UAE Foreign Minister Calls Iran Over Strait of Hormuz Shipping Safety

DUBAI - Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed picked up the phone on Friday and called Tehran. The UAE’s foreign minister reached his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araqchi to discuss one of the waterway’s most pressing concerns: keeping ships moving safely through the Strait of Hormuz.

The conversation, disclosed by the state news agency WAM, was the first publicly announced contact between the two ministers since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran, triggering Iranian retaliation that rippled across the Gulf and reached the UAE itself, where American military installations are located.

For ordinary residents and workers in the UAE, the stakes in this exchange extended well beyond diplomatic protocol. Iranian attacks during the recent conflict had already left visible marks on daily life. Dubai’s hotel sector faced disruption as some expatriate residents departed, and the broader image of stability that the emirates have carefully cultivated as a regional business center took a hit. The call suggested an attempt to stabilize a relationship strained by the broader conflict unfolding around them.

During the conversation, Sheikh Abdullah pressed for strict adherence to a US-Iran memorandum of understanding, framing compliance as essential to achieving what he described as an “immediate and comprehensive cessation of hostilities.” He also underscored three foundational principles: respect for national sovereignty, compliance with international law, and the uninterrupted passage of commercial shipping through Hormuz, one of the world’s most vital energy corridors.

The timing reflected a broader recognition that military escalation had created risks neither side could easily manage. The Strait of Hormuz remains vulnerable to disruption. Any sustained interference with shipping would reverberate far beyond the Gulf, affecting energy prices and supply chains worldwide. Both countries have interests in preventing that outcome, even as tensions persist.

Sheikh Abdullah articulated a position centered on diplomacy as the path forward. According to WAM, he expressed confidence that ongoing diplomatic efforts would ultimately produce lasting security and stability across the region. The message carried an implicit acknowledgment that military posturing had reached a point where negotiation became the more rational course.

The call’s significance lay partly in what it represented symbolically. Public contact between Abu Dhabi and Tehran had grown uncommon during the recent crisis, making this exchange a signal that both sides were willing to engage directly. Whether the conversation would translate into concrete de-escalation remained unclear, but the willingness to communicate suggested that neither government had abandoned hope for a negotiated resolution.

Meanwhile, the UAE’s particular vulnerabilities shaped its approach throughout. As a major commercial hub with substantial foreign investment and a large expatriate workforce, the country has strong incentives to restore a sense of security and normalcy. The disruption to Dubai’s tourism and hospitality sectors demonstrated how quickly regional conflict could damage economic activity, and restoring confidence among international business partners and residents required visible progress toward stability.

The call also highlighted the limited tools available to smaller regional powers caught between larger ones. The UAE could not control the actions of the US or Israel, nor could it dictate Iranian responses. Its leverage lay primarily in diplomatic engagement and the ability to host conversations that might help prevent further escalation. By maintaining communication channels and emphasizing shared interests in maritime security, Abu Dhabi positioned itself as a potential mediator. Whether that role can hold as the broader conflict continues to shift is the question that now hangs over the Gulf.