PNN – The totality of the world’s media narratives shows that the recent confrontation between Saudi Arabia and the UAE in Yemen was not a temporary incident, but a sign that the country’s crisis has entered a new and more complex phase.
The sum of global media narratives indicates that the recent confrontation between Saudi Arabia and the UAE in Yemen is not a transient incident but rather a sign of the crisis in this country entering a new and more complex phase.
Recent developments in the strategic port of Al-Mukalla in eastern Yemen, which was accompanied by the aerial bombing of a shipment of weapons and military vehicles attributed to the UAE by the Saudi-led coalition, have had widespread coverage in international media. An event that initially could have been considered a limited operational disagreement within the framework of the Arab coalition, quickly transformed in Western media analysis into a sign of overt confrontation and a deep rift between the two main partners in the Yemen war; a rift that many observers have referred to as a “dangerous strategic split.”
World media, particularly in Europe and America, consider this event not as an isolated incident, but a turning point in the course of the Yemen war; a point where the conflict of interests between Saudi Arabia and the UAE is no longer hidden and is openly manifesting on the ground.
The British newspaper The Independent wrote that the recent crisis began after a shipment of weapons and military equipment, without coordination with the Saudi-led coalition, was transferred from the UAE’s port of Fujairah to the port of Mukalla in Hadhramaut province. According to Riyadh, this shipment was intended for forces affiliated with the Southern Transitional Council (STC); a council that enjoys the direct support of Abu Dhabi and whose stated strategic goal is the separation of southern Yemen from the central government.
The Independent emphasized that the bombing of this shipment by Saudi Arabia sent a clear message to the UAE. From Riyadh’s perspective, the expansion of influence by separatist forces in sensitive and strategic areas of Yemen, particularly near Saudi Arabia’s southern borders, is considered crossing red security lines.
Read more:
UAE mercenaries oppose withdrawal from Hadhramaut and Al-Mahra
From Tactical Difference to Strategic Rift
A significant portion of media analyses emphasize that the disagreement between Saudi Arabia and the UAE is not new. Since 2019, coinciding with the reduction of the UAE’s direct military presence in Yemen, signs of divergence in the two countries’ objectives had become apparent. However, media believe that what happened in Mukalla marks a move beyond the stage of hidden differences and entry into a phase of open confrontation.
The Italian newspaper Inside Over, in a frank analysis, describes this situation as a “dangerous strategic split within the heart of the anti-Yemeni coalition” and writes that this crisis is not directly related to AnsarAllah, but rather reflects a fundamental contradiction in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi’s views on the future of Yemen and the regional order.
Two Conflicting Visions for Yemen
Based on Inside Over’s analysis, Saudi Arabia sees Yemen as part of a larger equation of its national security; a buffer country whose stability is critically important for preventing border threats. In contrast, the UAE sees Yemen as a key link in its own geopolitical influence project; a project that begins from the ports of the Horn of Africa and extends to southern Yemen and the Arabian Sea.
This media outlet emphasizes that Abu Dhabi’s support for southern separatist forces is not a temporary action, but part of a long-term strategy to control ports, trade routes, and key maritime points; a strategy that is not necessarily aligned with Saudi Arabia’s security priorities.
The Collapse of the “Cohesive Coalition” Narrative
The Swiss newspaper Le Temps also wrote critically that recent developments have called into question the official narrative about a “cohesive Arab coalition.” In this newspaper’s view, the cancellation of the defense agreement between the Yemeni government and the UAE and the order for Emirati forces to withdraw within 24 hours indicate that political trust between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi has been severely damaged.
Le Temps emphasized that the conflicting interests of the two countries have now overridden the initial common goals, namely confronting Ansar Allah, and have pushed the Yemen war into a more complex phase.
Southern Yemen: A Proxy Competition Arena
French media have also addressed these developments with concern. The newspaper Libération reported that forces affiliated with the Southern Transitional Council have refused to withdraw from areas captured in early December and are openly defying orders from the Saudi-backed government. This newspaper wrote that the separatists’ insistence on maintaining their positions shows that they rely more on external backing than on loyalty to the Yemeni state structure.
Le Monde, in a more cautious tone, stated that the announcement of the withdrawal of Emirati forces is a sign of escalating tension between the two countries and emphasized that this withdrawal does not necessarily mean the end of Abu Dhabi’s influence in southern Yemen.
Questioning the Coalition’s Future
Italy’s Asia News newspaper, raising the question “Where is the coalition heading?”, wrote that the confrontation between Saudi Arabia and the UAE is no longer a passing disagreement, but rather a reflection of a deep-rooted contradiction in the two countries’ views on the regional order. In this media outlet’s view, the declaration of a state of emergency, the cancellation of the defense agreement, and the imposition of aerial and maritime restrictions indicate a shift in Saudi Arabia’s approach from managing differences to a policy of direct deterrence against the UAE.
Trans-regional Consequences
Media concerns are not limited to Yemen. The British newspaper The Telegraph warned that confrontation between Saudi Arabia and the UAE, as two key players in the global energy market, could have consequences beyond the region and affect the stability of oil and gas markets.
On the other hand, The Economist wrote that the Yemen war has entered a stage where the coalition is fighting against itself and the main axis of conflict is no longer AnsarAllah, but rather competition between former allies. The Guardian has also raised the possibility of a civil war breaking out in southern Yemen and instability spreading to neighboring countries.
The American Perspective
In the United States, the Wall Street Journal examined this confrontation from the angle of Washington’s interests and wrote that the rift between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi complicates America’s calculations in the Middle East; especially at a time when Washington is seeking to contain Iran and prevent the spread of regional crises. In this newspaper’s view, the continuation of disagreement between America’s two main allies could give rival players more room to maneuver.