博客

Dubai’s carefully cultivated image as a secure haven in the turbulent Middle East faced an unprecedented challenge on Saturday as Iranian missiles and drones targeted the emirate. The assault, launched in retaliation for a surprise US-Israeli operation, sent billowing smoke and flames across the skyline of the region’s premier business and entertainment capital.

The attack carries profound implications beyond immediate geopolitical tensions. Dubai has emerged as the world’s foremost beneficiary of post-pandemic economic trends, attracting London bankers, American finance professionals, and global entrepreneurs with its low-tax environment and efficient bureaucracy. The city-state’s property market has soared by 75% since 2020, while its financial institutions have become magnets for diverse capital flows—from Sudanese militia leaders trading gold to Eastern European expatriates fleeing conflict.

Symbolic footage of an Iranian drone striking the luxurious Fairmont Hotel on Palm Jumeirah circulated rapidly through expatriate communities, challenging the fundamental calculation that built modern Dubai. The evacuation of the Burj Khalifa—the world’s tallest building—and indefinite flight suspensions at Al Maktoum International Airport further underscored the city’s vulnerability.

Regional analysts note that Dubai’s essence depended on being a safe oasis in a troubled region. The attacks demonstrate that no amount of economic success can fully insulate the emirate from the Middle East’s unpredictable politics. This development potentially reprices risk assessments for the wealthy global citizens who have fueled Dubai’s boom, with competitors like Doha, Riyadh, and Muscat waiting to offer alternatives.

The strikes have unexpectedly unified Gulf Cooperation Council leaders, with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman expressing solidarity with Emirati leadership. Iran’s broader calculation appears to be forcing regional monarchs to either support US military operations or pressure Washington to de-escalate tensions—particularly if economic hubs continue suffering collateral damage.

The United Arab Emirates found itself on the frontline of regional conflict this Saturday as Iranian-origin missiles and drones targeted both Dubai and Abu Dhabi, marking a significant escalation in Middle Eastern tensions. The attacks represent the first major spillover of the US-Israeli conflict with Iran into Gulf states, with UAE air defense systems intercepting multiple projectiles while some managed to penetrate the protective shield.

Eyewitness accounts from Dubai residents described visible plumes of smoke near prominent landmarks including the Fairmont the Palm and Dubai Marina neighborhoods. Verified video footage circulating online appeared to capture the moment an Iranian Shahed drone struck the city. Simultaneously, Abu Dhabi residents reported hearing distinct sounds of missile interceptions overhead as defense systems engaged incoming threats.

The UAE stands among several Gulf nations—including Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain—that have come under Iranian fire, presumably targeting US military installations throughout the region. The Al Dhafra Air Base, located just outside Abu Dhabi and housing approximately 5,000 American military personnel, represents one such potential target.

In response to the crisis, UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan initiated emergency communications with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. All parties unanimously condemned Tehran’s aggressive actions against regional stability.

Official statements from UAE authorities emphasized that defense systems handled the missile strikes “with high efficiency, without any serious material damage,” while maintaining that “the situation remains under full control.” Despite these assurances, the Ministry of Economy issued guidance against stockpiling basic commodities, while the National Emergency Crisis and Disasters Management Authority warned residents against approaching or photographing fallen shrapnel.

Tragically, one Pakistani national confirmed lost his life due to shrapnel impact in Abu Dhabi, marking the first casualty from the attacks.

The aviation sector experienced significant disruption as authorities initially advised passengers to avoid Dubai International and Al Maktoum International airports before suspending all flights indefinitely by afternoon. Travelers like Mariam (a pseudonym) found themselves stranded for hours before receiving confirmation of flight cancellations, with luggage remaining at airports throughout the crisis.

Abu Dhabi resident Omar (also a pseudonym) described receiving location-based emergency alerts directing citizens to seek shelter in secure buildings and avoid windows—a precaution not universally distributed across the emirate.

Despite official attempts to maintain normalcy, visible signs of unease emerged throughout Dubai. Ridesharing driver Akhtar noted significantly lighter than normal traffic patterns “because of the Iran-America situation,” while numerous high-profile retail establishments including Apple’s flagship store and luxury brands like Maison Margiela, Kenzo, and Christian Louboutin closed their doors during typically busy Ramadan shopping periods.

The UAE’s strict regulations regarding unverified information sharing—with penalties reaching approximately $55,000 for violations—have created a climate of cautious communication among residents. Nevertheless, social media platforms showed Emirati citizens sharing images of smoke plumes and expressing support for national security services at local establishments such as shisha bars in Dubai’s Business Bay district.

In a dramatic escalation of Middle Eastern tensions, joint United States and Israeli military forces conducted targeted strikes against Iranian facilities on February 28. The offensive operation, authorized by US President Donald Trump, explicitly targeted Iran’s missile production infrastructure with declared objectives of crippling the nation’s defense capabilities.

According to strategic analysis by Professor Chen Qi, Director of the Center for China-US Relations at Tsinghua University, these military actions signify the complete breakdown of preliminary diplomatic negotiations between Washington and Tehran. The professor contends that the offensive serves dual purposes: compelling Iranian concessions in future potential discussions while simultaneously diverting domestic attention from pressing political controversies, including the ongoing Epstein scandal, ahead of critical midterm elections.

The military engagement has effectively unleashed what experts characterize as a ‘Pandora’s Box’ of regional instability, with immediate repercussions already materializing. Initial reports indicate retaliatory missile strikes targeting the US military installation in Bahrain, resulting in significant casualties estimated at approximately 200 American personnel killed or wounded.

Strategic analysts project that subsequent developments will predominantly depend on Iran’s retaliatory capabilities and strategic decisions. Particularly concerning to global security experts is the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz—a critical maritime choke point for international oil transportation. Such action could create politically unsustainable pressure on the Washington administration amid growing domestic scrutiny and escalating regional violence.

In a significant diplomatic development, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan convened their first telephone discussion since late December to address Iran’s recent retaliatory strikes against Gulf nations. The high-level conversation occurred on Saturday amid escalating regional tensions.

The UAE’s official WAM news agency reported that both leaders examined recent regional developments, particularly what they characterized as ‘blatant Iranian attacks’ targeting the UAE and several neighboring nations. The dialogue resulted in a strong joint condemnation of what they described as a ‘dangerous escalation that threatens the region’s security and undermines its stability.’

Demonstrating Gulf solidarity, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman pledged Saudi Arabia’s ‘full solidarity with the UAE’ and offered the kingdom’s resources to support any measures the Emirates might undertake. President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed expressed his gratitude for this show of support between the Gulf allies.

Concurrently, the UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a formal statement condemning the Iranian missile attacks that affected the Emirates and other Gulf states. The ministry emphasized the indivisible nature of regional security, stating that any infringement on the sovereignty of one nation constitutes a direct threat to the entire region’s stability.

The UAE reaffirmed its categorical rejection of using regional territories as arenas for settling disputes or expanding conflicts, warning of grave consequences from continued violations that could undermine both regional and international security. The statement highlighted particular concerns about threats to global economic stability and energy security.

Despite the firm stance, the UAE reiterated its call for restraint and diplomatic solutions, emphasizing that serious dialogue remains the most effective path to overcome the current crisis. The ministry simultaneously underscored that the Emirates retains its full and legitimate right to respond to the attacks, maintaining all options for self-defense.

A cloud of uncertainty hangs over the status of Iran’s top leadership following coordinated military strikes by the United States and Israel on Tehran this past Saturday. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi, in an interview with NBC, stated that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Masoud Pezeshkian remain alive “as far as I know,” asserting the situation was “under control” with most high-ranking officials safe, aside from a few military commanders.

Contradicting these assurances, Israeli media outlets have circulated growing assessments within their military intelligence suggesting Khamenei may have been killed in the attacks. Channel 12, citing anonymous Israeli government sources, reported there are “growing indications” the Supreme Leader perished, though the Israeli government has not officially confirmed this. Concurrently, Israel’s Kan state TV reported a complete lack of contact with Khamenei, leaving his fate unknown.

The strikes reportedly targeted nearly all senior Iranian leaders. According to three separate sources familiar with the matter who spoke to Reuters, Iran’s Defence Minister Amir Nasirzadeh and Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) commander Mohammad Pakpour are believed to have been killed. An unconfirmed report from an Iranian establishment source also indicated several senior IRGC commanders and political officials had died, though Middle East Eye could not independently verify these claims.

Iranian state media moved to project stability, confirming that areas near the presidential palace and Khamenei’s compound were struck but reporting that President Pezeshkian, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Foreign Minister Aragchi, and other key figures were unharmed. An official told Reuters that Khamenei was not in Tehran during the attack and had been relocated to a secure location.

The attacks have triggered a significant regional escalation. Iran launched retaliatory strikes targeting Israel and several Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar, with explosions reported near U.S. bases. A tragic strike on a school in southern Iran is reported to have killed at least 50 girls, aged between seven and twelve, though the full civilian casualty toll remains unclear.

The operation, described by former U.S. President Donald Trump in an eight-minute speech on Truth Social as “major combat operations in Iran,” was justified as a measure to prevent Iran from “threatening America and our core national security interests” through its nuclear program and long-range missile development. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu framed the offensive as an effort to enable the Iranian people “to throw off the yoke of tyranny.”

This event marks a severe intensification of hostilities, echoing Israel’s 12-day war on Iran in June of last year, which saw the assassination of several top Iranian military officials and nuclear scientists.

A series of coordinated US-Israeli aerial and missile assaults on Iranian territory this Saturday has ignited intense legal scrutiny regarding potential violations of established international legal standards. Prominent legal authorities are now challenging the legality of these military operations, which they argue constitute a clear breach of the United Nations Charter.

Professor Marko Milanovic, an esteemed expert in public international law at the University of Reading, maintains that these strikes represent unlawful actions under international law. “The operations are unequivocally illegal as they violate the UN Charter’s prohibition against unilateral use of force between sovereign states,” Milanovic stated in an interview with Middle East Eye. He further explained that while self-defense remains the only potential justification, the necessary legal requirements for such a claim remain unfulfilled in this instance.

In response to these attacks, Iran launched retaliatory strikes targeting Israel and several Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar. Initial reports indicate significant casualties, with at least 63 schoolgirls reportedly killed in a strike on an educational facility in southern Iran.

US President Donald Trump characterized the operation as a preventive measure against nuclear proliferation and “eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime.” Simultaneously, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu framed the attack as creating conditions for Iranian citizens to “remove the yoke of tyranny.”

The legal framework governing such actions derives primarily from Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force except in two specific circumstances: authorization by the UN Security Council or legitimate self-defense under Article 51 following an armed attack. Since the Security Council did not authorize these strikes, the legal justification rests solely on questionable self-defense claims.

International law recognizes three distinct perspectives regarding self-defense: preventive self-defense (widely rejected), anticipatory self-defense (permitted only against genuinely imminent attacks), and self-defense following actual armed aggression. Legal analysis suggests the US-Israeli actions fail to meet the standards for any legitimate self-defense claim, particularly given the absence of evidence regarding Iran’s immediate intent or capability to launch an attack.

The proportionality and necessity of the strikes also face serious legal challenges, especially considering ongoing diplomatic negotiations and the lack of evidence supporting claims about Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Oman’s foreign minister, acting as mediator in US-Iran talks, confirmed Iran’s formal commitment to never develop nuclear weapons—a position consistent with findings from US intelligence agencies and the UN nuclear watchdog.

Under international law, Iran retains the right to self-defense, provided its response remains necessary and proportionate. However, targeting facilities in third-party countries that weren’t involved in the initial attack presents additional legal complications.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court classifies aggression as one of four core international crimes, though jurisdiction doesn’t extend to American, Israeli, or Iranian leaders since these nations aren’t parties to the ICC’s founding treaty.