Arab Press Reactions to the UAE Spying Scandal
Qatari and pro-Iran media translated the Washington Post's story on Emirati meddling in U.S. politics. The UAE's media obviously did not.
U.S. intelligence agencies have been circulating a classified report on “illegal and legal” political meddling by the United Arab Emirates, the Washington Post reported earlier this week. As I noted, the UAE has wooed large parts of America’s political class with offers of jobs or funding, and the leaked report is the Biden administration’s warning for officials to get their loyalties straight.
Washington is far from the only place where the UAE uses “illegal and legal” means to spread its influence. The oil-rich monarchy has tried to buy everything from favorable media coverage to military coups and mercenary armies in the Arab world. This soft power strategy has succeeded to an extent, as the Emirati leadership remains relatively well-liked among Arab publics despite the UAE’s very unpopular policies.
The idea that the UAE’s American patrons dislike this sort of activity in their own backyard obviously has implications for Middle Eastern politics. Media affiliated with the UAE’s geopolitical rivals — Iran and Qatar — covered the story. Stations owned by the Emirati royals and their allies obviously did not.
And a Jordanian publication mocked the idea that Washington would take offense to Emirati lobbying, when it allows Israel to wield influence over American politics.
Al Mayadeen, a Lebanese news outlet with a pro-Iran slant, covered the story twice. The first article summarized the original Washington Post report. The second translated a Washington Post cybersecurity newsletter that focused on the details about Emirati hacking.
The former had one translation error, stating that the report on Emirati activities was written by the CIA. In fact, the report was compiled by the National Intelligence Council, which serves as a clearinghouse for information from different U.S. government bodies.
The party newspaper of Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed party in Lebanon, gloated over the Washington Post’s coverage. It ran an op-ed by the Iraqi writer Adel al-Juburi titled “America makes embarrasses its allies and followers...the UAE for example.” Al-Juburi summarizes the history of Emirati support for U.S. policy, then states:
Despite the UAE identifying with and assimilating into U.S. policy, especially in regards to the Zionist entity,1 and despite the major American economic interests in [the UAE], Abu Dhabi is not safe from U.S. targeting.
After summarizing the Washington Post’s report, he argues:
The UAE, small in size and capabilities, wanted to penetrate the United States, the global superpower, which unmasked the former and exposed it to scandal. This is the case for subordinates who believe they have become great and influential. Recent history provides us with numerous examples of glaring American betrayal against its closest and most important clients, such as Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi of Iran, and Saddam Hussein, and Hosni Mubarak,2 and so on.
Qatar’s state-funded news outlet Al Jazeera also ran a short summary of the Washington Post story.
The Palestinian diaspora newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi printed the most complete translation of the Washington Post article that I could find. Al-Quds is run by Palestinian exiles in London and funded by Qatari interests.
It’s worth examining the difference between Iran and Qatar’s conflict with the UAE. Iran leads the militant opposition to U.S. presence in the region. It sees Saudi Arabia and the UAE as both U.S. outposts and major instigators of U.S. aggression. There is an active, violent Emirati-Iranian proxy war in Yemen.
Qatar presents itself as more of a loyal opposition, backing Islamist and populist movements against the status quo, but from within the framework of the U.S.-led regional order. It often uses the same soft power tactics as the UAE.
Nonetheless, the UAE has treated Qatari influence as a serious threat. The two sides have fought a proxy war over Libya in recent years. In 2017, Saudi Arabia and the UAE blockaded Qatar in response to its soft power activities, including its support for Al Jazeera. Saudi Arabia was reportedly ready to go to war over the issue.
For obvious reasons, Emirati and Saudi media did not touch the Washington Post’s report. There was no mention of it from Sky News Arabia, co-owned by an Emirati royal, or from Asharq Al-Awsat and Al Arabiya, owned by Saudi royals.
The U.S.-funded station Alhurra, however, covered the Washington Post report at length. Honestly, good on them. Alhurra is based in Dubai and has been criticized for its closeness to the UAE. U.S.-funded news outlets in general face pressure to serve a hawkish version of U.S. policy. It is always good to see American tax dollars going towards balanced, critical coverage despite these pressures.
Finally, the Jordanian satire site Alhudood mocked the American reaction to Emirati lobbying. Think of it as an Arab version of The Onion. I’ll leave the full translation here:
Washington warns the UAE of dire consequences if it continues copying the Israel Lobby
U.S. President Joe Biden expressed the strongest outrage at Emirati leaders, calling them “bad boys.”
Reports had confirmed that the UAE interferes in U.S. foreign policy and spends large amounts of money to change the opinion of decision-makers and the public, to prevent them from looking at the UAE in a way that the UAE does not like or does not serve the UAE’s efforts to top the list of U.S. weapons customers.
As if they are a real, respectable, and influential lobby like the Israel Lobby.
Biden emphasized that this is a cheap, poor, flawed imitation of a country that built up its media campaigns with leadership and innovation. The Zionist lobby was smarter and much more skilled at creating a mechanism to control all aspects of American political life, to the extent that it is considered candidates’ ticket to the presidency.
A few million dollars here and there — a senator here and a think tank there — are not enough to buy the silence of the American regime and the Washington Post. It costs billions of dollars, and a bit of a guilt complex.
Biden stressed that it is foolish for the UAE to try to break into this lobbying game and waste its money, when it shares the same goals with Israel anyways.
“Repetitive, lowbrow, and cheap,” he said. “Did Israel shortchange you in a way that made you try to influence U.S. foreign policy by yourselves? They let you buy weapons, come into the Holy Land, and share in the joy of repressing Palestinians. My God, if you keep gambling against Israel, I’ll take away your annual quota of American weapons and put Ambassador Al-Otaiba in the ‘naughty chair,’ so he can think about his mistakes, and learn that no one who interferes with other countries’ politics is allowed to get arrogant.”
On their part, the UAE’s rulers sent urgent text messages to the Emirati-American marketing team — which has spent $154 million dollars on its campaigns so far — ordering them to stop work immediately on the new logo and graphics package that were supposed to launch this week. Alhudood obtained it through a backdoor in the Pegasus app,3 which they left open when they installed it on our devices:

The UAE led the Abraham Accords, a U.S.-backed effort to normalize relations between Arab states and Israel.
Hosni Mubarak was the former Egyptian president deposed in the 2011 revolution. The United States had provided the Egyptian government with billions of dollars per year in aid for decades, but put out contradictory messages once the uprising began.
See also Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi by Amy Austin Holmes (2019).
Pegasus is an Israeli spyware app. The UAE has reportedly used it to spy on one of Jamal Khashoggi’s wives, former British prime minister Boris Johnson, and the sheikh of Dubai’s ex-wife.