The headline comes from a meeting on 12 September 2026 between Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Khaled bin Mohamed bin Zayed on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in New Delhi. The UAE’s official account said the talks focused on de-escalation, regional stability and creating opportunities for peace and development. Pezeshkian later said the two sides had agreed to put past differences aside and discuss how to build their future relationship.
But this was not a peace treaty, alliance or binding strategic agreement. It was a political opening after months of severe deterioration in relations during the US-Iran war. Only weeks earlier, Abu Dhabi had suspended trade, commercial exchanges and financial transactions with Iran after accusing Tehran of threatening Emirati and maritime security. Iran rejected some of those accusations.
Why talk now? Geography and economics leave both sides with strong incentives to keep a channel open.
The UAE sits beside Iran across one of the most strategically important waterways on earth. The war and disruption around the Strait of Hormuz have damaged shipping, energy exports and Gulf economies. Before the latest restrictions, the UAE was also one of Iran’s largest commercial partners and accounted for roughly 30% of Iranian imports in 2024. Prolonged confrontation therefore carries a substantial price for both sides.
There is also a straightforward military calculation: Abu Dhabi does not want Emirati ports, oil infrastructure or US facilities on its territory repeatedly exposed to a regional Iran-US confrontation, while Tehran has an interest in preventing every Gulf monarchy from becoming an active front against it.
But Tehran has reasons to judge this opening by actions rather than diplomatic language.
Just 11 days after the BRICS meeting, the UAE central bank barred Iran’s Bank Melli from operating in the country, citing regulatory violations. And this week UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with Reuters reporting that regional issues — particularly Iran — were among the subjects discussed. Abu Dhabi therefore continues simultaneously to engage Tehran while maintaining deep strategic ties with Washington and Israel.
Even senior Emirati adviser Anwar Gargash has acknowledged that the meeting does not mean the two governments suddenly agree on everything. His argument is essentially that geography makes engagement unavoidable, while rebuilding trust requires more than words.
So what can realistically come from it?
A limited understanding is easier to envisage than a genuine strategic partnership: keeping diplomatic channels open, preventing accidental escalation, protecting shipping, managing Hormuz and gradually restoring some commercial ties.
A deeper reconciliation would require much more difficult issues to be addressed — regional security, Iran’s relationship with US forces in the Gulf, the UAE’s strategic partnership with Israel, maritime security and the long-running disputes that have shaped relations between Tehran and Abu Dhabi.
In other words, “leave the past behind” is an important diplomatic signal — but it should not yet be confused with trust.
The real test will not be another photograph or communiqué. It will be what both governments actually do when the next regional crisis arrives.