UAE Rejects Iran’s Terror Threats Over Israel Peace Deal
Iran’s regime-affiliated media: Peace deal with Israel makes UAE “into a legitimate and easy target.”
The United Arab Emirates has hit back at Tehran over threats made by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) following a peace agreement reached by the country with Israel.
The historic peace agreement brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump between Israel and the UAE was a “huge mistake,” Iran’s Rouhani said. He accused the UAE government of betraying “Muslims and the Arab world.”
The Emirates faces a “dangerous future” for making peace with the Jewish State, the IRGC, Iranian regime’s military arm and U.S.-designated terrorist group, warned. The peace deal with Israel “will turn this small, rich country, which is heavily dependent on security, into a legitimate and easy target,” Iranian regime-affiliated newspaper Kayhan threatened.
The government of UAE summoned the Iranian envoy to “protest against the threats contained in Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s speech regarding the UAE’s sovereign decisions,” country’s state-run media reported.
“The UAE affirmed its absolute rejection of the language of inflammatory speeches delivered by the Iranian authorities following the peace accord reached between the UAE, the United States and the State of Israel,” the UAE’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Monday, “considering this an interference in its internal affairs and an attack on its sovereignty, as opposed to the principles of international law governing relations between states, which is completely unacceptable.”
Saudi Arabia’s English language newspaper Arab News reported the UAE’s response:
The UAE summoned the Chargé d’Affairs at the Iranian embassy in Abu Dhabi on Sunday over threats made in response to a peace deal with Israel.
The official was handed a “strongly worded memo” over threatening statements made by Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani regarding the UAE’s agreement with Israel to normalize relations, the state WAM news agency reported.
The Emirates’ foreign ministry said Rouhani’s statements were echoed by Iranian officials and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and that it considered this rhetoric “unacceptable and provocative.”
The ministry added that these statements will have serious repercussions on security and stability in the Arabian Gulf.The UAE rejects the inflammatory language used by the Iranian authorities following the country’s agreement with Israel, and considers the offensive statements an “interference in internal affairs and an attack on sovereignty.” (…)
GCC Secretary General Nayef bin Falah Al-Hajjraf also condemned the Iranian threats, saying they would have dangerous repercussions on the region.
Al-Hajjraf said the GCC stands with the UAE against any threats to its sovereignty and security.
While Arab states, including Egypt, Jordan, and Oman, welcomed the restoration of diplomatic relations between the UAE and Israel, Iran and Turkey joined the Palestinian leadership in denouncing the move. Turkish President threatened to suspend diplomatic ties with the Arab country, while PLO-controlled Palestinian Authority recalled its ambassador from Abu Dhabi.
Palestinian ‘worshipers’ on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount also fumed over the Trump-brokered peace deal on Friday, setting fire to the portraits of UAE crown prince Sheikh Mohammad bin Zayed. Elsewhere, Palestinians burned posters of U.S. President Trump, UAE ruler and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Their rage was shared by some in the European political class. Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn criticized the UAE for ‘letting down’ the Palestinians. “[Y]ou can’t just let your own brothers down in order to pursue economic interests and perhaps also have more security for yourself,” he lamented. “One can see for quite some time that solidarity with the Palestinians is no longer a priority, especially in the Gulf.”
Germany’s state-run DW News was equally dismayed at the prospect of peace between the Jewish State and its Arab neighbors. “Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ assessment was spot on: The historic agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a “betrayal” of Palestinian interests,” the German broadcaster complained.
President Trump: Israel-UAE deal a ‘truly historic moment’
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Everybody hates that Iranian regime. That’s why there has been an echoing silence every time Israel has destroyed their toys.
Maybe there can be consensus on pounding Iran into their very own stone age?
Iranian mullahs are cowardly girly men. To afraid to fight a straight up war they arm their proxies to do their dirty work and then deny it. They are far more proficient at brutalizing their own citizens.
And what’s up with the Eurotrash? They are thousands of miles away and hating the deal. It seems like the further away from Israel they are the louder they complain about attempting to make peace. It seems the countries that actually border Israel are more inclined to favor peace while the busybodies safely hundreds of miles away are too cowardly to do nothing but instigate. Kind of like a obnoxious in law living two towns over telling you how to work your marriage.
Funniest part of the Palestinians “withdrawing” their ambassador – the UAE has given the Pali’s tens of millions of dollars of aid over the years. The Palestinians have given back to the UAE – absolutely nothing. So now the Pali’s are crying “you big meanies! We’re not going to let you give us free money any more!!!” I’ll bet the UAE is just so, so, hurt over that.
UAE to the Pali’s – “Take your squeegee and go hang out on someone else’s street corner!!!”
Last Friday, the UN voted on an arms embargo against Iran with only the US and Dominican Republic voting in favor. Not a single EU nation voted opting instead to abstain from the vote. This happened AFTER last week’s Israel/UAE deal.
Also, keep in mind that Tom Cotton was the only Republican senator to show any spine against the Iran arms deals which will now allow Iran to buy arms from China and Russia. So how secure are these new deals? Can we trust McConnell and the rest of the Manchurian Republicans to ratify these deals. Only if Trump wins big.
Huh? Why would the US senate have any say on deals between Iran and Russia or China?
On the other hand I read somewhere that Trump may finally trigger the snapback clause in the original Security Council resolution. I cannot fathom why he didn’t do this the day he was inaugurated. It’s the one good thing 0bama did in all this mess; despite all the help he gave Iran, he did install this one clause that would let him bring the whole thing crashing down if he ever wanted to. Trump inherited that power, and for nearly four years he has refused to use it. Maybe now he will.
In case anyone’s forgotten what it is, the snapback clause says that if the USA (or any other party, but who else would?) alleges that Iran is not complying with its obligations, 30 days later all the UN sanctions automatically come back. There’s a mechanism for investigating the complaint, but it doesn’t matter, because no action by anyone is required to bring the sanctions back; the moment the complaint is lodged with the Secretary General the clock starts ticking, and it takes a Security Council resolution to stop it. Which the USA can veto. So Trump could have brought back all the sanctions on Feb 20, 2017.
And these are mandatory sanctions, binding under international law (to whatever extent there is any such thing). Of course Russia and China won’t care, but the EU’s courts will force it to care. They will enforce the sanctions against European companies doing business with Iran, whether the politicians like it or not.
The only loophole is that it doesn’t affect existing contracts.
It isn’t like Trump to play all his cards at once. He is very much a process man, letting the process play to give the other side of the table – be it the IG, the Senate, Doj, Foreign nations – an opportunity to come to their senses and agree with him. He’s telling the Iranians that “I can ramp this up, and you know that I will. What’s it gonna be: how long do you want to play this?”
There are times for gradualism and times for precipitate action. Precipitate action is indicated in countering an insurrection, quelling a riot, stopping an invasion – more of the immediate physical threat type of things. Gradualism is more in the line of negotiating for a change of heart. What’s the better option here: isolating Iran and forcing it’s regime collapse, or convincing Iran’s leadership that they cannot win?
Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn: “[Y]ou can’t just let your own brothers down in order to pursue economic interests and perhaps also have more security for yourself,” …
Well Jean, there’s a simple explanation. You’ll have to sit down while I explain this to you. Ready?
Ok, here goes: the other Arabs don’t consider the Palestinians to be their brothers.
I know, shocka, and it’s hard to believe. But it’s true. Indeed, the “Arabs” are not a single nationality: Moroccans, Mauritanians, Egyptians, Libyans, Syrians, Lebanese, Omanis, Iraqis, and Saudis all consider themselves differently. Their “brother Arabs” are more like second cousins, once removed.
And in a tribal and clan culture, cousins are the people you betray to preserve your core family.
The Palestinians aren’t their brothers. The Palestinians aren’t anyone’s brothers. The Palestinians are tools to be used when convenient and discarded otherwise. That’s their problem in a nutshell.
If the Palestinians want peace (what a joke!), let them handle it themselves. Obviously the Emirates can make their own independent decisions.
If this keeps up, the Iranians will find themselves between the opportunistic Chinese to their east and their “brothers” to the west who don’t care for them a whole lot. Pass the pop corn, please.
.
I hope the Mullahs arranged for a discount on personal lube with China, cause they sure as hell will need large quantities of it.
Hey Jean, I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the function of elected officials. Most people vote for the candidate who will be best suited to pursue improving their national economic interests and ensure security for themselves. Maybe they live differently in Luxembourg.
The palestinians are doing a good job of making themselves irrelevant.
Iran thinks they can pick off and intimidate nations Who have vowed to support each other.
Israel is not trying to divide and conquer, the schism has been there for over a thousand years.