Emirati Media Demonizes Palestinian Resistance to Serve Normalization Conspiracies

Anyone following the media in the UAE can clearly see how it actively works to demonize the Palestinian resistance and attempts to whitewash the image of the Israeli occupation, serving the conspiracies of normalization and the alliance between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv.
The recent assassination of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar by the Israeli army in Gaza has highlighted the intense animosity of Emirati media toward the Palestinian resistance and its leaders.
The UAE has not made an official statement regarding Sinwar’s death, finding itself trapped between its citizens’ strong support for the Palestinian cause and their resistance, and its hostile stance toward Hamas, all while maintaining its normalization agreement despite the ongoing genocide faced by the Palestinian people for over a year.
Nonetheless, we are surprised by some articles in major Emirati state media that discuss the situation in Gaza following Sinwar’s killing, equating the perpetrator with the victim and failing to distinguish between national liberation movements against occupation and internal rebellions against authorities, while others reinforce Abu Dhabi’s declared policies.
Starting with Al-Ittihad newspaper, which published an article titled ‘The People of Gaza: A Triad of Oppression,’ the author, who is Saudi, remarks: ‘Both sides of the war are devastating this people with all sorts of lethal weapons. One is a merciless enemy—Israel—proving it will not tolerate any threat to its security or the safety of its citizens, even if it means annihilating everything in its way. The other is a close ally, burning this people in the fires of ideologies they may or may not support; indeed, the oppression from one’s own kin is the hardest to endure.’
The article frames the ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip, which has lasted for over a year, as an internal issue between Israel as an authority and Palestinian resistance movements as armed rebel groups. Abdullah bin Bajad al-Otaibi, the author, asserts that ‘the oppression from one’s own kin is the hardest to endure’ in his piece published in Al-Ittihad, which originates from Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE and the hub of political decision-making.
In addition to accusing the resistance of leading the Palestinian people into ‘peril,’ the author further claims that anyone supporting this resistance ‘admits to backing all the atrocities of terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaeda, ISIS, and their counterparts.’
Nevertheless, he insists that his words represent ‘a necessary critique that must be said and heard by people in these difficult times in Gaza and the entire region.’ He accuses those who support the Palestinian resistance of engaging in ‘meaningless attempts to cloak ideology in a guise of rationality,’ labeling them as the unjust ‘third party.’
This does not mean that the articles exclusively attack Palestinians; there are also positions that align more closely with official stances and are less extreme, which do not equate the oppressor with the victim or regard the Palestinian resistance as mere rebellion, as if Israel were a legitimate authority.
In another article published in Al-Ittihad by Emirati writer Aisha Al-Mari, titled ‘Israel and the United Nations: International Disobedience,’ she discusses Israel’s rejection of all international resolutions and its defiance of Security Council decisions, as well as the UN reports that contributed to the establishment of Israel.
Al-Mari’s article aligns with the official stance advocating for a ceasefire in Gaza and the declaration of a Palestinian state; however, it does not equate the oppressor with the victim, unlike many other articles.
The English-language newspapers present a milder tone regarding the Palestinian resistance, adhering to the officially stated viewpoint that it is a conflict between parties that drags the region into war.
However, they do not fall into the impulsiveness of directly supporting the occupying state, as seen with the Saudi writer in Al-Ittihad. The National newspaper published an editorial on October 18 titled ‘Yahya Sinwar Leads Palestinians into a Dark Path,’ asserting that Sinwar ‘joins over 42,400 Palestinians who have lost their lives in subsequent Israeli retaliatory actions—military operations that have long surpassed any reasonable definition of self-defense.’ Yet, the newspaper perceives those who view Sinwar and his sacrifices for Palestine as ‘a reinforcement of extremist ideology’ and ‘a push toward disaster for Palestine.’
It adds that his militaristic inclination has led Palestinians—and the region—down a dark and violent path from which they have yet to emerge. He will not have to confront the less revolutionary yet heroic act of making peace and rebuilding the shattered society.
Nevertheless, the articles were not uniformly negative or aligned with the official stance; some approached the viewpoint of the Emirati people, who support the Palestinian cause, particularly in newspapers published in Dubai.
The newspaper Al-Bayan published an article titled “The Gradual Evolution of Netanyahu’s Project,” in which an Arab writer reflects on Netanyahu’s actions during the war. The writer asserts that “the intoxicating effects of security victories and successful military operations have fueled the man’s political ambitions,” causing him to move from shock to reaction, to aggression, and ultimately to genocide. He has now come to believe that he is playing the role of the “strong regional policeman” who will redefine the balance of power throughout the region.
A similar idea is explored in an article published on Sunday in Al-Khaleej newspaper, titled “After Sinwar: Questions and Paths.” The writer notes that Netanyahu’s speech following Sinwar’s assassination “indicates, on one hand, a commitment to continuing the war in Gaza and its support front in Lebanon, aimed at undisclosed goals that extend beyond the issue of prisoners to a complete reorganization of the region.” He asserts: “This is a project for a regional war that cannot be ruled out… as long as there is an occupation, resistance will derive its legitimacy regardless of who carries its banner.”
Al-Bayan also published another article on Saturday by an Arab writer titled “America, Protesters, and Freedoms,” discussing the struggles faced by students protesting for Palestine on college campuses. The writer highlights that these students encounter “numerous academic and legal issues, which may prevent them from focusing on their academic achievements.”
The writer states: “One of the most significant outcomes of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, and now on the West Bank and Lebanon, is that it has exposed and confirmed the double standards of the West and the hypocrisy of many slogans raised by certain Western countries regarding freedoms, human rights, and equality.”
Therefore, unlike Al-Ittihad, the newspapers Al-Bayan and Al-Khaleej, both published in Dubai, show a greater focus on “Israel” and its role compared to the Palestinian resistance movements, even considering the resistance a national liberation movement. Unfortunately, most of those writing about this are Arab writers.
As for Emirati writers, their political writings tend to rarely approach the official stance, resulting in a lack of genuine representation of those who should be their representatives (the citizens of the state).