The United Arab Emirates (UAE) released a detailed foreign‑ministry statement on 30 December 2025 refuting recent Saudi accusations about its role in Yemen. The diplomatic clash, sparked by a Saudi spokesperson’s claim of a “military operation at the Port of Mukalla,” has reignited questions about coalition coordination, the future of the Yemeni peace process, and the broader security architecture of the Gulf. This article examines the key facts, the historical context of UAE involvement in Yemen, and the potential implications for regional stability and the ongoing humanitarian crisis.
Background: The Saudi‑Led Arab Coalition and the UAE’s Evolving Role
Understanding the current dispute requires a quick review of the Saudi‑led Arab coalition that intervened in Yemen in March 2015. The coalition’s primary goal was to restore the internationally recognised government of President Abd‑Rabbu Mansour Hadi after the Houthi movement seized Sana’a in 2014. While Saudi Arabia has remained the coalition’s strategic commander, the UAE emerged as a crucial partner, providing air power, naval blockades, and ground troops.
Over time, the Emirati approach shifted toward a more focused counter‑terrorism mission in the southern governorates of Hadhramaut and Al‑Mahrah. There, United Arab Emirates forces targeted Al‑Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and Islamic State affiliates, while also supporting the Southern Transitional Council (STC), a separatist group that aligns with the coalition’s anti‑terrorism objectives despite its political differences with Hadi’s government.
By 2023 the UAE announced a gradual drawdown of combat troops, transitioning to a “support and advisory” posture. Nevertheless, Emirati personnel continue to operate from strategic locations such as the port city of Mukalla, which serves as a hub for humanitarian aid and security operations.
The Immediate Spark: Saudi Claims About Mukalla
Saudi Spokesperson’s Narrative
On 28 December 2025 a Saudi military spokesperson for the Arab Coalition issued a statement alleging that a convoy arriving at Mukalla was part of a “military operation” delivering weapons intended to fuel the Yemeni conflict. The communiqué further suggested that the UAE had pressured Yemeni factions to launch attacks that could jeopardise Saudi borders.
UAE’s Rebuttal and Key Points
The UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded with a comprehensive protest, labeling the Saudi narrative “fundamentally inaccurate” and “issued without prior consultation.” According to the Emirati statement:
- The vehicles delivered to Mukalla on 24 December were logistical assets—engineering and medical support vehicles—not weapons.
- The convoy operated under a joint Saudi‑Emirati coordination framework, with an explicit agreement that the assets would remain within the port’s secure perimeter.
- The UAE called for an immediate, transparent investigation to determine why the convoy was allegedly “targeted.”
By emphasizing “verified facts” and “high‑level coordination,” the UAE signalled a willingness to engage in a fact‑finding process while protecting its diplomatic reputation.
A Brief History of the UAE’s Involvement in Yemen
To gauge the significance of the Mukalla incident, it is essential to trace the evolution of Emirati engagement in Yemen:
- 2015‑2017: Direct Combat Support – The UAE contributed fighter jets, naval assets, and ground troops to the initial coalition offensive aimed at retaking Sana’a.
- 2018‑2020: Counter‑Terrorism Focus – Emirati forces shifted to southern provinces, conducting operations against AQAP and supporting local security units.
- 2021‑2023: Political Mediation – The UAE played a mediating role between the STC and Hadi government, facilitating power‑sharing agreements in the south.
- 2024‑2025: Advisory Presence – While combat troops were reduced, the UAE maintained a logistical footprint in Mukalla and continued to fund humanitarian projects.
This trajectory illustrates why the UAE is sensitive to any portrayal that suggests it is unilaterally influencing Yemeni factions or supplying weapons.
The Port of Mukalla Incident: Facts Versus Perception
According to the UAE’s clarification, the convoy that arrived on 24 December consisted of:
- Two engineering vehicles for infrastructure repair.
- One medical support vehicle equipped to treat coalition personnel.
- Logistical trucks carrying spare parts for existing UAE‑operated facilities.
The Emirati statement highlighted that these assets were intended exclusively for the maintenance of coalition‑run installations and for safeguarding personnel stationed in Mukalla. The claim that the convoy was “targeted” appears to stem from a misinterpretation of its purpose or a breakdown in communication between Saudi and Emirati command structures.
Rather than assigning blame, the UAE urged an “immediate, transparent investigation” to trace the chain of events that led to the alleged targeting. This measured response aims to preserve coalition cohesion while addressing the Saudi narrative that could damage the UAE’s image as a responsible regional actor.
Accusations of Coercion: UAE Denies Influence Over Yemeni Actors
Beyond the Mukalla episode, Saudi officials alleged that the UAE pressured Yemeni groups to launch operations threatening Saudi security. The UAE categorically denied these claims, stating that all its actions are taken “at the request of the legitimate Yemeni government” and within the framework of the coalition.
The denial is noteworthy because it touches on a long‑standing point of contention: the degree of autonomy the UAE enjoys in conducting operations on Yemeni soil. While Riyadh retains overall strategic command, Abu Dhabi has historically exercised considerable leeway—especially in the south—where its counter‑terrorism objectives sometimes diverge from Saudi political goals.
Regional Implications: Security, Terrorism, and Gulf Unity
Both the Saudi and Emirati statements reference the same set of security challenges that continue to plague Yemen:
- Al‑Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and Islamic State affiliates operating in the south.
- Houthi missile and drone attacks on Saudi infrastructure.
- The resurgence of Islamist groups linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.
The UAE warned that “the prevailing security challenges and threats posed by terrorist groups, including Al‑Qaeda, the Houthis and the Muslim Brotherhood, demand the highest levels of coordination, restraint and wisdom.” In the broader Middle‑East context, the Yemen conflict remains a proxy arena where Saudi Arabia seeks to curb Iranian influence, while the UAE focuses on preventing the spread of extremism into the Gulf.
Any fissure within the coalition—whether real or perceived—creates an opening for external actors, particularly Iran, to exploit the discord. Iranian support for the Houthis, including missiles and drones, could intensify if the coalition’s unity weakens.
International Reactions and Calls for De‑Escalation
The United Nations, which has mediated multiple cease‑fire attempts, called for “enhanced transparency among coalition partners” during recent briefings. A UN envoy to Yemen, speaking on condition of anonymity, warned that “internal disagreement within the coalition risks stalling the already fragile de‑escalation processes built over the past two years.”
Western allies echoed similar concerns. The U.S. State Department emphasized that “the fight against terrorism in Yemen is a shared priority, and cohesion among coalition members remains essential for achieving lasting peace.” The United Kingdom also urged Riyadh and Abu Dhabi to resolve their differences through diplomatic channels rather than public accusations.
What the UAE’s Statement Means for the Ongoing Conflict
The Emirati communiqué serves several strategic purposes:
- Protect Diplomatic Reputation – By refuting the weapon‑delivery allegation, the UAE safeguards its image as a responsible regional power and a key humanitarian donor.
- Demand Fact‑Based Dialogue – The call for “verified facts” and a joint investigation underscores the UAE’s desire for transparent, evidence‑based decision‑making within the coalition.
- Reaffirm Strategic Objectives – The statement reiterates the UAE’s long‑term goals: securing its borders, curbing extremist groups, and preserving the Saudi‑UAE partnership that underpins Gulf security.
By framing the issue as one of coordination rather than confrontation, the UAE hopes to restore trust with Saudi Arabia and maintain a united front against common threats.
Potential Path Forward: Coordinated De‑Escalation and Humanitarian Access
Experts suggest three practical steps to prevent future diplomatic spats and to advance a sustainable peace process in Yemen:
- Institutionalise Joint Operational Centers – Establish permanent, bilingual command hubs in key locations such as Mukalla to streamline communication and approve logistics movements.
- Launch a Coalition‑Wide Incident Review Board – A neutral panel, possibly overseen by the United Nations, could investigate any alleged breaches of coordination agreements.
- Prioritise Humanitarian Corridors – Ensuring that logistical convoys are clearly marked as humanitarian aid can reduce the risk of misinterpretation and protect aid deliveries to vulnerable Yemeni populations.
Implementing these measures would address the “verified facts” demand from the UAE while reinforcing the coalition’s collective commitment to de‑escalation.
Conclusion: Unity Is the Only Viable Path for Yemen’s Future
The latest diplomatic exchange between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates highlights the fragile nature of coalition warfare in a fragmented theatre like Yemen. While both governments publicly reaffirm their commitment to each other’s security and to the broader goal of Yemeni stability, divergent narratives about operational conduct threaten to undermine that shared purpose.
For the Yemeni people—who have endured years of displacement, famine, and relentless airstrikes—such intra‑coalition disputes risk translating into further humanitarian setbacks. The UAE’s appeal for “responsible handling of recent developments based on verified facts” places the onus on coalition leadership to institutionalise clearer communication channels, conduct joint investigations when incidents occur, and, most critically, sustain a unified front against the extremist forces that continue to exploit Yemen’s chaos.
If Riyadh and Abu Dhabi can reconcile their differences and present a coordinated, transparent approach, they may yet steer the war toward a negotiated political settlement. Failure to do so, however, could embolden the Houthis, give AQAP breathing room, and invite renewed external interference—outcomes none of the Gulf states can afford in an increasingly volatile Middle East.
