By utilizing a unique and complex strategy for foreign relations, Abu Dhabi has brought about significant changes in the way countries interact with one another. Instead of seeking to build strong partnerships with a particular country, Abu Dhabi has developed a calculated approach to using uncertainty in foreign policy as a means for hedging geopolitical risk. Similar to how an investor manages a financial portfolio, Abu Dhabi manages its foreign relationships through multiple regional and global alliances. Furthermore, due to the unstable nature of the world today, Abu Dhabi has avoided becoming too closely aligned with any one country and is developing simultaneous diplomatic relations with numerous countries that are also competing for international supremacy (the United States, China, and Russia).
Abu Dhabi’s multidisciplinary diplomatic orientation reflects an intentional approach towards diplomacy, rather than indecisiveness.
There is a logical rationale as to why they have pursued such a strategy; in an increasingly fragmented society, dependence represents an exposure to various risks and liabilities. Hence, by engaging in multiple diplomatic relationships, Abu Dhabi can reduce the likelihood of suffering from a geopolitical shock as well as enhance their independence when making future decisions.
This approach is representative of an overarching trend amongst the middle powers of the current geopolitical environment, an increasing number of which are favoring flexibility over loyalty.
Abu Dhabi’s example shows how to achieve goals through economics and the way they look at their needs regarding security. The United Arab Emirates is working to build stronger defense ties with Western countries but is also developing various other kinds of commercial activities and technology/infrastructure ties with Eastern states so that each party to such agreements can maximize the benefits of their respective relationships without being bound to any one single country.
Abu Dhabi continues to demonstrate this strategy through new developments and examples of strategic defense cooperation agreements and growing economic corridors that show it intends to remain a critical player across multiple geopolitical areas. At the same time, Abu Dhabi shows its intention to operate primarily in its own national interest by changing its approach to global energy governance, which includes reconsidering its participation in traditional producer alliances, rather than conforming to institutional norms.
Nonetheless, these strategies carry risks. Hedging against uncertainty is possible; however, if a competing power controls access to a critical resource or if a crisis presents a binary choice, it will undermine the value of these same hedging strategies. Furthermore, the financial crisis illustrated that networks established to create a hedge against uncertainty could become interlinked, leading to systemic vulnerabilities where “hedges on hedges” occur.
Abu Dhabi’s leadership seems confident in the future of power distribution, where alliances will be based on mutual advantage rather than loyalty and speed will be more important than loyalty or friendship. The UAE has been proactive and is on its way to becoming the standard for 21st-century independent countries.
As global divisions grow deeper and deeper, there is only one question left: Has Abu Dhabi learned how to conduct an independent existence in its own strategic way—or will it stumble and fall off a high wire that it does not wish to get on?
