TEHRAN - The United Arab Emirates’ “direct involvement” in the US–Israeli aggression against Iran has come to light against the backdrop of a BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in India, alongside revelations that senior Israeli officials travelled to the small Persian Gulf state during the conflict.

A two-day meeting of BRICS foreign ministers in New Delhi ended on Friday without a common position on the US–Israeli war on Iran, which initially began on February 28. Despite an April 8 ceasefire, diplomatic efforts to secure a permanent end to the conflict have so far failed due to what Tehran describes as Washington’s “excessive, unacceptable and unrealistic” demands.

Speaking at the BRICS meeting, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called on member states to explicitly condemn the US and Israeli “violations of international law” and to take concrete action to halt warmongering and end impunity for those violating the UN Charter.

Despite Iran’s criticism of the UAE over its involvement in the US–Israeli war—including allowing the United States to use its territory to launch attacks on Iran during the 39-day conflict—Araghchi did not initially mention Abu Dhabi in his formal address “for the sake of maintaining unity.”

However, Khalifa bin Shaheen Al Marar, the UAE minister of state for foreign affairs, who represented his country at the BRICS meeting instead of the foreign minister, singled out Iran in his statement and called for condemnation of Iranian actions during the war. Iran maintains it did not attack the UAE itself, but only US military bases located on Emirati territory.

UAE ‘directly involved’ in aggression

Araghchi later requested the floor again after all member states had spoken.

“The UAE was directly involved in the aggression against my country… When the attacks started, they did not even issue a condemnation,” the Iranian foreign minister said.

He added that the UAE is “an active partner” in the US–Israeli aggression against Iran, citing reports that Emirati fighter jets participated in operations against Iran.

Araghchi further blamed the UAE for blocking the BRICS ministerial final statement. “The only reason they stopped the final statement was their support for Israel and the United States in their aggression against Iran, which is very, very unfortunate.”

Netanyahu’s secret UAE visit

Recent revelations about the visit of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the UAE have intensified speculation over Abu Dhabi’s role in enabling the conflict.

Netanyahu said he made a secret visit to the UAE and met President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, during the US–Israeli war on Iran. The meeting, according to his office, resulted in a “historic breakthrough” in relations between Tel Aviv and Abu Dhabi.

A source cited by the Times of Israel said Netanyahu and bin Zayed met in Al-Ain, an oasis city near the Oman border, on March 26, and that the meeting lasted several hours. It would have been Netanyahu’s first visit to the UAE since normalization under the 2020 Abraham Accords.

The UAE, however, denied the visit, calling the revelation “entirely unfounded.” Ziv Agmon, Netanyahu’s then-spokesman insisted the account was accurate.

Iran’s foreign minister wrote on X that “Netanyahu has now publicly revealed what Iran’s security services long ago conveyed to our leadership.”

He added, “Enmity with the great people of Iran is a foolish gamble. Collusion with Israel in doing so: unforgivable.”

Israeli intelligence chief visits UAE

Earlier the same week, the Wall Street Journal reported that Mossad director David Barnea had made at least two visits to the Persian Gulf state during the war to coordinate military actions.

Separately, David Zini, head of the Shin Bet domestic security agency, was also reported by Israel’s Kan public broadcaster to have visited the UAE to deepen coordination between the two countries’ intelligence and security agencies.

Growing concerns over covert coordination

Israel’s Channel 12 reported that Abu Dhabi fears escalation with Tehran if its behind-the-scenes coordination with the Tel Aviv becomes public.

According to the report, Emirati officials are increasingly concerned that exposure of intelligence and security cooperation with Israel would reinforce perceptions that the UAE is directly involved in the military assault against Iran.

Recent disclosures have further fueled these concerns. Senior US officials confirmed that Israel deployed an Iron Dome battery, along with personnel to operate it, in the UAE during the war on Iran.

As disclosures continue to surface, the UAE’s forceful denials increasingly echo Shakespeare’s line in Hamlet: “the lady doth protest too much.” The more Abu Dhabi rejects claims of involvement, the more the growing body of reports and acknowledgments from Israeli and Western sources fuels skepticism about its proclaimed neutrality.

Recent disclosures have further fueled these concerns. Senior US officials confirmed that Israel deployed an Iron Dome battery, along with personnel to operate it, in the UAE during the war on Iran.

As disclosures continue to surface, the UAE’s forceful denials increasingly echo Shakespeare’s line in Hamlet: “the lady doth protest too much.” The more Abu Dhabi rejects claims of involvement, the more the growing body of reports and acknowledgments from Israeli and Western sources fuels skepticism about its proclaimed neutrality.

Taken together, these revelations deepen questions over the extent of UAE alignment with Israeli and US military operations against Iran. While Abu Dhabi continues to publicly deny direct involvement, reports from Israeli media, Western outlets, and US officials point to a widening web of military and intelligence coordination.

For Tehran, these developments reinforce the view that the UAE is no longer a neutral Persian Gulf actor but is increasingly embedded within a regional security architecture shaped by Israeli strategic interests. In this context, the UAE appears to be drifting into the role of a forward partner in Israel’s regional posture, rather than an independent actor balancing regional relations.

Iranian officials warn that such alignment carries long-term strategic risks for Abu Dhabi itself, particularly as regional tensions deepen and lines between proxy involvement and direct participation continue to blur. Any continued reliance on Israeli military and intelligence cooperation against Iran will not remain cost-free, and could ultimately expose regional actors to consequences they may not be able to control.