The war exposed the underlying realities of the West Asian region.

GD&TĐ - The war in Iran has challenged assumptions about foreign protection and military leverage, offering costly lessons for the UAE.

The truth is revealed.

According to Iran's Mehr News, the 40-day war was not simply a military confrontation between Iran and the US-Israel coalition; it also became a stage for exposing the underlying realities of the region.

Many countries in the region, which have sought to establish themselves as influential powers in West Asia in recent years, have faced harsh geopolitical realities in this major test.

Among them, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) holds a special place, a country that over the past two decades has relied on its economic wealth and strategic relationships with the United States and Israel to extend beyond its natural sphere of influence.

One of the most important lessons of this war is that major powers are strategic allies in critical times, prioritizing the protection of their own interests over ensuring the security of their regional partners.

The experience of recent decades in West Asia has repeatedly confirmed this reality. At various times, the United States has demonstrated its willingness to sacrifice even its closest allies to meet changing strategic conditions and volatile circumstances.

But it seems that a segment of the UAE's political elite still believes that closeness to the US and Israel can provide a form of strategic immunity. Security agreements, intelligence cooperation, and the normalization of relations with Israel can all be analyzed within this framework.

However, the 40-day war proved that this calculation was not appropriate for the regional reality.

Throughout the war, one of the primary goals of the US and Israel was to alter the regional balance of power. They believed that by exerting strong military pressure, they could weaken Iran's position and impose the order they desired. However, the final outcome was entirely different.

The secret to stability

The failure of the war's stated and unstated objectives reveals that the power structure in the region is far more complex than what might be reshaped through military operations or foreign alliances.

This reality is particularly important for the UAE because a significant portion of its foreign policy in recent years has been based on the assumption that the regional balance of power can be altered with the help of external actors.

However, geographical location has its own rules. The UAE is situated in a region where its security depends heavily on the stability of the surrounding areas.

This country does not possess vast strategic depth, a large population, or military capabilities comparable to the leading powers in the region. Much of the UAE's strength stems from its economy, trade, investment, and transit role.

Therefore, any widespread instability in the region could affect the UAE's interests more severely than many other countries.

For this reason, linking the country's future to projects that cause tension and foreign military alliances is not in line with the UAE's long-term national interests.

The experience from the 40-day war shows that any large-scale regional conflict can quickly impact economic security, energy, trade, and investment—the very areas that constitute the UAE's strength.

Another important point is that the 40-day war once again demonstrated that true power in West Asia does not come solely from advanced military equipment or foreign support.

National will, internal capacity, domestic unity, and the ability to withstand external pressure remain the most important factors in creating strength.

Many calculations based on technological superiority or support from major powers have been challenged in this war.

For the UAE, this reality should be seen as a serious warning. A country whose security and stability depend largely on its surrounding environment cannot pursue confrontational policies indefinitely.

The greater the gap between the UAE's policies and the region's geopolitical realities, the higher the cost of that gap. In recent years, signs of a reassessment of certain aspects of the UAE's foreign policy have become increasingly apparent.

Efforts to reduce tensions with some countries in the region and expand economic relations with neighbors can be assessed within this framework. However, the 40-day war showed that this process needs more depth and seriousness.

Sustainable security in the Persian Gulf region is not achieved through foreign alliances but through cooperation among regional countries. Historical experience also shows that the presence of external powers often complicates crises rather than de-escalates tensions.

Whenever countries in the region can resolve their differences through dialogue and cooperation, stability will be enhanced and more economic opportunities will emerge.

From a strategic perspective, the most important lesson from the 40-day war for the UAE is that security cannot be bought with money. No arms deals, security agreements, or foreign aid can replace stable and constructive relationships with neighbors.

Today, the UAE faces a crucial choice. The first path is to continue policies that place the country alongside projects outside the region, inadvertently making itself part of costly competition.

The second path is toward regional cooperation, respecting geopolitical realities and investing in sustainable relationships with neighboring countries.

The 40-day war proved that the future of West Asia would be decided by the people of the region themselves, not by outside powers.

Source: https://giaoducthoidai.vn/cuoc-chien-phoi-bay-thuc-te-ngam-khu-vuc-tay-a-post780393.html