E-Paper
One meeting, many messages: The significance of Netanyahu's visit to UAE, and what it means for India
The significance of Netanyahu's meeting lies in the fact that Israel and the UAE are no longer keeping their strategic engagement out of public view.
Prefer HTon Google
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reported meeting with UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Abu Dhabi marks more than a high-profile diplomatic engagement. It signals a public consolidation of the Israel–UAE partnership at a time when the Middle East is under mounting strain from Iran, the Houthis, Gaza-related tensions and rapidly shifting regional alliances.
In a conversation with senior anchor Aayesha Varma on Point Blank, Hindustan Times Executive Editor Shishir Gupta described the meeting as a consequential moment for regional security, diplomacy and India’s strategic interests. The discussion focused on what the visit could mean for the UAE, Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Abraham Accords and the proposed India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor.
According to Gupta, Netanyahu arrived in Abu Dhabi on September 27 with a high-level delegation that included senior Israeli security and political officials. The Israeli leader was accompanied by his wife, the National Security Council chief, the Mossad chief and political and military advisers. He was received by Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, popularly known as MBZ, with the two leaders holding lengthy talks that reportedly covered bilateral relations, Iran, regional security and the wider Middle East situation.
A Meeting With Multiple Messages
Gupta said the significance of the meeting lies in the fact that Israel and the UAE are no longer keeping their strategic engagement out of public view. Since the UAE signed the Abraham Accords in 2020, relations between the two countries have expanded across trade, technology, tourism, intelligence and defence-related cooperation. However, a visit by Netanyahu to Abu Dhabi, particularly amid a volatile regional climate, carries a stronger political and security message.
The first message, Gupta argued, is directed at Iran. The UAE, despite being one of the Gulf’s major economic and commercial hubs, has faced security threats in recent years, including attacks claimed by the Iran-backed Houthi movement in Yemen. The public display of engagement with Israel underlines that Abu Dhabi is not isolated and has access to security partnerships with one of the region’s most capable military and intelligence powers.
The second message is for other regional actors attempting to shape new blocs and alliances in the Middle East. The meeting projects the UAE as an independent strategic player—one that is prepared to work openly with Israel while preserving its own national interests and regional standing.
ALSO READ | Over France, into Manhattan: How Netanyahu travelled on an ICC warrant without arrest
Gupta also said the timing of the meeting matters because it counters speculation of strains between the Israeli and Emirati leaderships. There had been suggestions of friction and reports linked to the political debate in Israel, but the meeting itself, he argued, puts such claims aside. Netanyahu and MBZ appearing to engage at the highest level reinforces the idea that the Israel–UAE channel remains active and significant.
Iran, Houthis And Gulf Security
The broader context behind the meeting is regional security. Iran’s network of aligned armed groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, has emerged as a central concern for Israel, the Gulf states and the United States. Gupta said the UAE’s earlier experience of Houthi missile and drone attacks has made air defence, intelligence-sharing and early-warning capabilities especially important.
Israel, he noted, has advanced experience in countering drones, ballistic missiles and other aerial threats. Israeli intelligence and radar capabilities could be valuable to the UAE in identifying and tracking incoming threats. The public optics of Netanyahu’s visit, therefore, may be intended to reinforce deterrence—not only against the Houthis, but also against any wider Iranian effort to pressure the Gulf.
The message is that a strike on the UAE would no longer be seen simply as an attack on a Gulf state. It could have implications for a broader security partnership involving Israel and, indirectly, the United States.
ALSO READ | At UN, Netanyahu brandishes pager: ‘Remember the beepers? Hezbollah sure does’
Gupta also linked the meeting to wider concerns around energy security and maritime routes. With disruptions and military tensions affecting the Strait of Hormuz and other regional waterways, the Gulf’s oil-export infrastructure, shipping lanes and alternative pipeline routes are becoming increasingly important. In such an environment, security partnerships are no longer just about military threats; they are also about protecting trade, energy flows and economic confidence.
No Evidence Of Wider Arab Participation
Social-media reports claimed that representatives from countries such as Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Libya and Qatar may have attended or been linked to the Abu Dhabi meeting. Gupta, however, cautioned against accepting those claims.
Based on his conversations in Abu Dhabi, Tel Aviv and Washington, he said there was no confirmation that other Arab representatives were present. In his assessment, the meeting was primarily between Netanyahu and MBZ, and that alone was sufficiently significant.
Gupta pointed out that Saudi Arabia has not formally joined the Abraham Accords, even though it has its own channels of engagement and strategic interests involving Israel. Riyadh also sees itself as a principal regional power and would be unlikely to participate in a meeting involving Israeli leadership through a third-country arrangement if it preferred a direct diplomatic format.
Qatar, meanwhile, has had complicated relations with the UAE and has sought to retain its own distinct role in regional diplomacy. The reports about a larger gathering, Gupta suggested, may reflect speculation rather than verified developments.
A Challenge To Competing Regional Blocs
The meeting also comes amid growing debate over competing political and strategic alignments in the Muslim world. Gupta referred to a grouping involving Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, describing it as a bloc shaped in part by political positions on Gaza and broader regional influence.
Turkey and Pakistan have strongly criticised Israel over the Gaza conflict, while Saudi Arabia continues to balance its regional leadership ambitions, security concerns and engagement with the United States. Saudi-Israel normalisation remains a major but unresolved question in Middle East diplomacy.
ALSO READ | Netanyahu takes on Mamdani, warns Iran's ‘murderous dictatorship’ at UN as delegates storm out
Against that backdrop, the Israel–UAE relationship provides a different model: one centred on formal diplomatic recognition, economic cooperation, security coordination and pragmatic state interests. For MBZ, Gupta said, the UAE’s priorities appear rooted in growth, stability, technological advancement and resistance to political Islam rather than ideological confrontation.
This makes Abu Dhabi’s relationship with Israel particularly consequential. It sends a signal that the Middle East is not moving in one uniform direction, and that several states are seeking practical security and economic arrangements even amid intense public anger over Gaza.
Why India Has A Stake
For India, Gupta described the development as a positive one. New Delhi has close strategic relationships with both Israel and the UAE. India’s ties with Israel span defence, agriculture, innovation, cyber capabilities and technology, while its partnership with the UAE has expanded sharply under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President MBZ.
The India–UAE relationship has become one of New Delhi’s most important partnerships in the Gulf, covering trade, investment, energy, defence, food security and logistics. India also sees the stability of the Gulf as essential because of its dependence on regional energy supplies, trade routes and the presence of a large Indian diaspora.
A stronger Israel–UAE security partnership could also revive momentum around the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor, or IMEC. The proposed connectivity initiative envisages linking India to the UAE by sea, connecting Gulf ports to Israel through rail and logistics infrastructure, and then linking onward to Europe through Mediterranean routes.
Gupta said the corridor could potentially use key nodes such as Fujairah and Aqaba to move goods, equipment, energy and food supplies from India through the Gulf and Israel to European markets. But such a project depends heavily on regional security and political cooperation. Continued Israel–UAE engagement could therefore provide an important foundation for restoring confidence in the corridor.
Netanyahu’s Domestic Political Gain
The Abu Dhabi visit may also matter for Netanyahu’s domestic political standing. Gupta noted that Israeli elections are difficult to predict, particularly when opposition forces are attempting to consolidate against a long-serving prime minister.
However, the meeting gives Netanyahu an opportunity to portray himself as a leader capable of preserving Israel’s regional relationships and strengthening the country’s security partnerships. A public engagement with the UAE leadership allows him to point to a diplomatic success at a time when Israel’s security policies, the Gaza war and tensions with Iran remain central issues in Israeli politics.
For Netanyahu, Gupta said, the visit reinforces his argument that Israel can maintain strategic ties in the Arab world while standing firm on its security agenda. Whether that translates into electoral gains will depend on the broader political mood in Israel, but the meeting is likely to be presented by his supporters as a clear diplomatic plus.
Ultimately, the Netanyahu–MBZ engagement reflects the Middle East’s increasingly complex geopolitical landscape. It highlights the enduring relevance of the Abraham Accords, the shared concerns over Iran and the Houthis, and the growing importance of partnerships that combine security, technology, investment and trade. For India too, a more stable and connected Israel–UAE axis could create new strategic and economic opportunities.
