Q&A
Suzanne Maloney, Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour
Source: Getty
The Battle of Dubai: The United Arab Emirates and the U.S.-Iran Cold War
If the United States and the United Arab Emirates seek to move beyond sanctions and military containment to address the deeper roots of the Iranian threat, they may find they have differing long-term interests.
Published on Jul 27, 2011
As the United States seeks to contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions through economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has come to play a critical yet often ambiguous role. The UAE, namely the emirate of Dubai, is a top source of Iranian imports and a key transshipment point for goods—legal and illegal—destined for the Islamic Republic. Dubai’s bustling and loosely regulated ports have repeatedly frustrated international sanctions against Iran.
At the same time, the government in Abu Dhabi feels acutely threatened by Iran and has consequently forged a strategic alliance with the United States. The UAE spends billions of dollars on U.S. arms and Emirati officials have privately urged the United States to consider all possible options—including military intervention—to stop Iran’s nuclear program. Additionally, the UAE has allowed the United States to use Dubai—home to the world’s second-largest Iranian diaspora community—as a perch to gather information on Iran.
A combination of U.S. pressure and Abu Dhabi’s newfound economic and political clout over Dubai has led the UAE to significantly enhance the enforcement of sanctions in recent years. Yet both the United States and the UAE face serious obstacles in distinguishing between legal and illegal commerce and have felt a backlash from legitimate merchants who feel unfairly targeted.
Few policymakers in Washington or Abu Dhabi believe that sanctions alone will modify Iran’s external behavior or curtail its nuclear ambitions. But if the United States and the UAE seek to move beyond sanctions and military containment to address the deeper roots of the Iranian threat—namely the character of the Iranian regime—they may find they have differing long-term interests.
About the Author
Karim Sadjadpour
Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Karim Sadjadpour is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he focuses on Iran and U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East.
- Iran Wanted to Survive the War. Now What?
- What’s Keeping the Iranian Regime in Power—for NowQ&A
Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour, Robin Wright
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Uncomfortable Truth About EU EnlargementCommentary
Before the next wave of EU enlargement takes place, the union needs to grapple with thorny questions of how power is distributed among its members.
Emil Sondaj Hansen, Ditte Brasso Sørensen
- What to Watch When Trump and Xi Meet in WashingtonCommentary
The real test may come after the leaders leave the room.
- +1
Sheena Chestnut Greitens, Oriana Skylar Mastro, Yukon Huang, …
- The Impacts of the Houthis’ Advance Could Extend Well Beyond Saudi ArabiaCommentary
The Horn of Africa countries are among those facing a new security calculus.
Andrew Leber, Lesley Anne Warner
- Will the Far Right Change Europe’s Russia Policy?Commentary
The European far right might fail to steer EU policy in the direction Russia wants, but they will create enough chaos inside Europe to benefit the Kremlin.
Dimitar Bechev
- The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of TimeCommentary
The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.
Marc Pierini
