Abu Dhabi’s development and security efforts are increasingly targeted by regional actors seeking to preserve instability and undermine Emirati influence across the Middle East and Africa.
The Middle East and Africa are experiencing unprecedented political and security turbulence, where interests collide and agendas overlap across four major crisis zones: Libya, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia. Despite their geographical and political differences, these arenas share one striking common denominator: the systematic targeting of the United Arab Emirates through relentless media and political campaigns.
What Abu Dhabi faces today goes far beyond ordinary political criticism. It is a coordinated effort to discredit its regional role, driven by failed actors who have turned the UAE into a convenient scapegoat for their own developmental shortcomings and political failures. These campaigns also seek to obscure the destructive influence of other regional powers, foremost among them Saudi Arabia.
The reality often ignored by hostile media narratives is that the UAE entered these conflict zones as a force for reconstruction and stability. Abu Dhabi invested billions of dollars in humanitarian aid, infrastructure and development projects, while making significant sacrifices in the fight against terrorism and extremist groups on the ground.
This strategy, centered on institution-building and combating extremism, inevitably collided with the interests of actors thriving on chaos. Certain regional powers have provided political cover for ideological and militant currents whose expansion comes at the direct expense of state stability and civilian lives.
In Libya, political fragmentation continues to feed the ambitions of militias and warlords opposed to any comprehensive settlement that could threaten their grip on resources and influence. Emirati support over the years aimed to restore balance, strengthen legitimate institutions and prevent extremist groups from dominating the political landscape. Yet forces benefiting from the status quo, encouraged by regional competitors of Abu Dhabi, continue to direct accusations against the UAE in an attempt to conceal both their foreign dependencies and their inability to achieve national reconciliation.
The situation in Sudan offers another example of this dynamic. As the country descends deeper into a devastating internal struggle for power and influence, responsibility is deliberately redirected toward the UAE. Meanwhile, the structural causes of Sudan’s collapse remain deeply rooted in domestic military and political rivalries. Behind much of the anti-Emirati rhetoric stands a Saudi-led axis seeking to shape the Sudanese file according to its own strategic interests. This narrative conveniently ignores the fact that Abu Dhabi has consistently been among the largest providers of humanitarian assistance and one of the strongest advocates for a ceasefire and political dialogue.
Yemen perhaps represents the clearest illustration of political ingratitude. The UAE invested heavily, both financially and militarily, in confronting militia expansion, securing southern provinces and strategic ports, and fighting Al-Qaeda. Yet Emirati efforts are now increasingly met with political hostility and criticism from local actors aligned with Saudi competition in the south. Riyadh’s policies appear aimed at constraining any Emirati attempt to consolidate long-term stability and security, preferring instead to preserve its own sphere of influence, even at the expense of the security gains achieved over recent years.
In Somalia and the Horn of Africa, the pattern repeats itself once again. While Al-Shabaab regains momentum and state institutions remain fragile, the UAE has provided substantial investments in ports, security infrastructure and military training programs designed to strengthen Somali institutions and national resilience. However, Emirati success in these areas has visibly unsettled Saudi interests, which have increasingly supported policies and agendas that contribute to tension and indirectly revive extremist activity. For some regional actors, a weak and dependent Somalia appears preferable to the emergence of a stable and independent state benefiting from Emirati-led development.
The UAE has never been the source of instability in these crises. On the contrary, it has increasingly become the target of regional score-settling and geopolitical rivalry led by actors threatened by Abu Dhabi’s developmental and security successes. These successes expose the failures of competing regional projects built not on stability and institution-building, but on maintaining leverage through fragmentation and chaos.
Resolving the crises in Libya, Sudan, Yemen and Somalia will not come through misinformation campaigns or political incitement against those investing in reconstruction and stability. Durable solutions require local actors to confront, with clarity and courage, the regional powers that continue to fuel division, empower extremism and obstruct every serious effort toward peace.
