UAE cancels soccer match amid mounting tension with Iran
By James M. Dorsey
Increasingly strained relations between Iran and oil-rich
Arab Gulf states spilled on to the soccer pitch this weekend with the United
Arab Emirates cancelling a friendly match against the Islamic republic and
recalling its ambassador in Tehran.
The move against the backdrop of a war of words between
Iran and Qatar and a regional battle for influence with Saudi Arabia was in
protest against a controversial visit by
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to two disputed islands in the Gulf 60
kilometres off the UAE coast, Greater and Lesser Tunbs. Iran occupied the two
potentially oil-rich islands as well as a third one, Abu Musa, located near key
shipping routes at the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz in 1971 on the eve of
the formation of the UAE as an independent state. The visit was part of tour by
Mr. Ahmadinejad of the Iranian Gulf coast. Iran has threatened to close the
Strait of Hormuz if Israel or the United States were to attack its nuclear
facilities.
The UAE foreign minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al
Nahayan denounced the visit as a "flagrant violation of the UAE's
sovereignty'". His ministry said
the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) that groups Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, the
UAE, Bahrain and Oman would meet on Tuesday, the day the match was scheduled to
be played, to discuss the Iranian president's visit. The UAE immediately after
cancelling the soccer match withdrew its ambassador from Teheran.
Iranian soccer officials said they would file a protest
against the cancellation of the match that with world governing soccer body
FIIFA. They noted that Nigeria was ordered to pay $300,000 to the Iranian
football federation after cancelling in 2010 a friendly against the Islamic
republic on political grounds.
It is not immediately clear why Mr. Ahmadinejad chose to
provoke the UAE at a moment that Iran is engaged in six-party talks about its
nuclear program in a bid to weaken international sanctions and reduce the risk
of an Israeli and/or US military strike. A second round of the talks which
resumed in Istanbul this weekend for the first time in more than a year is
scheduled for May 23 in Baghdad.
The UAE last year emerged in remarks made by its
ambassador to the United States, Yousef al-Otaiba, as the first Gulf state to
publicly endorse military force to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power,
should peaceful efforts to resolve the standoff over Tehran’s nuclear program
fail. The UAE at the time also restricted Iran’s use of Dubai to imports goods
sanctioned by the United Nations and the United States. The ambassador's
remarks reflected the Emirates' mounting frustration with Iran’s refusal to
resolve the dispute over the islands.
Mr. Otaiba described a nuclear-armed Iran as the foremost
threat to the UAE, and one that needed to be neutralized at whatever cost. His
remarks suggested that in case of military action, the UAE would prefer a US to
an Israeli strike because that was less likely to fuel popular anger,
particularly among Shiites, at a time of widespread civil unrest in the Middle
East and North AFRICA
Mr. Otaiba described the UAE as the country most
threatened by Iran. Contrasting the
threat against the UAE with the danger a nuclear-armed Iran would pose to the
US, Mr. Otaiba said that a nuclear Iran would “threaten the peace process, it
will threaten balance of power, it will threaten everything else, but it will
not threaten you. . . . Our military . . . wakes up, dreams, breathes, eats,
sleeps the Iranian threat. It's the only conventional military threat our
military plans for, trains for, equips for. . . . There's no country in the
region that is a threat to the UAE [besides] Iran."
Satellite imagery last year revealed Iranian
installations on Abu Musa that included three missile launch pads, an elaborate
underground market, and a sports field with the words “Persian Gulf” emblazoned
on it -- a provocative reminder of Iran’s hegemonic view of a region the Gulf
states describe as the Arab Gulf. UAE
Foreign Minister Sheikh Zayed last year stopped short of comparing Iran’s
occupation of the islands to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory.
“Iran refuses to allow us to send teachers, doctors and nurses. I am not
comparing Iran to Israel, but Iran should be more careful than others,” Sheikh
Zayed said.
The UAE has worked to ensure that its security is closely
linked to U.S. and European security interests. French President Nicolas
Sarkozy last year inaugurated in Abu Dhabi France’s first military base in the
region. The base, which comprises three sites on the banks of the Strait of
Hormuz, houses a naval and air base as well as a training camp, and is home to
500 French troops. Alongside other smaller Gulf states, the UAE has further
agreed to the deployment of U.S. anti-missile batteries on its territory. The
UAE and Saudi Arabia are expected to spend up to $100 billion on arms
procurement in the next five years.
With his remarks, Mr. Otaiba signalled further that the
UAE was willing to pay a price for stopping Iranian nuclear proliferation, and
could afford to do so now that Abu Dhabi had cemented its predominance among
the UAE emirates following the financial crisis in Dubai.
“There will be backlash, and there will be problems with
people protesting and rioting and [being] very unhappy that there is an outside
force attacking a Muslim country,” Mr. Otaiba said. “That is going to happen no
matter what.”
But he added, “If you are asking me, 'Am I willing to
live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran,' my answer is still the same:
We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.”
James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S.
Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Nanyang Technological University
in Singapore and the author of the blog, The Turbulent World of Middle East
Soccer.
Comments
Post a Comment