{"id":2926,"date":"2026-05-22T09:13:51","date_gmt":"2026-05-22T09:13:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/?p=2926"},"modified":"2026-05-22T09:13:51","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T09:13:51","slug":"why-the-distance-from-the-uae","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/","title":{"rendered":"Why the Distance from the UAE?<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

If one were to cast a reflective gaze across the modern history of the Middle East, it would become evident\u2014clear as daylight\u2014that politics here is inscribed less through the conduits of oil than through the very lifeblood of its peoples. As the shadow of tension between the United States and Israel on one side and Iran on the other lengthened across the littorals of the Gulf, the United Arab Emirates did not remain a passive spectator; rather, it emerged as a deliberate and active participant. If the politics of this region were to be distilled into a single phrase, it would be that of an \u201cundeclared war\u201d\u2014a contest between Iran and Israel whose theatre may lie beyond visible borders, yet whose reverberations are felt upon every shore of the Gulf. Within this fraught geometry, the Emirates has assumed the posture of a \u201cmoderate yet engaged actor.\u201d<\/p>\n

Its expanding military cooperation with the United States, coupled with its deepening ties with Israel, has inevitably widened its diplomatic distance from Tehran. In recent years, as allegations surfaced of drone and missile reprisals attributed to Iran following American strikes, statements emanating from the Emirati Ministry of Defence seemed once more to suffuse the region with the unmistakable scent of gunpowder. It became increasingly apparent that the Gulf was no longer merely a reservoir of oil but had been transfigured into a \u201cgeography of security\u201d\u2014a line drawn not in sand alone, but in strategic anxieties.<\/p>\n

Yet this condition is not merely one of military strain; it is emblematic of a deeper civilisational and political contest, wherein each actor seeks its own endurance in the weakness of the other. In this shadowy proxy conflict between Iran and Israel, the Emirates appears to pursue a delicate equilibrium\u2014at times inclining toward one pole, at times toward the other. Such manoeuvring is not simply reactive defence; it signals, rather, a redefinition of power itself, wherein states increasingly seek to secure their existence through webs of military alignment and strategic patronage.<\/p>\n

When the Emirates moved toward announcing its withdrawal from OPEC, the step could scarcely be dismissed as a mere technical or economic recalibration. It was, in essence, an act of intellectual divergence\u2014a symbolic political declaration. Beneath this decision lies an emergent regional strategy, one that departs from the traditional solidarities of Gulf cooperation in favour of a more autonomous trajectory. The Emirates, it would seem, is signalling that it no longer wishes to be defined solely as an \u201coil-producing state,\u201d but rather as a \u201cglobal architect of energy policy.\u201d<\/p>\n

This marks a moment in which states begin to refashion not only their strategies but their very identities. No longer content to remain tethered to the fluctuations of \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0641\u0637, they endeavour instead to situate themselves within the intricate lattice of global politics. Oil, in this sense, represents an older identity; the future lies in economic diversification and sovereign diplomacy. The Emirati initiative thus reads as a prologue to a new era\u2014one in which the grammar of alliances itself is being rewritten.<\/p>\n

When reports emerged of the presence of the Egyptian Air Force on Emirati soil, observers of Middle Eastern politics were met with a development of striking significance. The visit of Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan alongside the Egyptian president to a squadron of fighter aircraft was not merely a military exercise; it was a gesture laden with strategic intent. It spoke, unmistakably, of a growing synchrony between two historically significant Arab states.<\/p>\n

One is compelled to ask whether this alignment signifies a new architecture of defence cooperation\u2014one in which air power assumes a central role in regional politics\u2014or whether it is simply a transient military arrangement. For we inhabit an age in which air forces serve not only as instruments of defence, but as vehicles of \u201cpolitical signalling.\u201d In this light, even the role of the Pakistan Air Force in Saudi Arabia may be read as part of a broader pattern, wherein aerial capability becomes entwined with the projection of political narratives.<\/p>\n

What, then, are the forces that have rendered relations between the Emirates and other Gulf states increasingly complex? This is not merely a diplomatic inquiry; it is one that reaches into the realms of civilisation and ideology. The politics of the Gulf is no longer a linear progression, but rather a dense and intricate web, each strand inextricably entangled with another. To describe inter-Gulf relations as a simple \u201cfraternal alliance\u201d now appears an oversimplification. In truth, every relationship is weighed upon the scales of interest. The pertinent question is not why relations falter, but how long they can endure\u2014for in the Gulf, interest has ever prevailed over sentiment.<\/p>\n

The demographic composition of the Emirates presents a most singular social tableau\u2014indeed, a \u201cremarkable social experiment.\u201d Of its approximately eleven million inhabitants, nearly ninety per cent are expatriates, placing it among the most distinctive societies in the world. It is, in effect, a state erected upon the shoulders of migrants, where labourers from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh form the backbone of its economy. This is a society forged through the confluence of \u201clocal leadership and global labour.\u201d<\/p>\n

Here, the preponderance of men and the relative scarcity of women point to a demographic imbalance that is more than statistical\u2014it is profoundly human. It is a story of solitude, toil, and migration. Such a society poses a quiet yet penetrating question: is the identity of a state rooted in its soil, or in its people?<\/p>\n

Economically, the Emirates projects an image of formidable strength. With a GDP of some $504 billion and a per capita income that ranks among the highest globally, it stands as one of the world\u2019s more prosperous nations. Yet this prosperity rests upon a finite foundation. Its wealth is anchored in vast reserves of oil\u2014reserves that, over time, assume not merely economic significance but political potency. The daily extraction of millions of barrels serves as a constant reminder that in this region, economy and politics are but two banks of the same river. Oil has conferred immense wealth, drawing the Emirates into the currents of global power; yet it is a wealth that demands both protection and power\u2014security as much as strength.<\/p>\n

The signing of the Abraham Accords in 2020 between Israel and the United Arab Emirates sent tremors through the political landscape of the Middle East. Ostensibly a step towards peace, these accords in truth marked the opening of a new diplomatic alignment. They were not merely instruments of statecraft, but rather a re-inscription of the region\u2019s political narrative\u2014a declaration that the categories of enmity and alliance would no longer be governed by creed or ideology, but by economic calculus and strategic necessity. The rapid expansion of trade following these contentious agreements within the broader Muslim world stands as testament to a sobering reality: that material interests increasingly prevail over doctrinal divisions.<\/p>\n

During the war in Gaza Strip, the posture of the Emirates resembled a double-edged sword\u2014an uneasy duality that reveals the intricate ambiguities of modern diplomacy. On the one hand, there were statements of condemnation and appeals to humanitarian conscience; on the other, the steady continuity of commercial relations. This dissonance is not an aberration but rather the defining characteristic of contemporary international politics, where contradiction has become a governing principle.<\/p>\n

The boycott of Qatar was, in essence, the outward manifestation of deeper ideological fissures within the Gulf alliance. Divergences over relations with Iran and attitudes toward the Muslim Brotherhood gave rise to a crisis sustained over several years. Accusations concerning terrorism and diplomatic proximity to Iran compounded the rupture, transforming it into one of the most enduring intra-regional disputes of recent times.<\/p>\n

The dispute between Iran and the Emirates over the three islands\u2014Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, and Abu Musa\u2014is not merely territorial but profoundly strategic. These islands are no ordinary fragments of land; they stand as sentinels over the arteries of global energy, lying in close proximity to the vital maritime corridor of the Strait of Hormuz. The contest over them is, in effect, a contest for influence over the flow of global commerce itself.<\/p>\n

It is one of the more striking paradoxes of the region that Iran and the Emirates remain, simultaneously, significant trading partners and political rivals. Here, politics and economics exist in a curious state of mutual contradiction\u2014at once negating and accommodating one another. Hostility and commerce, improbably, are seated at the same table.<\/p>\n

Relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia remained fraught with acute tension after 2016, yet their rapprochement in 2023 rekindled a measure of cautious optimism. It served as a reminder that in the Middle East, enmity is seldom permanent; the region\u2019s political currents are too fluid, too contingent, to permit fixed antagonisms.<\/p>\n

The war in Yemen is, in essence, a proxy conflict among regional powers, wherein local actors function as instruments in a wider strategic contest. The role of the Emirates within this theatre has been notably complex\u2014marked initially by military operations against the Houthis, followed by a partial withdrawal that suggests a strategy at once assertive and ambivalent. This is a domain where wars are seldom formally declared but rather conducted beneath a veil of denial and accusation. <\/p>\n

Investigations indicate that the support extended to various factions, coupled with covert operations, has rendered the conflict ever more intricate. By 2025, divergences between Saudi-led forces and groups backed by the Emirates had propelled the region toward yet another crisis\u2014one in which allies themselves appeared to drift into opposition.<\/p>\n

Conversely, the reintegration of Syria into the Arab League represented not merely a diplomatic manoeuvre, but a significant triumph of Emirati statecraft and a step toward political rehabilitation. It signalled the dawn of a new phase of reconciliation within the Arab world. The reopening of the embassy in Damascus was less an announcement than a quiet restoration of ties\u2014an understated yet profound shift in regional diplomacy.<\/p>\n

During the global crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic, humanitarian impulses served to narrow political divides and re-establish channels long thought severed. The pandemic imparted a stark lesson: that in moments of existential crisis, enmities recede into secondary importance. The exchange of trade delegations became the practical embodiment of renewed relations, for commerce has often proven the avenue through which politics reopens its closed doors. Such developments marked, in effect, the end of Syria\u2019s prolonged isolation within the Arab sphere.<\/p>\n

In the annals of political history, many decisions of consequence are not made in the full glare of public scrutiny, but rather along concealed pathways. At times, aircraft transport not only passengers but political realities. Reports suggesting the movement of certain elements of the Syrian leadership to the Emirates hint at a deeper truth\u2014that politics is often written behind closed curtains, where the transit of individuals may also signify the quiet transfer of historical momentum.<\/p>\n

Indeed, it is frequently the unseen decisions\u2014those absent from public spectacle\u2014that determine the true direction of states. In the politics of the Middle East, what remains invisible may carry greater weight than what is openly declared. The crisis in Syria was not merely a civil war; it stands among the most intricate geopolitical narratives of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. During this prolonged upheaval, the government of Bashar al-Assad was engaged not only in a struggle for domestic survival but also in a web of external, often discreet, engagements. Once reduced to near-total isolation, it gradually underwent a process that might be termed a \u201cmeasured diplomatic rehabilitation.\u201d Throughout this period, the Emirates did not entirely sever its ties with Damascus, but instead pursued a cautious\u2014indeed, meticulously calibrated\u2014diplomatic course.<\/p>\n

This is a world in which aircraft carry not only human beings but the very contours of political futures. Certain accounts suggest that the transfer of valuable assets and family members reflected the internal and external condition of the Assad government, illustrating a broader truth: that when states enter into crisis, their invisible structures become all the more active, shaping outcomes beyond the reach of public view.<\/p>\n

According to certain well-placed and credible sources, this period witnessed a series of financial, logistical, and diplomatic measures that subtly but significantly contributed to easing the isolation of the government of Bashar al-Assad. Among the developments surrounding the Syrian leadership, it is suggested that elements within its inner circles undertook initiatives\u2014particularly in matters of finance and mobility\u2014that opened new channels of engagement with Gulf states, most notably the United Arab Emirates. This was a moment of quiet but consequential transition, wherein Gulf politics began to incline toward a new tendency: not the perpetuation of isolation, but the gradual logic of reintegration.<\/p>\n

The strategy adopted by the Emirates at this juncture departed in no small measure from the orthodoxies of conventional diplomacy. Rather than sealing doors, it chose to keep a narrow diplomatic aperture deliberately ajar. The intention was neither sentimental nor na\u00efve; it was grounded in a sober calculation\u2014that to push states such as Syria entirely into the opposing camp would be to deepen instability rather than contain it. The restoration of contact with Damascus thus formed part of a broader strategic reappraisal, one in which regional actors came to recognise that absolute isolation often breeds precisely the disorder it seeks to prevent. It marked, in essence, a turning point at which diplomacy in the Middle East began to pivot away from ideological certainties toward the steadier compass of practical interest.<\/p>\n

The case of Libya offers a stark illustration of how the weakening of a central state structure can fragment a territory into competing centres of power. After 2011, Libya ceased to function as a coherent nation-state and instead became a living laboratory of contested authority. The collapse following the fall of Muammar Gaddafi created a vacuum that was swiftly filled\u2014not by a singular successor, but by a mosaic of armed factions, tribal alliances, and external actors, each vying for influence. In this transformation, Libya became less a state than a zone of conflict in which sovereignty itself appeared diffused and uncertain. The fronts at Benghazi and Tripoli were not merely internal battle lines; they formed part of a wider contest among regional and global powers, an undeclared war in which influence, rather than ideology, became the principal currency.<\/p>\n

Within this complex theatre, the Emirates maintained relations\u2014direct or indirect\u2014with various factions, extending support where its interests so dictated. Its backing of forces aligned with Khalifa Haftar in eastern Libya was indicative of a broader reality: that the conflict was never purely domestic, but deeply enmeshed in the strategic calculations of external actors. This was an era in which the very concept of the state in the Arab world appeared to erode, its traditional contours fading as non-state actors assumed ever greater prominence and authority.<\/p>\n

The tragic loss of students in a military incident near Tripoli in January 2020 brought into sharp relief the changing character of warfare itself. It compelled a troubling question: have modern wars become more brutal, or merely more impersonal? In contemporary conflict, the adversary is seldom visible; he resides, more often than not, behind a screen. The deployment of drone technology in Libya and elsewhere has fundamentally altered the nature of war\u2014collapsing distances while amplifying the moral ambiguities that accompany the use of force. Airstrikes across Tripoli and other regions signalled a departure from traditional modes of engagement. This is an age in which wars grow increasingly mechanised, even as human suffering becomes more silent; where technology and ethics stand in uneasy confrontation. The enemy is no longer a figure upon the field, but a digital coordinate\u2014an abstraction that renders modern warfare at once more efficient and more disquietingly inhuman.<\/p>\n

The Emirates, for its part, has frequently denied direct intervention in Libya. Yet such denials are not merely defensive reflexes; they reflect a broader and well-established doctrine of contemporary diplomacy, whereby states seek to preserve influence while avoiding overt accountability. This policy of being \u201ceffective yet unobtrusive\u201d has become a defining pillar of Gulf statecraft, enabling states to shape outcomes across regions while remaining, at least formally, insulated from international censure.<\/p>\n

The crisis in Sudan, though outwardly domestic, bears the unmistakable imprint of regional engagement. Allegations surrounding the formation and support of groups such as the Rapid Support Forces suggest a shifting balance in which state institutions weaken even as non-state actors gain \u0642\u0648\u0629 and autonomy. This region of Africa, once regarded as peripheral to global politics, now finds itself drawn into its very centre. Warfare here is conducted not solely through arms, but through training networks, financial channels, informal structures, and strategic alignments. It is, in every sense, a theatre of layered contestation\u2014simultaneously local, regional, and global.<\/p>\n

Sudan\u2019s recourse to the International Court of Justice underscores another evolution: that wars are no longer confined to battlefields but are increasingly waged within legal forums. Courts themselves have become extensions of the diplomatic arena. This is a new arena in which law is neither neutral nor detached but deeply entangled with the balance of power.<\/p>\n

International law, in practice, often serves as a shield for the strong and a barrier for the weak. The dismissal of cases is seldom a purely juridical act; it is frequently an expression of underlying political equilibrium. Thus, certain disputes may be extinguished in law yet persist in politics. The fundamental limitation of international law lies precisely here\u2014that without the backing of power, its enforcement remains uncertain. Decisions may be sound in principle, yet constrained in effect, revealing the enduring truth that in the councils of nations, justice and power remain inextricably intertwined.<\/p>\n

The ports of Somalia today are no longer mere hubs of commerce and exchange; they have assumed the character of strategic assets\u2014pillars upon which the edifice of contemporary geopolitics increasingly rests. To command influence over them is, in effect, to shape the currents of trade across the Indian Ocean itself. Agreements involving the United Arab Emirates and other powers testify to a broader transformation: that the littoral arc of East Africa and the Indian Ocean has entered decisively into the theatre of global politics.<\/p>\n

The prospective recognition of Somaliland signals not merely the opening of a new chapter in Middle Eastern affairs, but a deeper shift in the very conception of statehood within the international order. It suggests a world in which even modest territories may be drawn into the circuitry of alliances and diplomatic networks. Recognition, in such a context, is no ceremonial gesture; it carries tangible political consequences, capable of recalibrating the balance of power across an entire region.<\/p>\n

Port agreements, in this light, emerge as emblems of a wider reality: that maritime routes have become the new loci of political authority. Sea lanes now constitute a form of global currency, their control conferring both economic leverage and strategic advantage. The evolving arrangements between Somalia, Ethiopia, and Somaliland underscore a fundamental truth\u2014that geography is no longer merely a matter of land, but a medium of political negotiation and strategic bargaining.<\/p>\n

Naval bases, in the present age, occupy a place analogous to that once held by fortresses, frontier outposts, and fortified cities. They are instruments of both commercial oversight and military reach, symbols of a state\u2019s capacity to project influence across distant waters.<\/p>\n

Diplomatic crises, more often than not, arise from accusations that appear trivial on the surface yet conceal profound implications. Violations of airspace, for instance, have frequently served as the starting point of far-reaching confrontations. The tensions between Algeria and the United Arab Emirates offer a telling illustration: the Arab world can no longer be conceived as a unified bloc, but rather as a constellation of distinct and sometimes competing political centres.<\/p>\n

Support for, or opposition to, separatist movements has likewise transcended the bounds of domestic concern, evolving into a broader contest for regional influence. What was once internal has become, unmistakably, international.<\/p>\n

During the era of Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the Emirates grounded its diplomacy in principles of reconciliation, mediation, and regional stability\u2014foundations that secured for it the reputation of a measured and moderate state. Its role as an intermediary in Arab disputes earned it both credibility and esteem, a legacy that now stands under considerable strain. In its earlier phase, the Emirates was identified chiefly as a developmental and welfare-oriented polity. Yet in the aftermath of the Arab uprisings, a discernible \u062a\u062d\u0648\u0644 took place: the ethos of a welfare state gradually yielded to that of a more assertive and strategically driven actor.<\/p>\n

The rise of political movements associated with Islam introduced a further layer of complexity, reshaping both domestic and foreign policies across the Gulf. This division was not merely political, but ideological, compelling each state to align itself with differing regional forces. The divergences among Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates weakened the coherence of the Gulf alliance, exposing fractures that had long remained beneath the surface.<\/p>\n

Following the illness of Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the effective ascent of Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan marked a pivotal political transformation\u2014one that rendered Emirati foreign policy more active, more rapid in execution, and at times more assertive in tone. Statements directed toward Europe reflected a notable shift in discourse: that political Islam had come to be framed not as a matter of faith, but as a category of political and security concern. Warnings issued to European states appeared less as immediate critiques than as anticipatory reflections on future political changes. Debates in France concerning political Islam further underscored the emergence of ideological contestation on a global scale.<\/p>\n

In the contemporary world, war is no longer waged solely through arms, but through narratives, media, and networks of information. Allegations, reports, and orchestrated campaigns have become integral components of state power. It is within this arena that the boundary between reality and perception grows increasingly indistinct.<\/p>\n

The cumulative weight of these observations yields a stark and sobering conclusion: that Gulf politics is no longer anchored in ideology, but in the calculus of strategic interest. Traditional diplomacy has, in large measure, given way to intricate networks of indirect engagement. From Africa to Syria and Yemen, regions have become shared arenas of influence, pressure, and competition among global powers. War itself has transcended the battlefield, extending into courts of law, the domains of media, and the structures of economic exchange. It has assumed legal and informational forms, no less consequential than its military predecessors.<\/p>\n

Most significant of all is this: that states are no longer guided principally by doctrine, but by interest\u2014operating through a calculated synthesis of hard power, plausible denial, and the subtle exertions of soft influence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If one were to cast a reflective gaze across the modern history of the Middle East, it would become evident\u2014clear as daylight\u2014that politics here is inscribed less through the conduits of oil than through the very lifeblood of its peoples. As the shadow of tension between the United States and Israel on one side and …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2927,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,33,24,31,26,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2926","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-featured-columns","category-important-columns","category-international-columns","category-middle-east","category-pakistan-columns","category-today-columns"],"yoast_head":"\nWhy the Distance | from the UAE?<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"States are no longer guided principally by doctrine,but by interest\u2014operating through a calculated synthesis of hard power, plausible denial,\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Why the Distance | from the UAE?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"States are no longer guided principally by doctrine,but by interest\u2014operating through a calculated synthesis of hard power, plausible denial,\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Bitter Truth\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-05-22T09:13:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2560\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1280\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bitter Truth\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bitter Truth\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8\"},\"headline\":\"Why the Distance from the UAE?\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-22T09:13:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3782,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Featured Columns\",\"Important Columns\",\"International Columns\",\"Middle East\",\"Pakistan Columns\",\"Today Columns\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/\",\"name\":\"Why the Distance | from the UAE?\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-22T09:13:51+00:00\",\"description\":\"States are no longer guided principally by doctrine,but by interest\u2014operating through a calculated synthesis of hard power, plausible denial,\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":1280,\"caption\":\"Why the Distance from the UAE?\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Why the Distance from the UAE?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"description\":\"News, Technology, Sports, Health and more\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/BT-Logo.3.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/BT-Logo.3.png\",\"width\":280,\"height\":153,\"caption\":\"Bitter Truth\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8\",\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Bitter Truth\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Why the Distance | from the UAE?","description":"States are no longer guided principally by doctrine,but by interest\u2014operating through a calculated synthesis of hard power, plausible denial,","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Why the Distance | from the UAE?","og_description":"States are no longer guided principally by doctrine,but by interest\u2014operating through a calculated synthesis of hard power, plausible denial,","og_url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/","og_site_name":"Bitter Truth","article_published_time":"2026-05-22T09:13:51+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2560,"height":1280,"url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bitter Truth","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bitter Truth","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/"},"author":{"name":"Bitter Truth","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8"},"headline":"Why the Distance from the UAE?","datePublished":"2026-05-22T09:13:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/"},"wordCount":3782,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg","articleSection":["Featured Columns","Important Columns","International Columns","Middle East","Pakistan Columns","Today Columns"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/","name":"Why the Distance | from the UAE?","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg","datePublished":"2026-05-22T09:13:51+00:00","description":"States are no longer guided principally by doctrine,but by interest\u2014operating through a calculated synthesis of hard power, plausible denial,","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Why-the-Distance-from-the-UAE.jpg-scaled.jpeg","width":2560,"height":1280,"caption":"Why the Distance from the UAE?"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/why-the-distance-from-the-uae\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Why the Distance from the UAE?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/","name":"Bitter Truth","description":"News, Technology, Sports, Health and more","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#organization","name":"Bitter Truth","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/BT-Logo.3.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/BT-Logo.3.png","width":280,"height":153,"caption":"Bitter Truth"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8","name":"Bitter Truth","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Bitter Truth"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2926","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2926"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2926\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2928,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2926\/revisions\/2928"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2927"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2926"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2926"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2926"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}