By A Deep Dive into the UAE’s Foreign Policy and Its Support for Militias in the Middle East
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has long cultivated an image as a beacon of stability and tolerance in the volatile Middle East. It was the first Arab nation to establish a ministry of tolerance, a move that signaled its commitment to fostering harmony within its borders. Yet, this carefully curated reputation stands in stark contrast to its foreign policy, which has increasingly drawn international scrutiny.
On April 10, 2025, Sudan brought a case against the UAE at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing the Gulf state of complicity in genocide by supporting the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group implicated in the mass killing of the Masalit ethnic group in West Darfur.
This accusation, coupled with the UAE’s broader strategy of backing militias across the Middle East, paints a troubling picture of a nation that preaches unity at home while pursuing division abroad.
The UAE’s Militia Strategy: A Sphere of Influence Through Chaos
A recent article by The Economist, published on April 16, 2025, titled “The UAE preaches unity at home but pursues division abroad,” underscores the UAE’s controversial role in the region. The piece highlights how the UAE has carved out a sphere of influence by supporting militias that either aim to seize control of states or fracture them into smaller, more manageable entities.
This strategy, while tactically effective in expanding Emirati influence, has come at a significant cost—both in terms of human lives and the UAE’s international standing.
In Sudan, the UAE’s alleged support for the RSF has been particularly contentious. The RSF, led by Mohamed “Hemedti” Dagalo, has been embroiled in a brutal civil war with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) since April 2023. The conflict has devastated Sudan, with the fiercest fighting occurring in areas like El-Geneina, the capital of West Darfur.
According to a 2024 Human Rights Watch (HRW) report, the RSF and its allied militias killed “at least thousands of people” in West Darfur, targeting the Masalit tribe and other non-Arab groups in what HRW described as “ethnic cleansing” and potential “genocide.” Entire neighborhoods were looted, burned, and razed, with mass torture, rape, and killings peaking in mid-June 2023.
Sudan’s acting justice minister, Muawia Osman, told the ICJ that the UAE’s “direct logistic and other support” to the RSF has been the “primary driving force behind the genocide.” Sudanese lawyers presented evidence of UAE-backed arms deliveries to the RSF via neighboring Chad, a claim supported by a UN panel of experts in 2024, which found the UAE’s involvement in the conflict to be “credible.”
The United States, in January 2025, officially recognized the attacks on the Masalit as genocide, and U.S. lawmakers have threatened to halt major arms sales to the UAE over its support for the RSF.
The UAE, for its part, has repeatedly denied these allegations. However, the mounting evidence—combined with the UAE’s history of backing militias in other conflict zones like Yemen and Libya—suggests a broader pattern of behavior aimed at securing geopolitical leverage through proxy forces.
A Tactical Shift: From From Militias to Maritime Diplomacy
While the UAE’s support for militias has drawn significant criticism, it would be a mistake to view this strategy as the entirety of its foreign policy. The UAE has recently begun to recalibrate its approach, shifting from overt military projection to what some analysts have termed “straits diplomacy.”
A report by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace notes that maritime security has become a key pillar of the UAE’s foreign policy, particularly in the Bab al-Mandab region, a critical chokepoint for global trade. The UAE has invested heavily in port infrastructure, such as the $442 million expansion of the Berbera port in Somaliland, aiming to transform it into a regional trade hub.
Similarly, the emirate of Fujairah has attracted significant investments from Asian powers, further solidifying the UAE’s role in ensuring the stability of the Arabian Peninsula’s maritime straits.
This shift, however, does not signal a complete abandonment of the UAE’s militia strategy. As the Carnegie report emphasizes, the adjustment is “tactical, not strategic.” The UAE remains committed to its ambition of becoming a middle regional power, and its support for militias persists, albeit now overshadowed by diplomatic efforts.
The stability of maritime routes serves both the UAE’s economic interests—such as infrastructure development and exports—and its geopolitical goals, including maintaining freedom of navigation and countering the influence of rivals like Iran.
The Human Cost of Division
The UAE’s foreign policy has had devastating consequences for the people of the Middle East. In Sudan, the RSF’s campaign of violence has displaced hundreds of thousands, many of whom have fled to neighboring countries like Chad, Uganda, and Kenya.
HRW’s interviews with over 220 survivors between June 2023 and April 2024 paint a harrowing picture of the atrocities committed in El-Geneina, where more than half the population is Masalit. The violence has not only shattered communities but also deepened ethnic divisions, making reconciliation and reconstruction even more challenging.
Beyond Sudan, the UAE’s support for militias in Yemen and Libya has similarly contributed to protracted conflicts and state fragmentation. In Yemen, the UAE has backed the Southern Transitional Council (STC), a separatist group seeking to establish an independent state in the south, further complicating efforts to resolve the country’s civil war.
In Libya, the UAE has supported Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA), which has sought to overthrow the UN-recognized government in Tripoli. While these efforts have expanded the UAE’s influence, they have also perpetuated instability, undermining the very regional stability the UAE claims to champion.
The UAE’s Domestic Paradox
At home, the UAE presents a starkly different image. The country has invested heavily in promoting tolerance and multiculturalism, with initiatives like the ministry of tolerance and high-profile interfaith events, such as the 2019 visit of Pope Francis.
These efforts have bolstered the UAE’s reputation as a progressive and stable partner in the region, attracting foreign investment and tourism. Yet, this domestic narrative clashes with the UAE’s actions abroad, raising questions about the sincerity of its commitment to unity.
Critics argue that the UAE’s foreign policy reflects a pragmatic, if cynical, approach to power. By supporting militias that divide states, the UAE ensures that its neighbors remain weak and fragmented, unable to challenge its growing influence.
At the same time, its focus on maritime security and diplomacy allows it to maintain plausible deniability, presenting itself as a responsible global actor committed to stability and economic development.
The Global Response: Accountability or Impunity?
The international community’s response to the UAE’s actions has been mixed. Sudan’s case at the ICJ represents a significant step toward holding the UAE accountable, but the court’s processes are notoriously slow, often taking years to reach a final decision.
In the interim, Sudan has requested provisional measures, asking the ICJ to order the UAE to refrain from any conduct that could contribute to genocide and to submit regular reports on its activities. Whether these measures will have a meaningful impact remains to be seen.
The United States, a key ally of the UAE, has taken a more assertive stance. In addition to recognizing the attacks on the Masalit as genocide, U.S. lawmakers have threatened to block arms sales to the UAE, signaling growing frustration with its role in Sudan.
However, the UAE’s strategic importance—both as a partner in counterterrorism efforts and as a hub for global trade—may limit the extent of Western pressure. Asian powers, particularly China and India, have deepened their economic ties with the UAE, further complicating efforts to isolate the Gulf state.
Looking Ahead: Can the UAE Reconcile Its Contradictions?
The UAE stands at a crossroads. Its support for militias has undeniably expanded its influence in the Middle East, but it has also tarnished its reputation and invited legal and diplomatic consequences. The shift toward maritime diplomacy suggests a recognition of these risks, but without a fundamental change in strategy, the UAE is likely to remain a polarizing force in the region.
For the people of Sudan and other conflict zones, the stakes could not be higher. The UAE’s actions have contributed to immense suffering, and any hope of resolution will require not only an end to its support for rogue actors but also a broader commitment to peace and reconciliation.
Whether the UAE can reconcile its domestic ideals with its foreign policy remains an open question—one that will shape the future of the Middle East for years to come.
1 Comment