The US strikes on Iranian targets this week were not simply retaliation for another military exchange in the Gulf. Iran’s nuclear ambitions, missile and drone programmes, support for proxy militias, and attacks on regional infrastructure and civilians remain central threats. But those dangers are also tied to something broader: for decades, Iran’s leadership has opposed the direction much of the Gulf has taken politically, economically and diplomatically.
Today, that opposition is increasingly being expressed through direct attacks on the states, infrastructure and way of life that have emerged across much of the Gulf over the past two decades.
Since February 28, the Iranian regime has launched 549 ballistic missiles, 29 cruise missiles and 2,260 drones at the UAE, according to its defence officials. Schools across the country shifted to distance learning until at least the end of this week. A strike on the Fujairah Oil Industry Zone injured civilians. Night after night, air defence alerts in the UAE have sent residents indoors as interceptors destroy incoming missiles and drones overhead.
The UAE’s air defence network, including American Patriot and Thaad systems, has intercepted the overwhelming majority of incoming threats. This reflects years of preparation and investment, carried out by a country that has protected its population consistently under sustained attack.
The UAE is not engaged in a nuclear weapons programme. It does not deploy proxy militias across the Middle East. It has made no claims on Iranian territory. It has spent decades building itself into a global centre for commerce, finance, tourism and culture. That is what Iran has chosen to strike: airports, ports, energy infrastructure, financial centres and civilian areas.
Over several decades, the UAE has built a global hub for investment, talent and long-term living. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have also spent years building economies that draw global investment and talent while becoming places where people increasingly choose to live, work and build their futures. Economies once heavily dependent on energy now include aviation, logistics, finance, technology and tourism as major drivers of growth. These societies have expanded opportunity and openness while maintaining their religious identity and cultural traditions.
This stands in contrast to the system enforced by the Iranian regime. Governance in Iran is tightly controlled by religious doctrine, strictly upheld by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and security institutions that harshly punish dissent. The regime presents this model as the only legitimate form of Islamic governance. It leaves little space for alternative models of governance or social organisation.
That claim now competes with clear alternatives across the Middle East. Gulf states have demonstrated that economic growth, global engagement and religious life can develop together without the same degree of state control.
The UAE also made a decision to establish formal relations with Israel. This altered a long-standing regional dynamic. For decades, Iran’s leadership has treated Israel with hostility, issuing repeated threats against its existence and calling for its destruction, as a central feature of its regional posture. The UAE’s move showed that countries in the Middle East can pursue different paths, grounded in national interest and the pursuit of long-term stability and prosperity. It also introduced a precedent that runs directly against Iran’s effort to organise the region around confrontation and war.
Taken together, these developments help explain why Iran’s conflict with the Gulf extends beyond military confrontation alone. They stand in direct opposition to Iran’s broader ambitions. A country that represents economic openness, stability and independent decision-making challenges the narrative that the Iranian regime promotes about how the Middle East must function, and what it seeks to project beyond it.
The UAE has remained operational through repeated attacks. Flights land and depart. Businesses open each day. Financial systems function. Daily life continues, even under strain. The same holds across much of the Gulf. In my conversations with residents, as well as business and professional contacts across the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, there is a consistent view that leadership is managing the situation effectively and maintaining stability.
Iran’s actions make clear that a country pursuing economic openness, global integration and independent diplomacy can be subjected to sustained attack. They also signal to neighbouring states that economic openness, independent diplomacy and normalisation with Israel come with risk.
The UAE’s response sends a different message. It is reflected in continuity, in systems that hold and in a country that has not reversed course.
What is taking place over the skies of the UAE reflects an effort to damage a model that has taken shape across the Gulf, one built on stability, growth, prosperity, independent decision-making and the opportunity for people to live well and build meaningful lives.
What Iran is trying to damage has not broken under sustained attack, and I do not believe it ever will.
