Loading...

Beyond Performative Support: How the Gulf Can Shift from Two-State Rhetoric to Real Palestinian Leverage

To gain legitimacy in the emerging multipolar order, the Gulf must pivot to full Palestinian sovereignty. Moral capital begets investment capital.

The UAE and Saudi Arabia have recently begun publicly positioning themselves as champions of Palestinian rights: condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza as “genocide,” emphasizing Palestinian statehood, and carving out roles as rational regional leaders. Yet, much of this remains tied to the outdated, performative two-state solution — a framework Israel has already rendered impossible tchrough its explicit ambitions to annex the West Bank and maintain absolute control over Gaza.

Furthermore, their impositions surrounding African land acquisition, infrastructure control, poor worker conditions, and resource supply chains tell a different story: one of silent colonization, sovereignty erosion, and recursive dependency. As it currently stands, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are prototypes for a new model of regional imperialism: extractionism, development by displacement, the inhumane exploitation of a low-paid labour force.

But as global attention fixates on Gaza, Abu Dhabi and Riyadh have a chance to break the cycle of suppression — not in Africa, where reversing their biocidal incursions would take years — but in Palestine, where moral courage is needed now.

In today’s multipolar environment, real influence is earned by actionable moral leadership, not symbolic gestures. By pivoting decisively from performative, two-state rhetoric to consequential advocacy for Palestinian sovereignty, the Gulf states can fill the moral vacuum created by their own uncouth practices in Africa — and reshape regional power dynamics.

[I] The Gulf’s Moral Credit Balance Sheet — And Its Limits

A. Sub-Imperialism & Extractive Loops

Using the framework of sub-imperialism, a concept that was introduced by the Brazilian scholar and activist Ruy Mauro Marini, provides valuable insights for analysing the UAE and Saudi Arabia’s impact on global order. It demonstrates how these nations can simultaneously be both a subject of imperialism and an agent of imperialist practices within their spheres of influence. In essence, they occupy a liminal space between deferring to and challenging traditional imperialist actors like America.

Husam Mahjoub’s article, “The emerging sub-imperial role of the United Arab Emirates in Africa,” expertly breaks down the present-day ramifications of this model’s proliferation on global stability. Historically, both nations have surreptitiously leveraged the autonomy typical of sub-imperialist states, capitalizing on inter-imperialist contradictions to diversify their alliances. For instance, while historically investing heavily in the West, the UAE has diversified investments in China and Russia as well.

Sub-imperialism, in this context, refers to a circumstance where a nation, while not characterized as a global imperial power, operates in a manner that advances the interests of imperial powers; and behaves as a de facto imperialist entity within its own region. It is underlined by actions that extend a nation’s political, economic and military influence over other nations or regions, often to the profit of true imperial powers.

Under this framework, we can understand the UAE and Saudi Arabia to be peripheral nations engaging in imperialist practices within the Middle East while remaining dependent on the hegemonic power of Washington.

Furthermore, these nations actively suppress revolutionary movements, exploit migrant labour, and transfer value from weaker economies (e.g., Africa and Pakistan) – all traits indicating their sub-imperialist nature.

‘Engagement’ is a misnomer. Encroachment is a more terminologically apt characterization [Source: Africa Center for Strategic Studies]

[B] Dismal Labour Conditions

Saudi Arabia has the highest prevalence of modern slavery of all countries in the Arab States region, estimated at 749,000. This is followed by the UAE (132,000). Furthermore, Saudi Arabia’s 11 million migrant workers (largely from Asia and East Africa) are vulnerable to forced labour under the kafala system: a set of laws and policies that exacerbate the employer-worker power imbalance by preventing migrant workers from reporting abuse or exploitation. As recently as June 2025, various African labour unions have urged the International Labour Organization (ILO) to reign in Saudi Arabia’s continual violations (Source: The EastAfrican). Accounts made by victims of this system can be quite graphic (Source: International Trade Union Confederation – ITUC), sometimes including death:

The testimonies of returnee workers paint a horrifying picture: unpaid wages, arbitrary detention, forced labour, physical violence, starvation, sexual assault, and psychological abuse. Even more chilling are the cases where our fellow Africans return home in coffins, with autopsy reports revealing clear signs of torture — burns, electric shocks, broken bones — only for their deaths to be falsely classified as ‘natural causes.’

These exploitative practices reinforce extractive cycles and prevent generative capacity building within Africa.

[C] Creeping Infrastructure Control

The UAE is the fourth-largest foreign direct investor on the African continent, after China, the European Union (EU), and the United States. In the last two years alone, the UAE has pledged $97 billion in new investments in Africa, which is three times more than China’s commitments. More specifically, they are by far the most invasive regional actor in East Africa with an estimated $47 billion in projects.

At the core of the Gulf’s geopolitical strategy is its focus on acquiring port concessions that encircle the African continent as well as building supply chain infrastructures and logistical hubs. This two-pronged approach positions the UAE and Saudi Arabia to dominate global trade routes around Africa.

The two major players in Dubai’s strategy are DP World, directly owned by their government through parent company Ports, Customs & Free Zone Corporation, and AD Ports Group, whose majority shareholder is the ADQ (a sovereign wealth fund).

On the Saudi front, the focal point of their investments is the $12.7-billion Djibouti Damerjog International Park refinery by the Aiyal Petroleum and Energy Company. Another leading pillar of their creeping control in Djibouti (their most concentrated effort) is the creation of a Saudi Logistics City — a 120,000-square-meter facility with a 92-year lease that will provide a hub for Saudi commerce and trade with Djibouti and the region.

These ports, alongside dozens of logistical hubs across the African continent, play various roles in the Gulf’s broader sub-imperialist strategy. They are positioned to not only facilitate land acquisition and resource extraction across Africa but also to serve their military ambitions.

[D] Land Upheaval

In recent years, both nations have set their sights on acquiring land in several African nations for food production and carbon-offset projects. Main Emirati investors include ADQ, Mubadala, and the International Holding Company. Interestingly, both IHQ and ADQ are chaired by Sheikh Tahnoon Bin Zayed, brother of the UAE’s president.

The large-scale production of crops, fruits, vegetables and livestock often results in the depletion of local resources, leading to food insecurity and environmental degradation for the host countries. Notably, Saudi Arabia committed $179 million for an agricultural project in Sudan’s Upper Atbara and Setit Dam Complex. Keep in mind, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are focused on positioning themselves as global food trade hubs, rather than creating reciprocal partnerships within Africa.

The UAE has also acquired vast tracts of land in Africa for use in the emerging carbon economy. As of late, carbon-offset programmes are increasingly seen as corporate bailouts for continued pollution by countries and large firms, a practice often referred to as ‘greenwashing’ or ‘carbon laundering.’ The UAE meddles in all stages of the carbon-offset industry, from generating to purchasing carbon credits; they play a leading role in the global wealth extraction system exploiting African resources, all while feigning climate consciousness. In an age where Africa’s arable lands could serve as humanity’s final bastion against food insecurity, they continue to actively erode its future potential.

In an unsurpising turn of events, the UAE’s land acquisitions in Africa have been linked to human rights violations, including the forced eviction of local populations and corruption of local officials. Liberia and Kenya are prime examples of nations plagued with these Arab-centric issues.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. The UAE and Saudi Arabia’s investments in African ports and logistics align with their broader strategy to exploit natural resources on the continent. Displacement, local dependency, and strategic resource hoarding; these transgressions directly lead to the extraction of significant economic value, and sovereignty, from African nations.

[E] Mineral Extraction

Dubai serves as the world’s second-largest gold importer, with much of it unofficially sourced from conflict-affected African states. In fact, the capital reports higher gold import values than are declared as exports by countries such as Uganda and Rwanda. These glaring discrepancies paint the sub-imperialist nation as a hub for gold smuggling and money laundering.

Tens of billions of dollars in gold flows illegally out of Africa each year. This loophole-ridden theft induces recursive harm: each cycle of extraction diminishes Africa’s long-term leverage, and by extension the multipolar order’s stability.

Sudan is another prominent example. Much of Sudan’s gold is smuggled to the UAE, despite an Arab-fueled war in the country. Both the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have facilitated the production and smuggling of this gold to the UAE. Of course, both forces have received financial backing from the UAE and Saudi Arabia, which leads us into their fourth, and highest casualty, sin.

[F] Military Interference

The UAE has established military bases in countries such as Chad, Eritrea, Libya and Somalia, which have been used by UAE forces and affiliated militias in ongoing conflicts, particularly in Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. In a similar fashion, Saudi Arabia has schemed military and security footholds in Africa, particularly in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa. Unless it’s for economic gain, humanitarian aid is not their modus operandi.

The UAE is deeply involved in the ongoing war in Sudan, backing the notorious RSF militia, which has been accused of committing crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.

Saudi Arabia and the UAE project images of modern, progressive nations, but their actions in Sudan reveal ambitions that align with imperialist practices. They orchestrate immense suffering on millions of Sudanese citizens without facing any substantive reprisals on the international stage. The war has all but destroyed Sudan’s capital Khartoum; a staggering 12 million people have had to flee their homes and famine has gripped over ten areas. The death toll is now estimated at over 150,000 (Source: Columbia Journal of Transnational Law). As Austin-based software engineer Husam Mahjoub aptly explained in 2024:

The war that the RSF is waging, with the support of the UAE and others, is not a conventional war, but rather a war to dismantle the Sudanese state and subjugate the Sudanese people.

The UAE and Saudi Arabia may believe they’re operating strategically; that the geopolitical karma compounded from their past and ongoing infractions will never rear their ugly heads in the future. But other global actors are observing closely. BRICS+ is rapidly consolidating, and consistently watches for signals of true multipolar awarenesss. The African Union and African Development Bank Group are increasingly vocal about resource sovereignty. These infringements sustain Africa-specific critique toward the Gulf, creating a visible deficit of moral legitimacy in the eyes of global multipolar observers. No amount of platitudes-based perfomances can resolve this inconsistency.

[G] Performative Positioning

  • UAE // Projects itself as a ‘rational alternative’ to Israel, leveraging stability, economic influence, and diplomatic channels to provide humanitarian aid and critique Israel’s West Bank annexation plans as a “red line.”

  • Saudi Arabia // Leads diplomatic efforts for a two-state solution, partnering with France to rally international recognition of Palestinian statehood and condemning Israel’s actions as genocidal.

[H] The Limitation

Their approach remains constrained by two-state rhetoric, which Israel is actively dismantling through annexation and settlement expansion for their ‘Greater Israel’ project. This locks the Gulf into symbolic alignment with a solution that lacks viability, creating a moral credit deficit despite their performative humanitarian efforts.

Therefore, the vacuum created by the UAE and Saudi Arabia’s inability to generate immediate moral credit in Africa — an issue that requires time-intensive systemic interventions — can be filled by reorienting their stance on Gaza. More specifically, by pivoting decisively from performative rhetoric to consequential advocacy for Palestinian sovereignty, the Gulf states can fill the moral vacuum created by their immoral actions, reshaping regional power dynamics.

The UAE can remain a silent partner in extraction — or become a vocal advocate for liberation. It can’t do both. The vacuum is open. The next move is theirs.

[II] Why the Two-State Framework Is Obsolete

Israel’s Annexation Agenda

  • Far-right ministers like Bezalel Smotrich explicitly aim to ‘bury the idea of a Palestinian state‘ through West Bank settlements and annexation proposals.

  • The UAE itself has warned that annexation would cross a ‘red line’ and undermine the spirit of the Abraham Accords.

Recursive Consequences

Maintaining symbolic gestures while avoiding full advocacy sustains the Gulf’s vacuum in moral legitimacy. Partial support, often rationalized as a cautionary effort due to regional instability, becomes a Catch 22.

This cycle leaves the Gulf states in a strategic limbo: engaged enough to be criticized, but not enough to effect change.

[III] The Pivot: From Rhetoric to Recursive Leverage

PHASE I // Replace Two-State Talk with Full Sovereignty Advocacy

  • Publicly advocate for unconditional Palestinian sovereignty, including right of return and full control over resources.

  • Use diplomatic channels (i.e., United Nations, League of Arab States – General Secretariat) to frame this as a necessary evolution beyond obsolete models.

PHASE II // Lead with Humanitarian and Economic Leverage

Leverage sovereign wealth funds — e.g., UAE’s Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA), Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) to:

  • Divest from entities linked to Israeli annexation or occupation. Invest in Palestinian infrastructure, tech, and resilience projects.

  • Scale humanitarian aid to bypass Israeli restrictions, using air and land routes with regional partners.

PHASE III // Signal Multipolar Leadership

  • Collaborate with non-Western actors (i.e., BRICS Business Council, Shanghai Cooperation Organization) to create alternative diplomatic and economic pathways for Palestine.

  • Position the Gulf as the key node in a new regional order — one where moral legitimacy is tied to actionable justice, not performative gestures.

A Recursive Effect // “Collect +0.1 Moral & Regional Stability As You Pass GO.”

[IV] The Investor Case: Why Norway’s Model Matters

Norway’s Sovereign Wealth Fund as a Blueprint

The Government Pension Fund Global — managed by Norges Bank Investment Management and worth over $1.7 trillion — has divested from 11 Israeli firms and Caterpillar over ethical concerns linked to occupation and violence.

This move demonstrates that ethical investing is not just morally sound but financially prudent, stabilizing long-term returns by aligning with sustainable, equitable growth.

Early multipolar movers like Norway create a window of opportunity for UAE and Saudi Arabia. They’re in a prime position to portray themselves as preferred destinations for next-generation sovereign capital flows, signaling both moral and financial leadership. However, this is only viable if they undergo the proper concessions.

Why Gulf Funds Should Follow

  • Reputational Upside // Positioning UAE and Saudi funds as ethical investors would attract global capital and partnerships.

  • Strategic Diversification // Reducing exposure to Israel-related risks aligns with long-term financial stability.

  • Leverage // As major limited partners in global private equity and venture capital, Gulf funds can influence broader investment trends toward ethical, non-biocidal alignment.

The old playbook of performative alignment with the US and Western Europe is losing efficacy. The Gulf doesn’t need their approval — it needs to follow consensus-breakers like Norway, whose sovereign wealth fund proves that ethics and economics are recursive.

[V] Beyond Emulation: Norway as a Gateway to Northern Europe

While the UAE and Saudi Arabia have established economic ties with Norway — evidenced by bilateral trade, energy sector collaboration, and the presence of over 150 Norwegian companies in the UAE — their influence in Northern Europe specifically remains underdeveloped relative to their global ambitions. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, now divesting from Israeli entities, is likely actively seeking ethical and sustainable investment opportunities. This creates an immediate void that Gulf firms and sovereign wealth funds (PIF and ADIA) are uniquely positioned to fill. Not just as capital sources, but as partners in projects aligning with Norway’s values-based investment criteria.

This partnership offers a recursive benefit for the Gulf: economic access and ethical transformation.

By collaborating closely with Norwegian institutions — already leaders in ethical investing and sustainable governance — Gulf states can gain real-time, practical insights into dismantling exploitative practices (e.g., migrant labour systems, extractive supply chains) that currently undermine their moral standing. This allows them to:

  • Address African and domestic criticisms without diverting full resources away from strategic goals.

  • Future-proof their economies for a multipolar order where moral legitimacy is as valuable as financial capital.

  • Leverage Northern Europe as a testing ground for ethical business models that can later be scaled globally.

In essence, Norway isn’t just a model. It’s a partner in recursive self-correction. By engaging deeply with its institutions, the Gulf can accelerate its own transformation while securing a foothold in one of the world’s most stable and high-value economic regions.

[VI] The Recursive Outcome: Isolating Israel & Elevating the Gulf

Multipolar Pressure Map

The Great Convergence

The Tipping Point

Gulf action would accelerate Israel’s isolation, making its current trajectory unsustainable. This would implicitly nudge Israel toward a forced exodus into Western Europe and America. Considering this entire fiasco began due to the Balfour Declaration, this would serve as a fitting resolution to a century-long experiment in settler-colonialism.

These imminent developments would also elevate the Gulf as a moral and strategic cornerstone of the emerging multipolar order — a role that commands more influence than any bilateral trade deal with Israel or the West.

[VII] A Closing Call to Action

Protesters demonstrate support of Palestinian at Sabeen Square in Yemen, August 20, 2025 [Source: Reuters]

The Gulf stands at a tipping point:

  • Continue with two-state performativity // Risk irrelevance as Israel continues their attempts to annex Palestine and multipolar actors bypass the Gulf.

  • Pivot to full advocacy // Gain moral credibility, reshape regional dynamics, and secure a leading role in the post-Western order.

Every symbolic gesture is a partial cycle. A binary loop with diminishing returns. Every visible, consequential act — like divestment or unconditional aid — compounds into unignorable leverage. The Gulf’s future influence depends not on pleasing Western capitals, but on acting decisively for Palestine.

The recursive future is waiting. Will the Gulf compile it — or remain legacy code?

Tagged , , , ,