Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed backed up Gargash, responding: “We will never be blackmailed by terrorists.” 

In subsequent posts, Gargash not only said that Iran’s attacks are bringing his country closer to the U.S., but criticized other Arab countries for not aligning themselves with the Gulf.

“Where are the joint Arab and Islamic institutions, chief among them the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, while our countries and peoples are subjected to this treacherous Iranian aggression? And where are the ‘major’ Arab and regional countries? … The Arab Gulf states were a support and partner to all in times of prosperity… So where are you today in times of hardship?” Gargash wrote.

As such, he argued, “in absence and impotence, it is unacceptable later to speak of the decline of the Arab and Islamic role or to criticize the American and Western presence.” 

On Wednesday, Gargash followed up by distinguishing “those who offered genuine support” from “those who settled for statements without action.”

“The Emirates has proven its ability to confront and endure, and it does not need equipment and troops as much as it needs clarity of positions and knowledge of who can be relied upon in times of hardship,” he added.

Hussain Abdul-Hussain, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and author of The Arab Case for Israel, told Jewish Insider that the UAE is not the only Gulf state that is expressing resentment towards Arab League states at this time, saying that similar messages have been published in Qatari newspaper editorials and have come out of Kuwait.

Some of the targets of that anger, he said, are Egypt and the Arab League, whose secretary-general, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, is an Egyptian diplomat.

“Gulf governments expected more denunciations of Iran as an aggressor. It took [Egypt] five days to say a word. The Arab League hasn’t met; they usually hold emergency summits and haven’t called for one. The foreign ministers met over Zoom and issued a statement that was a nothingburger,” Abdul-Hussain said.

While Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi denounced the Iranian attacks and visited the Gulf, his remarks came across as weak, while Aboul Gheit called the attacks “audacious,” stopping short of a full denunciation, Abdul-Hussain argued.

“Even the adjectives they’re using are soft” in the eyes of Gulf leaders, Abdul-Hussain said. 

The media in Egypt and Algeria, Abdul Hussain said, are showing “happiness … that Israel is being pounded. They’re happy with what Iran is doing and no one really seems to care about the Gulf states. The Gulf took 84% of the [Iranian] missiles, as opposed to Israel, which took 16%, and they still can’t straightforwardly say Iran is a problem?”

While Gargash did not specifically mention Israel, Abdul-Hussain interpreted Gargash’s remarks as meaning, “If we in the Gulf can’t rely on you Arabs and Muslims, we will have to find other allies to defend ourselves. That clearly means the U.S. and Israel.”

“The Emiratis feel vindicated, that they were right to move forward and seek their interests with Israel, because look at [other Arab states] now,” he added.

Prominent Emirati media personality Jamal Al Mulla said in a recent episode of his podcast “Arab Cast” that “the Gulf is hurt and will not forget how fellow Arab countries let it down.” 

Al Mulla compared the current conflict to the 1991 Gulf War, when only 12 out of 22 Arab League members voted to condemn Iraq for invading Kuwait — “six Gulf countries and the six others were bought off by wealthy Gulf governments.” 

“This round, the line is even clearer since aggression is not by an Arab League member against another, but by a non-Arab foreign country against Arab countries, and yet, the Arab League is shameful and so are countries like Iraq, Algeria, Sudan’s Burhan government and western Libya’s government,” he said.

Al-Mulla said that “when any Arab government wants not to take a position on anything, it inserts the Palestinian cause into its statement.” 

Arab countries are “always citing Palestine as a distraction,” he added, and recounted that, in 1991, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat told the Arab League that “the Kuwaiti problem will be solved only after the Palestinian cause.”

“When the shooting stops, I expect a few Gulf countries to rush to normalization with Israel. My money is on Kuwait, perhaps Saudi Arabia too,” Al Mulla said.

Abdul-Hussain agreed with Al-Mulla that Kuwait would return to its past pro-American stance and normalize relations with Israel.

“People in the Gulf were expected to support the Palestinians at all times during the Gaza war, with money, humanitarian aid, politically and diplomatically, and they get nothing in return,” Abdul-Hussain said. “I think they’re really hurt.”

Abdul-Hussain said that Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have not robustly denounced Iran. After initially only condemning the U.S. and Israel, Hamas released a statement two weeks into the war against attacks on the Gulf by Iran — one of its patrons — under pressure from Qatar, another of its patrons. The Palestinian Authority released a statement on the first day of the war expressing solidarity with the Gulf states and calling for de-escalation. 

“The thinking in the Gulf is that this time, it’s our turn. We’re the victims. The Palestinians can wait,” Abdul-Hussain said.

Current and former Israeli and U.S. officials suggested that an Israeli strike on an Iranian gas field on Wednesday that prompted the Islamic Republic to strike Qatar was coordinated with the White House, despite President Donald Trump’s claim that the U.S. “knew nothing about this particular attack.” 

Trump made the remarks in a Truth Social post, in which he threatened that the U.S. would bomb the South Pars gas field, the Iranian portion of the larger field shared with Qatar, if Iran does not stop attacking Qatar. 

“The United States knew nothing about this particular attack, and the country of Qatar was in no way, shape or form involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this … and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar’s [liquid natural gas] facility,” the president wrote.

If “Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar,” he added, the U.S., “with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”

An Israeli official told Kan News, Israel’s public broadcaster, that the attack on the South Pars gas field was coordinated with the U.S.

Dan Shapiro, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel and Pentagon official in the Biden administration, wrote on X, “Trump can post whatever he likes. But there is zero, I mean zero, chance the IDF would conduct a strike in that location without giving CENTCOM full visibility.”

“Trump knew (and approved),” Shapiro added. “Now he realizes it caused a major escalation with Iran’s (entirely unjustified) attacks on Gulf energy targets.” 

Shapiro later clarified that the Israeli strike “could not have been carried [out] without U.S. knowledge and explicit or implicit approval.” 

“It was predictable that strikes on Iranian energy facilities (by US or Israel) would lead to Iranian strikes on Gulf energy facilities,” he wrote. “There is a narrow window following the Israeli and Iranian strikes, and Trump’s Truth Social Post (untrue, but possibly useful in this context), to de-escalate away from further strikes on energy industry targets in either direction. That will still leave a very challenging situation to unwind, but [it] would be the best near-term development.”

Gilad Erdan, a former Israeli ambassador to Washington and a former member of Israel’s Security Cabinet, told Jewish Insider that it was highly likely the U.S. knew about the strike, saying that Trump did not criticize Israel in his post, and “in the same breath” as saying the U.S. was unaware, “[Trump] himself threatened to erase the [gas] field.”

Erdan noted that the South Pars gas field is “used for Iran’s domestic energy needs [and] doesn’t harm the international energy market.”

“Israel took upon itself to be at the front [of the situation] in my estimation because the field is also Qatari,” Erdan, who is also a senior fellow at the Misgav Institute for National Security, said. “Someone had to send the deterrent message about the energy field to the Iranians, that if they continue, then all options are open against them and they will be hurt badly.” (The writer is a senior fellow at the Misgav Institute and cohosts its podcast.)

Yaakov Katz, an Israeli military expert and author of While Israel Slept: How Hamas Surprised the Most Powerful Military in the Middle East, told JI that he agreed with Shapiro’s assessment. “There is no way Israel would attack such a strategic facility [without coordination] because they know it would draw the Iranians to attack the Gulf states,” he said. 

Katz pointed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s behavior since the war with Iran began late last month as further indication that Israel was unlikely to make such a move without coordinating with the U.S.: “Why would Netanyahu who behaved so carefully all throughout the war, coordinating with Trump to not upset him so he keeps the war going … do something that would anger Trump and potentially lead him to do something brash and declare the war is over?” 

“It was coordinated, and now Trump is saying what he’s saying to distance himself, but it was done to send a message to the Iranians,” Katz added.

Also Thursday, Saudi Arabia released a statement with the foreign ministers from Azerbaijan, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Pakistan, Turkey, Syria, Qatar, Kuwait, Lebanon and Egypt urging Iran to stop its attacks.

“The participants held Iran fully responsible for the losses and called on Iran to immediately and unconditionally cease its aggression and to comply with UN Security Council resolutions. The meeting also emphasized the dangers of supporting militias and destabilizing security, stressing that Iran must seriously reconsider its miscalculations,” the statement read.

If Iran continues, the foreign ministers stated, there will be “serious consequences for Iran and the security of the region, and will exact a heavy price, casting a shadow over its relations with the countries and peoples of the region, who will not stand idly by in the face of threats to their capabilities.”

As Iran retaliates against the U.S. and Israel’s joint military campaign, findings have revealed that the United Arab Emirates — not Israel — has thus far faced the majority of Tehran’s missile and drone attacks.

Since the launch of the war on Feb. 28, Tehran has responded with widespread drone and missile attacks across the region, but it has been the UAE that has borne the brunt of the attacks. As of March 11, the UAE’s Ministry of Defense reported that its air defenses had “engaged” 268 ballistic missiles, 15 cruise missiles and 1,514 UAVs.

Iranian strikes have targeted American assets in the country, such as the U.S. consulate in Dubai, but also a range of civilian targets, including Dubai International Airport, where a drone attack wounded four people. Reports have indicated that Abu Dhabi has faced more than three times the number of Iranian drones and missiles launched toward Israel. The attacks come as Gulf allies are running short on missile interceptors. 

Two Senate Republicans argued to Jewish Insider on Wednesday that, ultimately, the U.S. campaign against Iran will be to the benefit of the UAE and other Gulf allies, even if they’re feeling pain in the short term.

“It’s always something that we need to be aware of, and it is not an item to be ignored, but at the same time, you have to measure it with what Iran has left, and whether our offensive capabilities will continue to degrade their ability to actually inflict damage in that region,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) said, referring to the attacks on UAE and other allies and their reportedly dwindling interceptor stocks.

Iran’s offensive weapons “have limits as well,” Rounds continued, “and we’ve just got to do a better job of making sure that we go after their offensive capabilities.”

“Unfortunately we’re in the middle of a battle [that will decide if] the area [is] going to be safe or not,” Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said, adding that he believes the U.S.’ allies are supportive of the action the U.S. is taking. “Everybody would like to make sure Iran doesn’t have a nuclear weapon and they’re sick and tired of Iran’s antics. So I think it’s part of what you have to go through.”

Meanwhile, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) pointed to the attacks on Gulf states as an argument against the war in general.

“These countries have limited interceptor stocks. This could get even uglier very quickly. Like everyone (except the White House) knew it would,” Murphy said on X.

Experts told JI that the UAE’s proximity to Iran, combined with its role as a global financial and commercial hub, makes it a particularly attractive target for Tehran. Even limited strikes can rattle international markets, disrupt tourism and investment and raise the economic stakes for countries aligned with Washington and pressure it to end the war.

“Iran is deliberately and disproportionately targeting the UAE partially because it is easy, given the UAE’s proximity to Iran, and more importantly, because it is an easy target that Iran knows will exact a global cost financially, and a military cost for the United States and the region,” Rachel Brandenburg, a senior policy analyst at the Israel Policy Forum, said. 

“The UAE is home to significant global financial capital flows, international corporations, and tourists from far and wide,” she said. “Hitting the UAE is a relatively easy way for Iran to show that it can harm not only American and Israeli interests and assets, but also global interests.” 

Brandenburg said that the UAE had been “counting on its diplomatic and economic relationship with Iran to insulate it from any retaliation against American or Israeli strikes” but “that, in fact, was not the case.”

Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, said that Tehran’s strategy is not only to broaden the conflict, but to interfere with the “Emirates’ success as a safe haven for economic activity,” in hopes that the UAE and other Arab countries “will pressure Trump to end the war as soon as possible.” 

“Ironically, the UAE did such a good job creating a safe haven that now even the threat of a few drones can shock and scare away tourists, investors and shippers.”

Ruhe also noted that the UAE is an “easier military target” compared to Israel. 

“Its [the UAE’s] air defenses are less battle-tested, and have less time to react to incoming projectiles than those in Israel, and, unlike Israel, it’s within reach of Iran’s short-range missiles,” Ruhe said. “Israel has already adapted to two-plus years of grueling conflict, so missiles and drones cause less disruption to normal life.”

However, experts noted that Tehran’s strategy could backfire, exposing the military promise of Gulf allies while potentially pushing them closer to defense cooperation with the U.S. and Israel. David May, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, said that the missile defense systems of Arab allies have “performed admirably in real-world conditions.”

“While Iran might have hoped that Gulf countries would beg the Americans to end the war, the opposite has happened,” May said. “The Gulf countries have condemned Iran and intercepted most of the drones and missiles, and the shared experience of being subjected to Iranian aggression has reminded them of the need for a regional defense architecture in line with the Abraham Accords.”

Ruhe also argued that Iran’s strategy “has backfired,” and echoed sentiments that it could create the conditions for cooperation that were not present prior to the start of the conflict. 

“However and whenever this conflict ends, it’s creating new opportunities that, frankly, didn’t exist until Iran attacked the entire neighborhood,” Ruhe said. 

Major Gulf powers are coming together in rare lockstep amid Iran’s strikes around the region, with the United Arab Emirates closing its embassy in Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council declaring it retains the right to respond.

After the U.S. and Israel launched a major operation against Iran on Saturday, the regime struck sites in at least nine countries around the Middle East, including Israel, Jordan, Syria and every member of the Gulf Cooperation Council — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Despite claiming it is aiming at U.S. military assets in the region, Iran has struck widely at civilian infrastructure, including hotels, residential neighborhoods and airports in the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq. At least 12 civilians were killed in Israel over the weekend, along with three U.S. servicemembers.

On Saturday, the first day of the operation, UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed spoke by phone with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to discuss Iran’s aggression and their response, a significant development and sign of the seriousness of the issue amid a regional rift between the two major powers.

The UAE has taken the brunt of much of Iran’s malign activity — its Ministry of Defense said Sunday that the country had been targeted by 165 ballistic missiles, two cruise missiles and 541 drones from Iran. Three civilians were killed and 58 injured in the barrage. 

Shortly after, Abu Dhabi announced the closure of its embassy in Tehran and the withdrawal of its entire diplomatic mission, citing Iran’s “hostile attacks against civilian sites … in a serious and irresponsible escalation [that] constitute a flagrant violation of national sovereignty.” The country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also summoned the Iranian ambassador to the UAE and “delivered a strongly worded note of protest” about Iran’s “terrorist attacks and assault.”

Also on Sunday, the ministerial council of the GCC held a meeting over video conference and issued a statement strongly condemning Iran’s attacks and affirming the countries’ “legal right to respond.” 

“The Council also expressed full solidarity among the GCC countries and their unified stance in confronting these attacks, stressing that the security of GCC member states is indivisible, and that any attack against any member state constitutes a direct attack against all GCC countries,” the statement went on. The countries “will take all necessary measures to defend their security and stability and to protect their territories, citizens, and residents, including the option of responding to the aggression,” they pledged.

The U.S. also joined the GCC in another statement Sunday, saying that Iran’s “targeting of civilians and of countries not engaged in hostilities is reckless and destabilizing behavior.”

Three U.S. servicemembers have been killed since the start of hostilities with Iran on Saturday, CENTCOM announced on Sunday morning, with five more seriously wounded.

In addition, several others “sustained minor shrapnel injuries and concussions — and are in the process of being returned to duty,” the statement read, without details of where the injured troops were located or when the fatal strikes occurred.

They are the first U.S. casualties in the war, which the U.S. has named Operation Epic Fury and Israel, which is jointly conducting strikes with the Americans, has named Operation Roaring Lion. Eleven people — all civilians — have been killed in Israel.

Three people have also been killed and 58 injured in the United Arab Emirates, its defense ministry said Sunday, amid Iran’s strikes around the Gulf.

CENTCOM also announced Sunday that U.S. forces struck an Iranian warship at the beginning of the operation, which is “currently sinking to the bottom of the Gulf of Oman.”

Democratic lawmakers are expressing concerns about the administration’s apparent moves toward a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia that would allow the kingdom to enrich uranium, lacking the safeguards that were included in a similar nuclear cooperation deal with the United Arab Emirates.

There had previously been bipartisan support in Congress for including such safeguards, including intrusive International Atomic Energy Agency inspections, under an “additional protocol” of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and the “gold standard” commitment of renouncing nuclear enrichment and reprocessing included in the UAE deal. Even Energy Secretary Chris Wright last year denied that the U.S. would allow Saudi enrichment.

Asked about the situation this week, Democrats — across a broad ideological spectrum — expressed concerns, while Republicans generally avoided commenting, saying they weren’t familiar with the administration’s apparent plans.

“I think we should be extremely cautious and scrutinize — very exactingly — any deal with Saudi Arabia that provides nuclear know-how or fuel, and certainly it has to be a part of a broader agreement for normalizing relations with Israel that expands the Abraham Accords,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).

“It can’t be a separate action, apart [from] everything else that’s going on, where we need Saudi cooperation,” Blumenthal continued.

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) told JI he wasn’t aware of the terms of the proposed deal, but said that there is a “whole range” of what enrichment can entail.

“You see this with Iran,” he said. “We gave them, in the 1970s, the ability to do medical-grade enrichment. [There is a] big difference with that and enriching uranium up to 90% have the ability to then make a weapon. I haven’t looked at the proposal. I think we’ve got to be generally very careful about how we transfer this technology.”

Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) last week accused the administration in a statement of “caving to  Saudi demands and … writing a recipe for disaster with its plan to give nuclear-weapon-wannabe Saudi Arabia nuclear technology without the strongest safeguards.” He said Congress should block the deal in order to prevent a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), a vocal critic of efforts to allow Saudi Arabia to enrich, re-introduced legislation on Tuesday requiring a congressional vote of support for an agreement with Saudi Arabia, saying in a statement, “Any nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia must include ironclad nonproliferation protections. … Without the strongest safeguards, we risk fueling nuclear proliferation in one of the world’s most volatile regions.”

He has previously warned that a Saudi nuclear program could ultimately be turned to target Israel should the kingdom’s stance change or the ruling family fall from power.

Previously, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have demanded the same “gold standard” commitments from Saudi Arabia that the U.S. received from the UAE, with both the chair and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee affirming that stance last year.

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the committee chair, said last year that any nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia “has to” include the “gold standard.” He did not provide a comment this week.

Asked by JI about the latest developments, several Senate Republicans said they had not been following the situation and largely declined to comment.

A group of nine Jewish House Democrats last year also raised concerns about efforts to move toward a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia unless “explicitly … tied to the Kingdom’s recognition of Israel and normalization of relations between the two countries.”

Andrea Stricker, a research fellow and deputy director of the nonproliferation program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JI that Israel should be “worried” about a potential nuclear deal between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, describing it as a “stunning reversal” of longstanding U.S. policy.

 She noted that the decision to disregard typical safeguards is cause for concern, warning that completing such a deal can have unpredictable consequences down the line. 

“We can’t control how the Saudis will use enrichment and reprocessing in the future, even if they are a partner today,” said Stricker. “With weak safeguards in place, Riyadh could duplicate the technology and set up covert fuel-making plants for nuclear weapons.”

Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, said that Saudi Arabia cannot be trusted with a nuclear deal, adding that it is “bad politics” for the U.S. to “demand that Iran end enrichment while possibly partnering up with its rival’s enrichment program.”

“It also sends the wrong message to partners like the UAE that signed up for the gold standard deal with the United States, which rightly prohibits such activities,” Ruhe added. He warned that such a deal could “set off a regional proliferation cascade,” from actors such as Iran, Turkey and Egypt. 

Simon Henderson, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the United States faces a delicate balancing act: pursuing a deal that could carry long-term proliferation risks while also trying to prevent Saudi Arabia from turning to rival powers for nuclear cooperation.

“The United States is trying to do what is arguably impossible: allow Saudi Arabia to acquire American civil nuclear technology while hoping that it isn’t used as a cover for being able to make an atomic bomb,” Henderson said.

Henderson downplayed concerns that the prospective deal is not explicitly tied to Saudi-Israel normalization, telling JI that normalization is “delayed rather than dead.” He also dismissed the notion that a civil nuclear agreement with Riyadh would pose a threat to Israel.

“Iran is the threat to Israel, not Saudi Arabia,” Henderson said. “Even without formal relations, Riyadh and Jerusalem are on the same page on many issues.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Thursday rejected the suggestion from some in the Arab world that the deaths of civilians in Gaza does not align with Christian values. Graham made the comments during an appearance on an episode of the “On The Record” podcast with Hadley Gamble, while discussing how Israel’s war in Gaza had impacted regional stability in the Mideast and delayed normalization efforts with the Saudis.

“I just don’t buy that at all, because what did we do in World War II? Did we think for one minute about starving the Germans? Did we bomb every city into smitherreens?” Asked if that meant he was comparing Israel’s response to Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on the Jewish state to how the U.S. responded in World War II, Graham responded affirmatively.

“This is an absolute, existential threat to the Jewish people. What happened on October the 7th was 1,200 people were slaughtered, raped and murdered, and filmed by radical Islamists who would kill every Jew if they could.”

Gamble then pressed Graham on Israel “flattening Gaza,” which the South Carolina senator said he took no issue with.

“Just flatten it. We flattened Berlin. We flattened Tokyo,” Graham said. “Were we wrong to drop an atomic bomb to end the Japanese reign of terror? Were we? In my view, if I were Israel, I would have probably done it the same way. Without military victory, there is no hope of breaking radicalism. We flattened Germany. We flattened Japan.”

“It’s a TV war. We didn’t have TV in World War II. The behavior of the United States was to pursue total destruction of the enemy. That was our behavior. Take Tokyo and Berlin,” he added. “Those people who are trying to say this is just another conflict, it’s not another conflict. It’s existential to the Jewish state.”

Graham, who is in the Middle East for meetings with Israeli, Emirati and Saudi officials, also criticized Saudi Arabia for “attacking the United Arab Emirates pretty viciously for being in the Abraham Accords” and questioned assertions that the kingdom’s ongoing dispute with the Emiratis was solely based on differences in Sudan and Yemen. 

“Saudi Arabia is now moving backward. They’re attacking the United Arab Emirates pretty viciously for being in the Abraham Accords,” Graham said. “There is no good reason for this. You can have disputes about Sudan and Yemen, but they’re basically declaring war.”

Asked if he believed the dispute “is all about Israel,” Graham replied: “I don’t know what this is about. I know the consequences. [Mohammed bin Zayed], the president of the United Arab Emirates, I’m going to meet him, you could not ask for a better partner. You could not ask for a better partner than the United Arab Emirates. They’ve stuck with the Abraham Accords through Gaza.”

In a post on X after his meeting on Thursday with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Graham praised the kingdom while acknowledging his concerns about achieving normalization with Israel. 

“The Crown Prince is dealing with the aftereffects of October 7 like all leaders in the region, particularly with the tremendous loss of life in Gaza,” Graham wrote. “Having said that, his vision for the region is for conservative Islam to coexist — with tremendous economic opportunity — for the people of Saudi Arabia, the Middle East, and the entire world. He is the first Arab leader in modern history that’s expressed a vision not only for the faith, but for economic empowerment that is simply stunning when absorbed, and will set the tone for the region for generations to come.”

Graham criticized Gulf state opposition to regime change in Iran over fears about potential fallout as politically weak.

“That is a short-sighted view of the problems you face over here,” he said. “You’ve got domestic problems, so do I. I’ve got domestic problems. It’s probably better for me to be at home than it is here, so I don’t have a lot of tolerance anymore for people having to make uncomfortable decisions, because I have to make them all the time.”

Pressed on Saudi concerns about oil prices and regional instability, Graham said all of the Gulf states needed to “suck it up.”

“I’m telling everybody over here to suck it up. You’ve got to suck it up to bring about real change. Real change doesn’t come without sacrifice. Now, this region is going to change one way or the other,” Graham said. “There are two scenarios. … The inflection point is weeks away, not months away. That’s why I’m here. That’s why I haven’t slept, because it’s either going to go really good or really bad.” 

Later Thursday, Graham warned in a post on X that the U.K. should not deny the U.S. the ability to use British military bases to attack Iran. 

“If it turns out to be true that Britain is denying the United States the ability to use British bases against Iran if there is a necessity for an attack – it would be beyond surprising,” Graham tweeted. “I’ve been a military lawyer most of my adult life. What they’re saying about the status of Diego Garcia, the joint US-UK military base, is a huge question.”

“To my friends in Britain, sitting this one out puts you on the wrong side of history and is yet another example of how much our alliances throughout Europe have degraded,” the tweet concluded.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) warned Saudi Arabia that the escalating tensions with the United Arab Emirates risk benefiting Iran at a critical moment in the Middle East, addressing the nations’ leaders directly in remarks at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

“As to MBS [Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman] and MBZ [UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan] — knock it off, Saudi Arabia, knock it off,” Graham said from the stage. “I’m tired of this crap.”

Graham also urged “anybody who will listen in the Middle East — don’t let this moment pass,” and warned that the rift between the UAE and Saudi Arabia is “emboldening Iran.” He added that “MBZ is not a Zionist,” pushing back against criticism in Saudi Arabia of the Emirati leader’s ties to Israel. Among other escalatory rhetoric out of the kingdom, a prominent Saudi academic publicly accused Abu Dhabi last month of aligning itself too closely with Jerusalem and acting as “Israel’s Trojan horse in the Arab world.” 

Saudi Arabia and the UAE have increasingly been at odds in recent months as the two U.S. allies have backed different sides in several regional conflicts and Riyadh continues to pivot away from its role as a moderating force in the region. 

“Be smart, but don’t be locked down with fear,” said Graham. “I know they [the UAE and Saudi Arabia] got differences in Yemen and they got differences in Sudan, but we got to think big picture,” he said. “To any leader in the region that doesn’t understand you’re on the verge of history, history would judge you poorly.”

In Yemen, Saudi Arabia conducted an airstrike in late December 2025 against what Riyadh said was an Emirati arms shipment linked to the UAE-backed Southern Transitional Council (STC). Hours after the strike, the Emirati government announced it would withdraw its remaining troops from the country.

The two countries have also diverged in Sudan, where Riyadh has embraced Islamist-aligned factions while the UAE has aligned with rival forces. The Gulf states have also taken opposite sides in Somalia, with the UAE quietly supportive of Somaliland, while Saudi Arabia condemned Israel for recognizing the region’s independence.

Graham’s remarks in Munich come as the South Carolina senator remains an outspoken advocate of expanded cooperation between Israel and Arab states and has repeatedly emphasized countering Iran as a central U.S. objective in the region. On Monday, Graham met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in his Jerusalem office during a trip to Israel.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) expressed confidence on Thursday that Saudi Arabia is intent on maintaining its status as a moderating force in the Middle East amid growing concerns that Riyadh is entertaining more hardline Islamism.

Graham met on Thursday morning with Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman Al Saud in Washington and spoke by phone on Wednesday with Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud. The South Carolina senator sat down with Jewish Insider on Thursday afternoon for a wide-ranging discussion, where he said that, despite feeling unsettled by some Saudi conduct, he is not concerned that the kingdom is making a pivot toward a more extremist posture, as some in the region and the Jewish community have worried.

Graham had earlier this week publicly criticized the kingdom for its growing conflict with the United Arab Emirates and what he described as a failure to act to protect the Syrian Kurds against Syrian government advances.

“After having met with the Saudis today, I understand their concerns better. I don’t agree with everything they’ve done, but I fundamentally believe that the vision is still the same,” Graham told JI. “To all those who think like me and have been upset by what you’ve heard, I understand why you’re upset, but I would just say this: If I feel good, you should feel good.”

Once a vocal critic of Saudi Arabia and Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Salman — particularly in the aftermath of the 2018 murder of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi — Graham said that MBS’ grand economic and development plan, Vision 2030, convinced him that the Saudi government is interested in development, peace and deradicalization, because those factors would be incompatible with MBS’ plan.

“If the man is willing to spend a trillion dollars to make Saudi Arabia a destination of choice, he’s got to be smart enough to know that the old model of the Mideast has to be replaced,” he said of the crown prince.

Graham said claims that Vision 2030 had stalled were “overstated” and dismissed the notion that the Saudis were struggling financially, despite flagging oil prices. The kingdom recently announced plans to significantly scale back the flagship Vision 2030 project and the futuristic megacity Neom.

“They’ve had 97 projects, 94 are on target,” Graham said of Vision 2030. “This idea that Saudi Arabia is running out of money is bulls**t. Every time you fill up your car, they appreciate it. … They’re not abandoning their 2030 model. Has anybody in Turkey talked about a 2030 model?”

The South Carolina senator, a leading advocate for U.S. strikes against the Iranian regime, also said he expects that action against the Islamic Republic is still forthcoming, arguing that the United States’ credibility is on the line after President Donald Trump promised protesters that the U.S. would assist them.

Graham framed the protests and their ultimate outcome as a tipping point for the region and the world.

“[Trump] said, ‘Keep protesting. Help is on the way.’ That is his Ronald Reagan moment. You have to follow through,” Graham said, referring to Reagan’s demand for the Berlin Wall to be torn down, and arguing that there is now a clock running for the U.S. to take action.

“Regime change is being led by the people. The question is: Are you for the ayatollah or the people? Donald Trump said, ‘I’ll be with the people.’ Well, that means you’ve got to be with the people,” he added. “I’d like to find a solution without conflict. I don’t know what that would be, but I am confident that it can’t go on forever. There’ll come a point where the people lose hope. We’re not there yet, but the sooner we can demonstrate help is on the way, the better.”

If the U.S. fails to follow through, Graham warned, “It’s going to make Afghanistan look like a cakewalk.”

“Everybody’s gonna hedge their bets. Nobody will follow America. Nobody will trust the idea that, you know, making peace is good. It will set the region back 100 years,” he continued.

And, Graham argued, the fall of the Iranian regime is a precondition for any further progress toward regional normalization.

“Nobody in their right mind can talk about normalization in the Mideast until we know how the protests end in Iran,” Graham said. “If, in fact, the ayatollah is still standing after all this bluster and rhetoric, normalization is lost for decades.”

But if the regime falls, bringing its proxies Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis down with it, Graham asserted that normalization would be easy to achieve, adding, “If you could sink the mothership, the ripple effect changes Lebanon and Syria.”

Graham said that, from everything he knows about Trump, he expects the president to follow through on his promise to the protesters. He added that he expects the U.S., and potentially Israel, to deliver a “bigger” hit to the regime now than they might have if they struck several weeks ago when the protests began.

“I will judge the president by what he says and what he does. I have no reason to believe that he will not fulfill the promises he’s made. His track record is pretty good. He doesn’t want conflict, but he won’t be trifled with,” Graham said.

Trump’s vacillating threats to the regime, and the lack of U.S. action following a crackdown that officials said has quelled the recent protests, have created uncertainty about how the U.S. plans to proceed. Media reports and public comments by Trump indicated that the administration was interested in reopening negotiations with Tehran, but over the last week, Trump has gradually amped up threats of a military strike against Iran amid continued intransigence from Tehran. 

Graham said that the Islamic Republic should accept any offers of diplomacy from the U.S., but that he’s not surprised the regime hasn’t been amenable, describing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as a “religious Nazi.”

He expects that a U.S. campaign would involve “enough lethality to make the people who live without fear live with fear, to make those who are killing the people … wonder if maybe they’ll wake up dead tomorrow.” He said the U.S. would also maintain economic pressure on Iran.

“If whatever we do doesn’t inspire the people and put some fear in the regime, we’ve made a mistake,” he continued.

Still, he emphasized that he does not expect a U.S. invasion of Iran.

Graham rejected concerns that Khamenei could be replaced by someone equally radical if removed from power.

“Most likely, the day after in Iran, if the ayatollah falls, is a long road back to a more accommodating Iran that wants to be prosperous,” Graham said. “Why would you double down on the things that got you in this? … Now, it won’t be Jeffersonian democracy, but it’ll be something we can live with.”

The GOP senator also said that he supports the approach in a post-regime Iran outlined Wednesday by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, which would likely involve a transfer of power to others inside the Iranian government, potentially within its military, if the ayatollah falls — akin to the approach the U.S. took in Venezuela.

“We’re not going to do the Iraq thing where we fire everybody,” Graham said. “We’re going to trust the people taking over to understand that the old ways have got to go. If you want to perpetuate the old ways, you’re not going to make it. … To the people taking over in Iran, if you act like the ayatollah, we’ll bomb you too.”

Graham, together with Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), introduced legislation on Thursday, the Save the Kurds Act, that aims to largely re-implement the Caesar Act sanctions on Syria, repealed by Congress in December amid pressure from the Trump administration.

Graham was a longstanding skeptic of unconditional sanctions relief, without snapback measures, for the Syrian regime, and the new legislation comes in response to advances on territory run by the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the U.S.’ primary allies in Syria in the war against ISIS.

In a reversal of current U.S. policy, the bill would sanction Syrian government officials and financial institutions, and any foreign individuals who engage in any transaction with the Syrian government, as well as re-designating Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the faction that Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa led, as a terrorist organization.

The administration would be able to suspend the sanctions if the Syrian government stops all attacks on the SDF, but would be required to immediately reimpose them if attacks resume.

Softening his rhetoric from earlier in the week, Graham told JI he’s optimistic that Saudi Arabia wants to deal as an honest broker to decrease tensions between al-Sharaa’s government and the Kurds — something he said was not the case with Turkey — and urged Saudi officials to maintain that approach. 

He said that he’s very concerned about al-Sharaa, after he “gave him a chance,” warning that failing to protect the Kurds would ultimately lead to a situation in Syria as bad or worse than under the former Assad regime.

“If we let radical Arab groups and [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan eliminate the Kurds, nobody would ever follow America again,” Graham warned. “‘One Syria’ cannot be accomplished through the threat of the gun.”

Graham made waves in Washington and Jerusalem earlier this month with comments that he wanted to quickly wind down U.S. aid to Israel, after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that he wants to wean the Jewish state off of U.S. financial assistance in the next decade.

He promptly traveled to Israel to discuss the matter of future U.S. aid and Israel’s plans for Iran with Netanyahu and top Israeli defense officials. Following a meeting with Netanyahu in Jerusalem, tensions seem to have cooled, with Graham saying he “understand[s] better what he’s saying” despite the two not being totally aligned.

He said that his concern has been that U.S. aid to Israel has been a strong investment that has paid dividends for the U.S., while Netanyahu is concerned with being perceived as a burden on the U.S. — though Graham maintained that ending aid will do nothing to placate anti-Israel voices in the U.S.

Graham said that Netanyahu had a “very, I think, clever way of modernizing the weapons systems to our mutual benefit that’s different than aid, so I was impressed,” adding, “I’d like to be a partner with” Israel’s technological developments.

Many analysts believe that the future of U.S.-Israel cooperation lies more in co-produced and jointly developed programs than in direct financial assistance from the U.S. to Israel, and such programs have been growing in recent years.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called on Saudi Arabia to end what he described as its “attack on the United Arab Emirates” and slammed the country’s silence regarding the Syrian government’s campaign against the Kurds, demanding the kingdom use its influence to “keep the region from falling further into chaos.”

Graham made the comments in a post Tuesday morning on X, hours after announcing his plans to introduce legislation this week imposing sanctions on any government or group involved in targeting Kurdish forces in Syria. Syrian government forces have recently led a campaign against the Kurdish-led and U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, resulting in the loss of SDF control over parts of the country’s territory. 

“As previously stated, I am trying to work with the administration and regional partners to prevent a bloodbath in Syria against our Kurdish allies,” Graham wrote. “It is now time for the region to change their ways and man up for decency.”

“To Saudi Arabia: I have tried to work hard to chart a new path for relations between your country, the United States and the region,” he continued. “I have tremendous respect for many of the changes that have been embraced. However, the Kingdom’s attack on the United Arab Emirates and their silence regarding the Syrian government’s constant assault on the Kurds has to change.”

Last month, Saudi forces carried out airstrikes in southern Yemen targeting what they said were weapons shipments from the United Arab Emirates to UAE-backed separatists, escalating tensions between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi and prompting the UAE to announce a withdrawal of its remaining forces from Yemen.

The South Carolina senator continued, “Please understand that I am smart enough to know that Saudi Arabia has influence on the Syrian government, and I expect them to use it to keep the region from falling further into chaos.”

Graham, who has been closely engaged with the Saudis while lobbying the kingdom to normalize relations with Israel, said earlier this month that he would be “dramatically rethinking” the “nature of” the U.S. alliance with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states if they “intervened on behalf of Iran to avoid decisive military action” by President Donald Trump against the Iranian regime.

“All the headlines suggesting that our so-called Arab allies have intervened on behalf of Iran to avoid decisive military action by President Trump are beyond disturbing. The ayatollah’s regime has American blood on its hands. They are slaughtering people in the streets,” Graham said at the time. 

“If it is accurate that the Arab response is ‘action is not necessary against Iran’ given this current outrageous slaughter of innocent people, then there will be a dramatic rethinking on my part regarding the nature of the alliances now and in the future.”

Lawmakers in Washington are largely downplaying recent developments suggesting that Saudi Arabia is pivoting away from moderation and entertaining more hardline Islamism.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have been at loggerheads in Sudan, Somalia and Yemen — including a recent Saudi airstrike on an Emirati shipment in southern Yemen — prompting questions about Riyadh’s continued interest in acting as a moderating force in the region. 

Saudi Arabia has also sided with Muslim Brotherhood-aligned forces in other regional conflicts, is increasing its business ties with Qatar and softening its stance toward other Islamist powers hostile to Israel, among other steps, some analysts say.

Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud met with lawmakers on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, who came away from the meeting indicating that potential disputes or shifts in the kingdom had been overstated.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) — who has been critical of Saudi Arabia in the past — told Jewish Insider that Prince Faisal, in the meeting, sought to directly rebut claims that Saudi Arabia was pivoting away from a position of moderation.

The overall message from Prince Faisal, Sherman said, was “the Saudis claim that they are anti-Brotherhood and that the disputes with the UAE are tactical, not ideological.”

“Just because the Saudis are not Shiite does not mean they’re Zionists. No one should get too carried away. And I’m sure there are elements of the Saudi government that are not nearly anti-[Muslim] Brotherhood as much as they should be,” Sherman said. “That being said, I see a foreign minister who is not Qatar or Turkey.”

“If you’re worried about Israel, you should never put any of the countries we’re talking about here in the ‘don’t worry about it’ category — you’ve got to worry,” he continued. “But the foreign minister went out of his way to say that when it comes to the Brotherhood or Iran, that there’s less reason to worry about Saudi Arabia.”

He said that he expects Saudi Arabia and the UAE to come to an agreement on the anti-Houthi campaign to deconflict the situation — likely one which would see the UAE take a decreased role in Yemen.

Sherman also said he did not see evidence that Saudi Arabia has significantly accelerated or expanded its relationship with Qatar — though he also noted that Saudi-Qatari tensions have gradually eased over the past few years and particularly since the Arab League blockade of Qatar. Saudi Arabia signed a major deal earlier this month to link Riyadh and Doha with a high-speed rail line. 

Even so, Sherman said he has other pre-existing concerns about Saudi Arabia, such as its pursuit of a nuclear program and bid to purchase F-35 fighter jets, neither of which was discussed at Wednesday’s meeting.

Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also met with Prince Faisal. He said it was “great” to see the foreign minister and that the group had discussed various issues including Yemen, Sudan and Gaza.

“Saudi Arabia and UAE are very close, right? I mean, that’s an understatement,” Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told JI. “What I’m saying — everybody can have disagreements, spats, misunderstandings about different things, and that relationship is no different, but those two are two very, very close allies.”

“The U.S.-Saudi relationship remains a pillar of U.S. policy in the region,” Mast said in a statement. “I look forward to continuing to build upon our decades-old alliance to help resolve some of the region’s most pressing and complex challenges.”

He dismissed concerns about a potential Saudi repositioning or clash with the UAE.

“Saudi Arabia and UAE are very close, right? I mean, that’s an understatement,” Mast told JI in a brief interview. “What I’m saying — everybody can have disagreements, spats, misunderstandings about different things, and that relationship is no different, but those two are two very, very close allies.”

A congressional source deeply involved in Middle East issues argued that ties between the Sudanese Armed Forces — the faction Saudi Arabia is backing in Sudan — and the Muslim Brotherhood have been overstated and that the Saudi decision to back the SAF is a tactical one rather than an ideological signal of alignment with the Brotherhood. The source said that the Saudis have indicated that they are working to push the Brotherhood elements out of the SAF faction.

And, the source emphasized, both sides in Sudan have committed significant atrocities, further noting that the Trump administration sanctioned the Rapid Support Forces — which successive U.S. governments have found is committing genocide. The source said that Saudi Arabian officials have been clear they do not want the U.S. to sanction the UAE over its alleged support for the RSF, as some in Abu Dhabi heard after Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s visit.

Regarding the Saudi strike in Yemen, the source said that Saudi Arabia was concerned about anti-Saudi forces approaching its territory and that the shipment the UAE convoy was transporting was being provided to those forces. 

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) said that there “a lot of concerns” about a Saudi dispute with the UAE in Yemen but that he is not “worried about [the Saudis] repositioning to an extreme point.”

“I don’t think we see that yet. There’s still a lot of conversations going on,” Mullin said. “I think that was just one of those regional things that sometimes we have a lack of understanding — or maybe understand it, but don’t understand it.”

Another lawmaker who has had conversations with individuals in the region said on condition of anonymity that — despite recent headlines — they did not believe that Saudi Arabia was making a fundamental pivot in its posture away from moderation or toward a more extremist Islamist stance.

The lawmaker added that the tensions between the two U.S. partners have been “surprising” but also noted there is a long and complex history between the two countries.

Addressing the Saudi-Emirati tensions, Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE), the No. 2 Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, acknowledged that the two countries had conveyed “different interests,” but did not appear concerned that their differences would alter the Saudis’ view of Iran as the top threat in the region. 

“The UAE seems like they’re trying to diversify their sources of support in the region, and that’s a point of some disagreement between the Saudi leadership and UAE leadership,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told JI.

“I have no insight into what’s going on there, but clearly they’ve got different interests,” Ricketts told JI. “Saudi Arabia’s long-term interest is in a peaceful Middle East where they have allies to offset Iran. Saudi Arabia knows that in the region their worst enemy is Iran, and so they’re going to want allies to push back.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee as well as on Foreign Relations, said his primary concern was the UAE’s deepening ties with Russia.

“I mean, the UAE seems like they’re trying to diversify their sources of support in the region, and that’s a point of some disagreement between the Saudi leadership and UAE leadership,” Cornyn told JI.

“What worries me a little bit is UAE talking about allowing the Russians to build a military base there,” he continued. “They seem to be less convinced that they can rely on support from the United States and so they are looking for other friends. That concerns me.”

Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) attributed the fissures to the situation in Sudan and instability in Yemen that neither country could independently solve, but said he had been informed that the Saudis and Emiratis had addressed their differences. 

“Well, Yemen is a mess,” Kennedy said. “The UAE and the Saudis have been allies. Now, they recently got crossways, but I understand they got it worked out. I don’t know what else to say. I mean, Yemen is just, … it’s not a stable country.”

Pressed on the Gulf states having “worked out” their issues, the Louisiana senator responded, “Well, I think that got a lot of it worked out. The Saudis and UAE … they’re crossways in Sudan. They’re not always joined at the hip, so I wasn’t particularly shocked about it, but my understanding is they got it worked out.”

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he hadn’t been following all of the developments with Saudi Arabia’s regional posture but had been tracking the conflict in Sudan, where Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been backing opposing sides in the civil war. Warner emphasized that “neither one of them are the good guys,” referring to the UAE-aligned RSF and Saudi-aligned SAF.

“It does bother me, not just where [the Saudis] may be moving, but also just … in terms of bombing [in] Yemen,” Warner added, referring to the Saudi strike.

Warner, who led Intelligence Committee members on a visit to Saudi Arabia to meet with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in 2024, said that the Saudis were, at the time, “anxious to get normalization with Israel,” but the Gaza war interrupted that progress.

And Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said the “instability” in the region — including the Saudi-UAE tensions —  demonstrates the need for strong congressional oversight of “any agreement that’s reached with any of our potential partners there.

President Donald Trump recently announced a series of deals with Saudi Arabia, including selling the kingdom F-35 fighter jets and naming Riyadh a major non-NATO ally, without making public strides toward Saudi-Israeli normalization.

“And very bluntly, it reemphasizes that our one truly reliable ally in the Middle East is Israel,” Blumenthal continued.

In recent days, a chorus of left-wing lawmakers in Congress have ramped up their ire towards the United Arab Emirates, accusing the Gulf country of helping fuel the yearslong civil war in Sudan by reportedly backing the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), the non-Islamist Arab force fighting the Muslim Brotherhood-aligned Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF). 

The UAE has long denied allegations of involvement in the war. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that, according to sources, recent assessments by the Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department’s intelligence bureau purport to show the UAE sending Chinese drones to the RSF. 

On the other side, Iran, Russia, Egypt and Turkey have provided support to the SAF, according to conflict monitors and reporting by Bloomberg and The Washington Post.

The war in Sudan has wrought havoc upon the eastern African nation, with both warring factions committing crimes against humanity. The conflict has killed as many as 150,000 people and has displaced around 12 million. 

Over the more than two-year long conflict, both militias have been accused of widespread sexual assault, mass killings of civilians, torture and deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure. On Monday, the RSF captured the city of El Fasher after an 18-month blockade which saw the group effectively devastate the city, with reports of mass killings, sexual violence and the destruction of hospitals and displacement camps.

The U.S. government, under former President Joe Biden, determined the RSF was committing genocide and found both the RSF and SAF guilty of committing war crimes.

Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood’s growing influence with the Sudanese Armed Forces has alarmed experts, who warn that the SAF’s deepening ties to Islamist networks threaten regional stability and could pose a risk far beyond the eastern African nation.

“The Muslim Brotherhood has had a strong presence in Sudan since the 1940s and that presence has evolved over the years,” Norman Roule, a former senior U.S. intelligence official, told Jewish Insider. “It’s important to note that this presence is also why Iran is such a strong supporter of the Burhan [head of SAF] government.” 

Liam Karr, an analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, who has condemned actions on both sides of the conflict, says the ties date back to former Islamist dictator Omar al-Bashir, who ruled Sudan for several decades before the SAF overthrew him in 2019. 

“The SAF is working with several Islamist brigades that consist of former Bashir-era army, police and intelligence personnel,” Karr told JI. “This includes the al Baraa Ibn Malik Brigade, which is widely associated with the Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood and Bashir and has an estimated 20,000 fighters.” 

In recent months, the SAF has received explosive attack drones from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps to aid in the conflict, while Egypt, one of their key backers, arrested a key Islamist militia leader aligned with the group — signaling that even staunch regional supporters of the group are “growing wary of its Islamist factions,” according to Foundation for Defense of Democracies Research Fellow Hussain Adbul-Hussain. 

Roule said Iran has a vested interest in providing the SAF with weaponry in order to reestablish a presence in the region and revitalize their “broken proxies,” following Israel’s degrading of its military capabilities and of its proxy Hezbollah, as well as the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. 

“This is of extreme importance to the U.S. and its partners in the region, because if the Quds Force [IRGC] is able to establish a presence it lost in Syria, it would be able to reestablish training camps it operated a decade ago for Hamas smugglers, routes for weapons that it could send back into Gaza and revitalize Lebanese Hezbollah, as well as provide a transshipment location of weapons to the Houthis,” said Roule. “The Muslim Brotherhood presence in Khartoum is of serious concern for the United States and deserves much greater attention. It is a significant threat to the United States, Israel and the region.” 

Anti-Israel lawmakers, including some of the Jewish state’s most vocal critics in the House, have sounded the alarm on the RSF, but have notably glossed over the SAF and its increasingly Islamist alignment. 

“Sudan is facing the world’s worst humanitarian crisis and a genocide,” said Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) in a post on social media on Tuesday. “The UAE and other arms dealers to the RSF and RSF-aligned militias must be held accountable.”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) echoed the same sentiment, saying she is “horrified” by the RSF’s “mass killings of civilians.”

“We must do everything in our power to stop this genocide, including cutting off all weapons sales to the United Arab Emirates who are arming and funding this ethnic cleansing,” said Tlaib on social media on Wednesday.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) followed suit and similarly directed his criticism at the Emirates. 

“I am incredibly concerned about the deepening humanitarian crisis in Sudan, and the atrocities committed by the Rapid Support Forces,” Castro wrote on social media on Wednesday. “The United States must put pressure on the RSF and those who back it — including the United Arab Emirates — to end these atrocities.”

A number of far-left activists online have also singled out the RSF and its reported Emirati ties for condemnation. 

Kenneth Roth, a virulent critic of Israel and former head of Human Rights Watch, posted on Tuesday, “British arms sold to the United Arab Emirates are being found in Sudan, where the UAE is arming the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces as they commit genocide.” 

“Both the Biden and Trump administrations refused to hold the UAE accountable as it armed Sudan’s RSF, despite massacre after massacre, atrocity after atrocity,” wrote New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, adding, “Members of Congress are showing more responsibility and initiative.” 

House Democrats, led by Reps. Gregory Meeks and Sara Jacobs, released a statement in April marking the two year anniversary of the conflict. “External actors like the UAE must immediately stop fueling the conflict by arming the warring parties,” the statement said notably only listing the UAE and omitting any mention of Turkey, Iran, Russia, and other countries who have sent arms to factions in Sudan.

A bi-partisan group of senators, including Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, released a statement on Thursday breaking in tone from the other lawmakers – condemning both sides and making mention of all nations reportedly backing the war. 

“Both the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have committed atrocities against civilians and pursued a zero-sum war at any cost,” the lawmakers said in a statement. “Foreign backers of the RSF and SAF-including the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Russia, Iran, China and governments in the immediate region-have fueled and profited from the conflict and legitimized the monsters destroying Sudan,” the senators continued. 

Secular forces in Sudan have called for the country’s Islamist movement to be classified as a terrorist group, according to Hussain. Sudan’s Civil Democratic Alliance of Revolutionary Forces (Sumud) has stated that the “Islamist movement sees no pathway for ending the fighting other than the complete submission of the Sudanese people to its terrorist regime, an arrangement that has never achieved peace.” 

Karr says the Trump administration and the SAF’s own partners have put “heavy pressure” on the group to “distance itself politically from the Islamist groups.” Karr also believes pressure should be applied to the RSF.

In his second term, President Donald Trump voiced support for designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. Various members of congress have introduced legislation that would require the secretary of state to use this designation, though Congress has yet to move forward with the legislation. 

Israel’s first ambassador to the United Arab Emirates said on Thursday that he is “very, very worried” about the future of the Abraham Accords, as Israel’s ties in the Gulf are coming under strain following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders in Qatar earlier this week.

“For the last week, I am almost not sleeping. I’m very, very worried,” Amir Hayek said at a webinar hosted by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy marking the five-year anniversary of the signing of the Accords, when Israel normalized ties with the UAE. 

UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed flew to Doha this week in a show of support for Qatar after the Israeli attack. Reports have indicated that Israel did not successfully hit the terror leaders it targeted, instead killing several lower-level Hamas officials. Other Gulf leaders, including Jordan’s Crown Prince Hussein and Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, also planned visits to Doha, and Qatar will host an emergency summit with Arab leaders on Sunday. 

A barrage of criticism directed at Israel — including from President Donald Trump — has sparked fears that its goal of regional integration could now be even farther away. 

“I believe that Israel should look at our partners as partners, and talk to them, and not let this situation and the Abraham Accords collapse,” said Hayek, who was ambassador to the UAE from 2021 to 2024. “I think that it will be very hard to rebuild the Abraham Accords if we will pass a point of breaking them, even if we think that we can do it for a few months. No. No. We need to do everything to protect the Abraham Accords.”

Hayek did not specifically reference Israel’s actions in Qatar, nor did he mention Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision on Thursday to move forward with a controversial new settlement expansion plan, known as the E1 corridor, in the West Bank. But he suggested “internal Israeli politics” may be at play.

“We [Israel] didn’t start the war, but we need to know when to finish the war,” said Hayek. “Maybe it’s related to the internal Israeli politics. But we all need to be very, very wise in order to protect, I think, one of the most important things that we have in our region.” 

Hayek, a businessman who is now a fellow at the Atlantic Council, said he is still doing everything in his power to promote Israel’s ties with the UAE and with Bahrain.

“To be an ambassador, it’s not a lifetime job, but it’s a lifetime mission,” said Hayek. “I’m talking not only to the Emiratis, Bahrainis and other countries. I’m talking to my government as well, saying we need to do everything needed in order to keep those relations.”

Hayek maintains hope in the future of the Accords. But if their promise was already being tested by the war in Gaza, it has grown even more fraught this week.

“Hope is my middle name, and I think that I will need a lot of hope these days when we see some difficulties with the Abraham Accords,” said Hayek. “I hope that the Abraham Accords will stand … and we’ll go forward with our partners and friends in the Middle East.”

One of the original drivers of the 2020 Abraham Accords, in which the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain normalized relations with Israel, was Israel’s vocal, public stance against Iran’s nuclear program and regional aggression. That stance also brought Israel and Saudi Arabia closer, a relationship that developed to the point that in the summer of 2023, it seemed like normalization was just around the corner — which officials, including former Secretary of State Tony Blinken, have since confirmed.

By extension, it might make sense for the Abraham Accords and a Saudi-Israel rapprochement to be back in the headlines after Israel took the ultimate stand against Iran’s nuclear program last month, bombing it with assistance from the U.S. President Donald Trump has expressed hope to expand the accords in recent weeks, ahead of and during his meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week. 

Yet there has been almost no serious talk about Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords in recent weeks.

Riyadh has also been publicly signaling that its relationship with Tehran is still on track since China brokered a deal between the two countries in 2023. Saudi Arabia, like other Gulf States, spoke out last month against the Israeli and American airstrikes on Iran. Last week, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Jeddah. 

With no long-term ceasefire in Gaza and a strategy of trying to contain and balance Iran’s power in the region, the Saudis are in no rush to normalize relations with Israel, experts told Jewish Insider.

Bernard Haykel, a professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, told JI that the Saudis’ statements came out of a fear that “if Iran is attacked by Israel and the U.S., the Iranians would retaliate against them … The public statements are all basically defending Iran’s right as a sovereign state to get the Iranians not to see them as an ally or a proxy of America and Israel.”

But, “in fact, they are allies of America,” he added. 

“There’s all this public condemnation of the attacks on Iran,” Haykel said, “but when the U.S. pulled its forces from the Air Force base in Qatar [due to Iran’s retaliation], they moved their planes to a Saudi base. So they condemned the U.S. for attacking Iran, but they also gave the U.S. protection.”

In addition, he noted, Saudi Arabia is in CENTCOM, as is Israel, such that if any Iranian drones or missiles were detected over Saudi territory, the information would be relayed to Washington and Jerusalem. “It is a fact that [the Saudis] are part of a security architecture that protects Israel as much as it protects them.”

Haykel said there is a sense of relief in Riyadh from how the 12-day Israel-Iran war played out, but Saudi officials are still concerned about Iran’s remaining ballistic and cruise missiles: “[Iran is] very close and can swarm Saudi Arabia. Unlike Israel, the Saudis don’t have an Iron Dome. They’re much more vulnerable.” 

The meeting between bin Salman and Araghchi is “part of the strategy to protect themselves from an Iranian attack,” Haykel added.

Hussein Aboubakr Mansour, a senior fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs and a researcher at the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, told JI that “the Gulf states are immediate neighbors of Iran and will always have to live with them.” 

“Iran will always be a problem for them no matter who is in power. It is a huge, advanced state, and they are these tiny Gulf states. They can’t stop Iran’s ambition and wish for hegemony,” he said. 

Aboubakr Mansour argued that the Saudis have an interest in keeping the current Iranian regime in place, because a more liberal Iranian regime may turn itself into Washington’s favored Middle Eastern power, as it was in the 1960s and ‘70s, threatening the close relationship Riyadh has with the Trump administration.

“They have an interest in Iran remaining the pariah that it is,” he said.

Haykel said that the Saudis “are not going to shed tears for Iran, regardless of their public statements.” 

“They sound like they’re anti-Israel, but in actual fact, the Israeli military capability that has been on display vis-a-vis Iran, the attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities and the Israeli capability to defend itself from Iranian attacks are all things the Saudis want,” he added. “They want an Iran chastened, that doesn’t use non-state actors and doesn’t have a nuclear program. They want a contained Iran.”

Saudi Arabia’s strategy has been “trying to get Iran to behave more responsibly,” rather than as a “hugely destabilizing factor in the region through its proxies,” Haykel said. That was also the motivation behind the 2023 China-mediated detente between Saudi Arabia and Iran, he explained.

Aboubakr Mansour said that balancing the other major powers in the Middle East — Iran, Israel and Turkey — is a priority for Riyadh.

A decade ago, “standing up to Iran was one of the main attractions of Israel [for the Saudis], that was true then,” Aboubakr Mansour said. “Now there’s a main factor they need to calculate, that the U.S. is not reliable and maybe it isn’t going to be again … [The Saudis] had four good years with Trump and the Abraham Accords, and then the Biden administration [and the Saudis] couldn’t stand each other.” 

In addition, he said that the Gulf states “have a complete lack of hard power compared to Israel, Iran and Turkey,” and bin Salman has big ambitions for his country and its economy.

“All of these elements together lead them to calculate their national interests and strategy in a way that gives them maximum leverage over everyone all the time,” he said. “It’s about balancing everyone against everyone else … The Saudis’ ambition is huge and they can’t allow the Iranians, Turks or Israelis to become a hegemonic force in the region.” 

As such, Aboubakr Mansour posited that “the Saudis are in a place where they want to see neither the Israelis nor the Iranians win. [The Saudis] want them to put each other in check, which will give [the Saudis] more leverage.”

As for what the means for Saudi-Israel normalization, Aboubakr Mansour argued that “the Saudis are comfortable playing the normalization game for as long as they can … because they can gain more from their current position than actually normalizing.”

Normalization talk gives the Saudis positive attention from the media, attracts investment and makes them look better in Washington, but “it’s a good show. There’s no reality to it,” Aboubakr Mansour said. 

“They cooperate with the Israelis — they have a new class of statesmen who are [Millenials], they are not interested in the ‘resistance’ and see the positive in Israel — but interests dictate everything. They will play the game as long as they can extract more leverage from it … Normalizing with Israel doesn’t have the incentives for the Saudis that it did five years ago,” he said.

Haykel similarly said that “the Saudis are very good at temporizing, kicking the can down the road until they feel the time is right,” he added.

The Saudis “have their own constraints — domestic, regional and the Islamic public – that they have to keep in mind,” Haykel said. “They are insisting first and foremost on a ceasefire … They seem to be talking less about irreversible steps towards Palestinian statehood, but I think it is still a condition for normalization.”

Still, he said, “Palestinian statehood is seen in Israel as rewarding terrorism and not something the Israeli public is willing to entertain at the moment, and the Saudis know this well.”

Because of that, the Saudis have been “pushing for more cosmetic things … [such as] working with France to get as many states as possible to recognize a Palestinian state through the U.N.” 

According to Haykel, the Saudis want to be able to say that a solution for Palestinian self-determination has been found, without making specific demands of what that means, whether the Palestinians would have an army or not, or if they would have full or partial sovereignty.

In that regard, not much has changed since Oct. 7, 2023, in that the Saudi leadership “never had much respect for the Palestinian Authority, with a few exceptions,” and as such, Riyadh does not want to be saddled with the bill for Gaza’s reconstruction because they do not think the PA is up to the task, Haykel said.

“They want some kind of face-saving solution with the ceasefire being a precondition,” he said. “They’re waiting for President Trump to put pressure on Netanyahu to reach a ceasefire and then make gestures toward the Palestinians.”

At the same time, Haykel warned that there is some talk in Riyadh of pushing for a U.N. Security Council resolution that would enshrine a right for the Palestinians to have sovereignty over the West Bank and to have a capital in east Jerusalem. The idea, he said, came from former PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.

“They would like the U.S. to push for this regardless of what Israel says or thinks or does,” he added, “but they have not moved to do this yet.” 

Meanwhile, the only recent public movement toward Israeli-Saudi normalization was the appearance last week of Saudi journalist Abdulaziz Alkhamis in the Knesset for a meeting of the Caucus to Advance a Regional Security Arrangement. 

Alkhamis said that the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks and subsequent war, along with the Israeli strikes on Iran, are a sign that the region’s “tectonic plates” are moving, and that Israel exposed Iran’s strategic limitations. However, he emphasized that “normalization, from a Saudi point of view, is not just a bilateral agreement. It is a regional alignment and must include a credible, irreversible path to Palestinian sovereignty.”

Former Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz said in the caucus meeting that “there is too much weight given to the Palestinian matter and it is being turned into [an excuse] to stay in place. We must be daring and make advances — we must, but we should also demand this courage from neighboring countries that want to advance normalization.”

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is departing today for Saudi Arabia, the first leg of an Abraham Accords-themed congressional delegation that also plans to visit Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Israel and meet with leaders in each country. Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), who is leading the delegation, told Jewish Insider that the trip will take place even as Israeli strikes against Iran continue. 

“I think the timing just becomes all that much more important,” Schneider said in an interview on Friday. “Last night, Iran took a significant hit to its nuclear program and its military. So I think and hope maybe it opens up possibilities. We’ll find out.” 

Other members attending the trip, which is hosted by the Atlantic Council’s N7 Initiative, include Reps. Don Bacon (R-NE), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) and Zach Nunn (R-IA). 

“During these times of instability in the region, support for the Accords is necessary to enhance Israel’s security and stability, as well as a way to counter threats posed by Iran,” Bacon said in a statement. 

It has been nearly five years since Israel normalized ties with the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco in the Abraham Accords, which were widely viewed not just as a diplomatic accord but also a counterweight to Iran’s influence in the region. 

“The Arab countries around Israel remain committed to this idea of a better future, a pathway to peace, and I believe the Abraham Accords are that path,” said Schneider. “The purpose of the trip, before the strikes against Iran, was to talk about that. That doesn’t change.”

The Senate on Wednesday defeated two resolutions aimed at blocking certain weapons sales to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, with five Democrats voting with nearly all Republicans against both resolutions.

The 56-39 votes came as a pressure tactic from some progressive Democrats on the two U.S. partners and the Trump administration over dealings between President Donald Trump and the two Gulf states — Qatar’s provision of a luxury jumbo jet to serve as Air Force One and the UAE’s investment of $2 billion in a Trump-linked cryptocurrency.

Democratic Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) voted against the two resolutions. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) voted present.

Coons said in a statement that “these resolutions don’t hold President Trump accountable” and will not punish Trump at all, but will rather “target other countries for the actions of our president, countries that host more than 10,000 U.S. troops on strategically important bases and are our partners.”

He said that blocking the sales would weaken two pillars of stability in the region and create space from those partners at a critical time, as well as make other nations doubt Congress’ reliability. 

He said the sales were negotiated years ago. 

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), who led the effort with Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), has framed the arms sales as a direct response to “cash payments” from the two nations. 

“Normally those might be deals that Congress would approve, but we cannot approve any security relationship today with countries in the Middle East that are engaged in the fundamental corruption of American foreign policy,” Murphy said earlier this week. “The Trump administration is moving these sales forward as part of a broader scheme which enriches Donald Trump to the tune of billions of dollars.”

He said the Qataris are looking to be “not left out” of the second Trump administration and that the Emiratis are seeking “our secrets,” specifically sensitive semiconductor technology that could be compromised by China.

Republicans’ essentially united front against the resolutions came even though multiple Senate Republicans have expressed deep skepticism of Qatar and called for its status as a major non-NATO ally to be reconsidered.

Murphy, meanwhile, in a Senate floor speech earlier this week expressed gratitude for Qatar in spite of the resolutions.

“What makes this moment so dangerous is that both UAE and Qatar, but especially Qatar, are key partners of the United States,” Murphy said. “They’re imperfect allies, but they are our allies. In fact, I’ve been down on this floor in the past arguing on behalf of Qatar and the U.S.-Qatar relationship, when other senators have tried to denigrate the Qataris’ contributions to regional peace. The Qataris have been a critical partner of ours on so many important issues.”

He suggested that Qatar had felt bullied by the Trump administration into offering the jet and “feels like it had little choice but to say yes when asked for this $400 million gift” because the U.S. had punished and isolated Qatar during the first Trump administration when Saudi Arabia and the UAE “effectively ganged up to blockade Qatar and Trump gave that move implicit consent.” 

He claimed that the UAE had first set the precedent for Qatar by investing in Trump’s cryptocurrency, leaving Qatar to play catch-up.

But he also noted that the U.S. has never allowed any other Middle East country to buy MQ-9 Reaper drones, the weapons sale to Qatar in question, because the U.S. has felt that such transfers are too risky.

During President Donald Trump’s trip to the Middle East earlier this month, he shuttled between Gulf capitals to announce major economic deals. In Qatar, it was an eye-popping $1.2 trillion economic commitment in trade agreements and direct investment. Saudi Arabia pledged to invest $600 billion in the United States in defense, energy and infrastructure. And in the United Arab Emirates, Trump announced a series of agreements — including one to build Stargate UAE, the largest artificial intelligence campus outside the United States, in partnership with OpenAI and Nvidia — worth more than $200 billion, on top of $1.4 trillion previously committed in U.S. investments.

Missing from the list of deals announced on Trump’s Middle East junket was any kind of similar agreement with Israel, which Trump did not visit on his first major trip abroad since returning to office. Economic ties between the U.S. and Israel are strong; Israel is a larger trading partner to the U.S. than either Saudi Arabia, the UAE or Qatar, and American investors are among the biggest investors in Israeli startups. But the country lacks the liquid financial firepower that is available to the oil-rich Gulf monarchies, which risks placing Israel at a disadvantage in the eyes of an American president who sees the world as a series of business deals. 

“You try not to compete in areas where you have a disadvantage. We have a capital disadvantage. So we should compete where we have an advantage, which is on innovation and technology,” said Michael Eisenberg, who co-founded Aleph, an Israeli VC firm. 

Some Israeli business leaders and innovators are now urging the country to seriously consider adopting a strategy of “economic diplomacy” to place the country more firmly on Trump’s radar. They think that startup founders and venture capitalists stand to serve as Israel’s best ambassadors, better suited to make the economic case for deepening U.S.-Israel ties than the buttoned-up bureaucrats who populate global capitals advancing Israel’s interests.

“Founders are Israel’s best ambassadors. They travel more than diplomats, pitch to the world’s biggest investors and solve real-world problems that transcend borders,” said Jon Medved, the Israel-based CEO of OurCrowd, a global venture investing platform. “Do they have a responsibility to engage in economic diplomacy? I think they already do, whether they realize it or not.” 

Where the Gulf countries have the ability to spend seemingly endless sums of money on American investments and projects to woo Trump, Israel offers “deep tech expertise” and a venue for early stage collaboration that cannot easily be replicated. 

“We’re the lab. The Gulf can be the scale-up market,” Medved continued. “There’s a powerful opportunity for synergy, not just competition.” 

It’s not news to the American government that Israel excels in technology. In 2022, the two countries launched a strategic high-level dialogue on technology as a way to advance cooperation on artificial intelligence, climate change and pandemic preparedness. (The dialogue slowed down after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks.) 

Avner Golov, who until 2023 served as the senior director for foreign policy in Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office, thinks the collaboration between the two countries should be formalized with a photo op, like the signing ceremonies Trump participated in during his visit to the Gulf. The U.S.-Israel security memorandum of understanding, which promises Israel $3.3 billion in U.S. security assistance annually, expires in 2028, and Golov thinks the renegotiation of that agreement is an opportunity to strengthen the tech and economic ties between the countries — to put Israel’s tech diplomacy to the test. 

“I envision going to the White House Rose Garden, signing, for the first time, a formal strategic partnership between Israel and America, approved in both Congress and the Israeli Knesset,” Golov told Jewish Insider. Such a deal, as Golov sees it, might also include ways to make it easier for American businesses to operate in Israel. 

Eisenberg, who has invested in major Israeli startup successes such as WeWork and Lemonade, thinks changes to Israel’s “regulatory environment” can help make the sell to American companies and, by extension, Trump. 

“We’re not going to do zero taxes like Dubai, but we need to be attracting more capital here by making our regulatory environment much simpler and lowering our capital gains taxes to be competitive with the United States so that we can bring capital formation vehicles like hedge funds to Israel,” Eisenberg said. 

Of course, many leading tech companies already have large operations in Israel. The chip giant Nvidia announced a $500 million investment in an Israeli AI research data lab in January. In March, Google acquired the Israeli cybersecurity company Wiz for $32 billion, Google’s largest-ever acquisition. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and Google President Ruth Porat were with Trump in Saudi Arabia, along with other top CEOs. 

“Many of them have employees in Israel because of our innovation, but we need to build a strategy around attracting them, getting deeper engagement and using them in our attempt to build us into a regional superpower,” added Eisenberg. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long touted Israel’s startup ecosystem, but some worry he has not sufficiently tapped into that world to meet the moment, when Trump — whom Netanyahu has always sought to present as a close friend — seeks flashy financial success on the world stage. 

“[Netanyahu] should have realized that in a competition for the affections of a strongman like Trump, Israel had little to offer,” The Atlantic’s Yair Rosenberg wrote this month. 

But the basis of the U.S.-Israel relationship has never been purely about dollars and cents. 

“If we’re going to make sure, ‘Hey, don’t forget about us,’ it’s not about money. It’s about morality and humanity and the purpose of Israel on the world stage,” former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides told JI. “Obviously there’s this whole notion that there are a lot of deals to be done. But that’s not how we compete.” 

Before President Donald Trump departed the Middle East last week, his motorcade made one final stop in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, before heading to the airport: a visit — the first by a U.S. president — to the Abrahamic Family House, a multifaith complex with Muslim, Christian and Jewish houses of worship. 

His tour, with stops inside the mosque, church and synagogue, underscored the message of tolerance that he shared in an address at a Saudi investment forum earlier in the week. 

“From the United States’ point of view, that is a signal to everybody he met in the region that week, and to people he didn’t yet meet, that religious freedom and tolerance is absolutely crucial going forward,”  Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean and director of global social action at the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told Jewish Insider last week.  

Trump had just wrapped up a four-day visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE, and all week he had spoken about the Gulf nations’ efforts at modernizing and moving away from sectarian divisions. 

“Before our eyes a new generation of leaders is transcending the ancient conflicts of tired divisions of the past and forging a future where the Middle East is defined by commerce, not chaos; where it exports technology, not terrorism; and where people of different nations, religions and creeds are building cities together, not bombing each other out of existence,” the president said at the forum. 

Trump used the speech to call for Saudi Arabia to normalize ties with Israel, following the lead of the UAE, as well as Bahrain and Morocco. So could the Saudis similarly follow suit by creating an Abrahamic Family House of its own, or something similar to advance religious pluralism? 

Religious freedom experts say that’s highly unlikely. After all, it is only in recent years that people of other religions have even been able to legally practice their faiths at home, behind closed doors, in Saudi Arabia, part of the wide-ranging reforms implemented by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. But as a monarch with near-unlimited authority as well as near-unlimited resources, MBS’ next move is anyone’s guess — and that pertains to religion, too, even in this deeply religious country where the vast majority of people practice Sunni Islam. 

“I think you won’t see a version of the Abrahamic Family House in another country. I think what you will see is each country, in their own way, doing similar things in the years to come,” said Johnnie Moore, an evangelical leader who met with MBS in 2018 as part of the first delegation of evangelical leaders to Saudi Arabia. “Obviously in Saudi Arabia, the baseline is different.”

As the home of Mecca, the birthplace of Islam, Saudi Arabia has long been viewed as the standard-bearer for the Muslim world. In the UAE — a much smaller nation, where nearly 90%  of residents are foreigners there for business purposes or as laborers — Islamic law has never been applied as strictly. 

“The strategy of letting expatriates worship as they like or other cultural practices that aren’t inherently Islamic looks very different in a country where the majority of those residing in it are expatriates, versus the majority of those residing in it are Arab Muslim,” said Moore. 

MBS has made clear his desire to turn Saudi Arabia into a global business and tourism hub. Part of that mission involved his 2016 decision to sharply curtail the powers of the religious police, who for decades had regulated every facet of daily life in the country, in a bid to make the country more appealing to foreigners. 

The Muslim World League, a major Islamic NGO, hosted a forum in Riyadh in 2022 for a diverse array of global religious leaders that included Jews, Muslims, evangelicals, Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Buddhists and Hindus. Saudi Arabia has also made efforts in recent years to rid textbooks of negative references to Jews and Christians. 

Houda Nonoo, a former Bahraini ambassador to the U.S., touted “the presence of interfaith houses of worship across the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council]” as “a powerful symbol of coexistence and mutual respect.” The king of Bahrain has promoted religious tolerance in the small island nation, situated between Saudi Arabia and Qatar. 

“Building houses of worship for all religions is a meaningful step toward making people of all faiths feel seen, respected and truly welcome,” Nonoo told Jewish Insider last week, declining to specifically comment on whether Saudi Arabia should adopt a similar approach. 

Overall, true religious pluralism in Saudi Arabia remains far afield. The State Department has designated Saudi Arabia a “country of particular concern” on matters of international religious freedom since 2004, alongside China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Russia, among others.

A U.S. delegation to the country last year departed early when Saudi officials asked Cooper, the then-chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, to remove his yarmulke. The Saudi Embassy in Washington acknowledged the flub, describing the incident as “unfortunate” and “the result of a misunderstanding of internal protocols.”

But despite Saudi Arabia at times facing global censure for such incidents and for other human rights abuses, the country is guaranteed to be a major figure in shaping the changing face of the Middle East, particularly in relation to Israel’s standing in the region. 

“Without question, the most important address on this issue about how we move forward on the peace end of things is Saudi Arabia,” said Cooper. “Expect that whatever the Saudis do will have a Saudi, if you will, stempel” — Yiddish for “stamp” — “and imprint. It won’t look like whatever anybody else has done.” 

A widely followed social media service in the United Arab Emirates is pushing a boycott campaign against Shopify, the Canadian e-commerce platform, after its president endorsed a recent social media comment critical of biased media coverage against Israel.

In a series of dramatically worded Instagram posts on Wednesday, Smashi, a digital information service owned by the Dubai-based media group Augustus Media, took aim at Harley Finkelstein, Shopify’s president, over a brief social media remark voicing agreement with a fellow tech entrepreneur who had denounced a news article for uncritically citing casualty figures provided by Hamas.

“Thx for saying this,” Finkelstein wrote on Tuesday, responding to a viral post from Martin Varsavsky, an outspoken board member of Axel Springer, the German publishing giant whose subsidiary, Politico, had run the Associated Press story Varsavsky dismissed as “one-sided Hamas support.”

Smashi, in its framing of Finkelstein’s comment, said he had backed a “pro-Israel tweet defending Israel’s airstrikes” against Hamas, “adding fuel to the debate over the legitimacy of Israel’s military actions, which equate to a genocide, in Gaza.”

Noting that Shopify has nearly 25,000 customers in the Middle East, “with a substantial concentration” in the United Arab Emirates, Smashi urged its followers to use alternate e-commerce platforms in the region, sharing a list of six competitors to Shopify.

Finkelstein’s online remark has drawn separate calls from anti-Israel activists to boycott Shopify — which has previously been a target of such campaigns. But Smashi’s involvement stands out given its wide reach in the United Arab Emirates, which has continued to maintain its normalization agreement with Israel even amid the ongoing conflict with Hamas in Gaza.

Augustus Media — whose advertising partners include Nike, Citi Bank, Samsung, Nestle and Coca-Cola — owns another digital media brand, Lovin Dubai, that has promoted other anti-Israel content since October 7th. The so-called “local news and lifestyle brand” has described the Israeli hostages held by Hamas as “prisoners,” for instance, and amplified a conspiracy theory about “‘Zionists’ organ harvesting Palestinian bodies.”

Augustus Media did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday. 

Smashi has also turned a critical eye toward Google over its recent acquisition of Wiz, an Israeli cybersecurity startup. In a social media post this week, the company emphasized that Google had just paid a “world record $32 billion” for the startup “founded by former Israeli military officers.”

After some followers took issue with the framing as celebratory, the company said in response to critics that its coverage of Google had been misinterpreted.

“We, as a policy, call Israel’s acts in Gaza a genocide,” the streaming service wrote. “This news is also one of the pieces where we highlight that Google has invested in one such startup which is Israeli and by former military officers. While everyone highlighted it as a big deal in tech world, we are one of the only few who highlighted for IOF [[Israel Occupation Forces, a term used by Palestinians and anti-Israel activists to refer to the IDF] soldiers being behind it.”

Still, the company — which claims more than 605,000 followers and reaches more than 28 million viewers, according to Augustus — has otherwise recently reserved its involvement in boycott efforts to Shopify.

It is unclear, however, why Smashi has chosen to target Shopify now, as Finkelstein, who is Jewish, had previously spoken up more vocally in support of Israel amid its war with Hamas.

Finkelstein did not return a request for comment on Wednesday, nor did a spokesperson for Shopify.