By Staff Reporter
For more than a decade, Pakistan has treated financial lifelines from the Gulf as a structural feature of its economy rather than a temporary bridge. Abu Dhabi’s refusal to roll over roughly $3.5 billion in deposits at the State Bank of Pakistan—now being repaid in tranches that include a $2 billion maturity on April 17 —should shatter that illusion once and for all. The timing is brutal. Global oil prices have spiked past $100 a barrel amid the Iran war. Pakistan’s foreign-exchange reserves hover near $16.4 billion, barely three months of import cover. Fuel costs are surging, inflation is accelerating, and the country is scrambling to meet the International Monetary Fund’s reserve targets under its $7 billion program. But the deeper damage is strategic. What is collapsing is not merely a banking arrangement but the assumption that money can indefinitely substitute for aligned interests.
This was never a partnership of equals. It was a relationship of deepening dependence dressed up as mutual benefit. Since December 2018, when the UAE placed its initial $3 billion deposit to stabilise Pakistan’s external accounts under the PTI-led government, Abu Dhabi has repeatedly extended or supplemented those funds—another $2 billion in 2021, $1 billion in 2023, and further rollovers in 2024 and early 2025. Each time, Pakistani officials hailed the support as proof of brotherly solidarity. In practice, it embedded the UAE ever more deeply into Islamabad’s macroeconomic architecture. By January 2026, the arrangement had been reduced to month-to-month extensions. When the deposits matured this spring, Abu Dhabi simply asked for its money back. Pakistan’s Foreign Office insists this is a “routine financial transaction” under bilateral commercial agreements. That characterisation is technically accurate and strategically evasive. The real story is the collapse of an older understanding that once made such rollovers automatic.
The mistrust had been building for years, even as Pakistan’s reliance grew. In 2015, Pakistan’s parliament declined to join the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. The decision irritated both Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, but while Saudi Arabia eventually reconciled with Islamabad, the UAE treated the episode as an early warning of Pakistani unreliability. Personal diplomacy—particularly the sustained outreach by then-Army chief Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa to UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed—helped repair the surface damage between 2017 and 2022. But beneath the surface, strategic drift only accelerated. Islamabad increasingly viewed Abu Dhabi as tilting decisively toward India. Abu Dhabi, for its part, concluded that Pakistan continued to accord primacy to Saudi Arabia. The evidence was hard to ignore. The UAE’s deepening political, economic and security ties with New Delhi, including its prominent role in the I2U2 grouping with India, Israel and the United States, unsettled Pakistan. From Islamabad’s perspective, the arrangement threatened to lock in a regional order that marginalised its own interests. The May 2025 India-Pakistan crisis brought the divergence into sharp relief. After Pakistan downed Indian jets, Abu Dhabi pressed for restraint, arguing that deterrence had already been restored when Indian aircraft crossed both the Line of Control and the international border. Pakistani leaders insisted on their sovereign right to respond. The episode confirmed Islamabad’s fear that Emirati closeness to India could constrain Pakistan’s freedom of action in its most critical security theater.
September 2025 delivered the next fracture. Pakistan signed a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement with Saudi Arabia. For Islamabad the pact was less a dramatic pivot than the formalisation of decades of political coordination, financial support and security cooperation. For Abu Dhabi it registered as a deliberate choice of Riyadh over the Emirates. The perception was not unreasonable. Saudi Arabia remains the Gulf’s political heavyweight, and the agreement explicitly linked stability across South and West Asia in ways that suited Pakistan’s broader strategic calculus. Islamabad has left the door open to a comparable defence arrangement with the UAE, but Abu Dhabi has shown no enthusiasm. The Iran war has now crystallised the incompatibility in its starkest form. Pakistan shares a long border with Iran and is home to a large Shia population. It has positioned itself as a mediator, with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Army Chief Syed Asim Munir quietly passing messages between Washington and Tehran. Islamabad has also aligned its diplomacy with Beijing, advancing a joint five-point peace proposal after Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar’s meetings with his Chinese counterpart. The UAE, by contrast, has adopted a hawkish posture aimed at permanently weakening Tehran’s regional influence. On the defining crisis of the moment, the two countries are not merely in different camps; they operate from incompatible theories of how the conflict should end. A mediator and a hawk cannot coordinate effectively. They can barely communicate. This is the central contradiction that has always lurked beneath the surface of Pakistan-UAE ties. Financial support was never intended to resolve such divergences. It was intended to manage them—until it could no longer do even that. The IMF acknowledged in September 2024 that Pakistan had secured financing assurances from the UAE, Saudi Arabia and China for its program running through September 2027. Those assurances were vital to program approval. Yet assurances are not the same as alignment. Abu Dhabi’s decision to demand repayment illustrates the point with brutal clarity: deposits can buy time and stabilise reserves in a crisis, but they cannot purchase loyalty on Yemen, India, Iran or the broader question of regional order.
The immediate economic risks are serious. Pakistan must now service the UAE repayment alongside a $1.3 billion Eurobond that matured on April 8 and other obligations. The energy shock from the Strait of Hormuz disruptions has already driven petrol and diesel prices up sharply. The IMF program demands reserves above $18 billion by June. Without fresh inflows, that target becomes unattainable, risking a breach that could complicate future reviews. Saudi Arabia has once again stepped into the breach. Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb said Riyadh will deposit $3 billion in new funds in the coming days and extend its existing $5 billion facility for a longer term—reportedly three years—eliminating the annual rollover ritual. The gesture is generous and timely. It plugs the immediate gap created by the UAE repayment and provides breathing room for the next IMF review. Still, Saudi money, welcome as it is, is a lifeline rather than a solution. It underscores Pakistan’s uncomfortable dependence on friendly-country deposits rather than self-generated resilience. Exports have stagnated for a decade. Foreign direct investment remains elusive. Fiscal deficits persist because politically painful choices—expenditure cuts, tax-base broadening, energy-sector efficiency—have been deferred. Remittances and borrowing cannot indefinitely substitute for export-led growth. The Saudi support creates breathing space. The decisive question is whether that space will be used for genuine transformation or simply to kick the can down the road once more.
There are deeper risks as well. Pakistan’s multi-ethnic state is already contending with an intensifying insurgency in Balochistan that carries spillover potential along the Iran frontier. Abu Dhabi’s support for non-state actors elsewhere in the region—the Southern Transitional Council in Yemen, the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan—has quietly unsettled Pakistani security planners, even in the absence of public evidence of direct involvement at home. A regional order that erodes state-centric norms and normalises armed proxies is not in Islamabad’s interest. Nor is one in which its traditional Gulf partners increasingly view India as the more reliable economic and strategic partner. For the UAE, the calculation is equally unsentimental. Abu Dhabi has spent years forging a distinct foreign-policy identity separate from Riyadh’s. Its partnerships with India and Israel reflect a clear assessment of where its long-term interests lie. From Abu Dhabi’s vantage point, Pakistan has chosen Saudi Arabia and a mediation role on Iran that conflicts with Emirati priorities. Continuing to roll over deposits would effectively subsidise divergence. Better, in this reading, to convert a strategic bond into a revocable line of credit and move on. None of this means the relationship is doomed to permanent rupture. Pakistan and the UAE are not enemies. They share historical ties rooted in the vision of the late Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan. The large Pakistani diaspora in the UAE continues to send vital remittances, and Dubai remains a destination for Pakistani investment and labour. Islamabad has signalled openness to deeper defence cooperation should Abu Dhabi wish it. Pragmatic engagement on issues of mutual interest—trade, investment, labour mobility—can and should continue. But such engagement must rest on realism, not nostalgia or one-sided financial dependence.
The way forward for Pakistan is straightforward, if politically difficult. Use the Saudi deposit and the temporary stabilisation it provides to accelerate the very reforms the IMF program demands: export promotion, investment-climate improvements, energy efficiency and fiscal discipline
Longer term, both countries will need to reassess their ties within a rapidly shifting regional map. India, Saudi Arabia, Iran and China are redrawing lines of influence. Transactional deposits cannot dictate geopolitical alignments. Personalised leadership engagements can manage differences but cannot erase them. The old understanding that sustained Pakistan-UAE relations has collapsed. What replaces it will be shaped less by personal rapport than by cold calculations of interest. Abu Dhabi’s demand for repayment is not punishment. It is repricing. Pakistan’s response should not be recrimination but a clear-eyed recognition that financial diplomacy has limits. The Gulf has reminded Islamabad of a truth that applies far beyond the UAE: money can buy time and stabilise reserves, but it cannot purchase shared strategic vision.
Copyright © 2021 Independent Pakistan | All rights reserved
