UAE, US: Partnership for innovation, opportunity
Importance of the historical trip
Sharaf emphasised the significance of President Trump's visit to the UAE, noting that cooperation on science and technology has become a vital pillar of the US–UAE relationship.
Collaboration on the Mars Mission
'Even with the Emirates mission to Mars, our main partner and knowledge transfer partner was the United States,' he stated. 'We couldn't have done it if we didn't work together hand in hand.'
Expanding across emerging technologies
He highlighted that the UAE–US relationship has broadened to include critical emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing, and energy. 'The US$1.4 trillion investment is a reflection of how strong the relationship has become. It is the result of decades of partnership between both nations,' Sharaf added.
Shared benefits and trust
The cooperation is grounded in shared benefits and mutual trust. 'We always look at these opportunities as a win-win situation. Such investments will not just create opportunities for the UAE—whether economic, social, or regional impact—but also for the US economy, creating jobs and attracting talent in both countries.'
Governing emerging technologies responsibly
Sharaf stressed the necessity of collaboration in responsibly governing emerging technologies. 'It is crucial that we have relationships where countries work closely, investments happen both ways, and we come up with governance systems for new technologies that, if misused, could have serious consequences.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UAE Moments
an hour ago
- UAE Moments
US President Trump Extends TikTok Sale Deadline by 90 Days
In a significant move, U.S. President Donald Trump has extended the deadline for ByteDance, TikTok's parent company, to sell the popular video-sharing app's U.S. operations by 90 days. The US President posted on Social Truth, "I've just signed the Executive Order extending the Deadline for the TikTok closing for 90 days (September 17, 2025)." The TikTok ban took effect on January 19, one day before President Trump's inauguration. Upon taking office, President Trump gave TikTok 75 days to divest its U.S. business, but a second extension pushed the deadline to Thursday, June 19, but now the deadline is September 17. "We are grateful for President Trump's leadership and support in ensuring that TikTok continues to be available for more than 170 million American users," TikTok said in a statement. This article was previously published on saudimoments. To see the original article, click here
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
On World Refugee Day, scores of families approved for resettlement in US are stuck in limbo
Friday, 20 June, marks International Refugee Day, but celebrations across the US have been muted since the Trump administration's 20 January refugee ban remains firmly in place. Since the ban was implemented, around 12,000 refugees who had security screenings and were booked for travel to the US had their flights cancelled. Another approximately 108,000 remaining refugees who had been 'conditionally approved' to come to the US remain stranded in precarious situations overseas. Only a very small number of refugees are currently being resettled and allowed to access support services under exceptions to the refugee ban. The Biden administration had announced a target of 125,000 refugees for fiscal year 2025, and according to the United Nations, there were 42.7 million refugees worldwide at the end of 2024. Refugees currently being settled in the US include dozens of white South Africans and approximately 160 refugees protected by an injunction under a lawsuit known as Pacito vs Trump. While multiple lawsuits against the ban have been, and are being filed in courts, the Pacito vs Trump case, filed by International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP) in February, is one of the most significant and high-profile challenges to the refugee ban. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The class action lawsuit filed by IRAP represents a group of nine individuals affected by the ban and several refugee resettlement agencies seeking to have the executive order and suspension of refugee-related funding declared illegal and their implementation halted. It also looks to restore vital funding to the United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). On 5 May, the Western District Court of Washington issued a compliance order to the government to process and provide resettlement support to refugees who were conditionally approved and had travel scheduled before 20 January 2025. This order covers 160 individuals who had imminent travel plans as of 20 January and will retain protection under the ruling. On 15 May, the district court also affirmed that the government must immediately resume the processing of around 11,840 vulnerable refugees who were conditionally approved for resettlement with confirmed travel plans before the executive order. Laurie Ball Cooper, vice president for US legal programmes at IRAP, affirmed that some more people may be eligible to resume their plans to come to the US. 'In addition, among the remaining - approximately 12,000 people minus the 160 - there are surely people who can meet the standard set by the Ninth Circuit of showing that they have a strong reliance interest in the travel and therefore are still protected by the injunction,' she said. 'The district court has indicated that they will set up a process using a special neutral individual [special master] to adjudicate disputes around who meets that standard and who does not. But that process hasn't started yet,' Ball Cooper said. 'Bittersweet' From the approximate 108,000 refugees who were 'conditionally approved', Ball Cooper remains optimistic that the current litigation would also be able to find them some relief. 'Our underlying litigation continues to challenge the executive order as it applies to all refugees, and so over the long term, I hope that we will prevail on those arguments and see people able to proceed to safety.' USRAP was created in 1980 by the Refugee Act of 1980 to provide a safe and legal pathway for people fleeing persecution, war, or conflict to come to the United States to either join with family or to meet foreign and humanitarian policy priorities of the US government. Despite political rhetoric that often scapegoats refugees as a burden, refugees are a fiscal success for the United States. Based on a study commissioned by the Trump administration during his first term, refugees were shown to contribute $63 billion more in federal, state, and local taxes than they had taken in services and assistance between 2005 and 2014. US grants dozens of white South Africans refugee status Read More » 'Every refugee who enters is someone who is able to pursue the life that they are meant to be able to pursue here: in many cases, to reunite with family members, to join communities that are ready to welcome them. So every single arrival is something worth celebrating, and more should be coming!' Ball Cooper added. Despite the statistical net positive that refugees bring to the US, celebrations on World Refugee Day have been bittersweet. 'I would describe observances of International Refugee Day today as mixed,' Ball Cooper said. She said that everyone in refugee communities or refugee-serving communities was continuing to take time today to celebrate the many ways refugees 'enrich our communities in the US, and the great joy it is for those of us who get to know, work with and live with refugees'. 'At the same time, it is certainly bittersweet, because there are so many tens of thousands of refugees who should be here already, and they're not because of the refugee ban,' she said. 'This is deeply sad, extremely frustrating, heartbreaking and life-threatening for many of the refugees themselves.'
Middle East Eye
3 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
'Not our war': US lawmakers attempt to rein in potential strikes on Iran
Two US lawmakers in the House of Representatives have teamed up to introduce a bipartisan resolution that would compel President Donald Trump to seek congressional approval before ordering air strikes on Iran. US military engagement, alongside Israel against Iran, is largely assessed not only to lead to Iranian retaliation against US assets in the region, but also to potential US entanglement in yet another years-long war in the Middle East. Trump, in all three of his campaigns for the White House, ran on a no-to-war platform. Now, he is reportedly weighing whether to drop a 30,000-lb "bunker-buster" bomb on an Iranian nuclear facility. Republican Thomas Massie, a staunch anti-interventionist, and Democrat Ro Khanna, a progressive whose district encompasses Silicon Valley, are hoping to amass support from both parties for a vote on a war powers resolution next week. "The Constitution does not permit the executive branch to unilaterally commit an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn't attacked the United States," Massie said in a statement. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "Congress has the sole power to declare war against Iran. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran is not our war." In an interview with CNN on Thursday, Khanna said while he believes it's in the interest of US national security for Iran not to develop a nuclear weapon, "I don't believe that will be achieved by the United States getting dragged into a war with Iran." Both the United Nations' nuclear watchdog and the US intelligence community have said Iran is not close to developing a nuclear weapon. When pushed by CNN's Wolf Blitzer on why taking out a hidden nuclear facility - using a bomb no other country but the US has - would not be a good thing, Khanna pointed to a litany of unknowns. "We don't know how deep underground Iran actually has those bombs. We do not know how much - spread out - Iran has that capability, and we do not know how quickly they would be able to rebuild, given that they have the centrifuges and the know-how, [and] the estimates range from one to three years," Khanna said. "There has to be a diplomatic solution," he added. Trump was in the middle of a months-long negotiation with Iran towards a new nuclear deal, much like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that he pulled out of in 2018, when Israel began air strikes on Tehran one week ago. Some of the president's most famous and most loyal supporters on the Make America Great Again (MAGA) circuit have made it clear this week that they believe Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to lure the US into a war that is none of Washington's business. 'De-escalatory vehicle' Massie and Khanna's resolution follows a similar move in the Senate by Democrat Tim Kaine, who ran for the vice presidency on the Hillary Clinton ticket in 2016. That resolution, also utilising the War Powers Act, demands a debate in the upper chamber and a vote on any US military engagement in Iran. Both votes are likely happening next week. On Thursday, Trump announced that he could take up to two weeks to decide on direct US engagement in Israel's war, but many suspect strikes could come as early as this weekend. 'We want to put every single member of Congress on public record of where they stand specifically on war with Iran' - Cavan Kharrazian, Senior policy advisor, Demand Progress The 1973 War Powers Act allows any senator to introduce a resolution to withdraw US armed forces from a conflict not authorised by Congress. The legislative branch, which acts as the country's purse, is also supposed to be the one that declares war, not the executive. But since the 9/11 attacks in particular, the foggy nature of the so-called "war on terror" has enabled the White House to call the shots, especially as Washington has carried out air strikes in countries from Somalia to Pakistan without an official declaration of war. "Presidents have consistently said that the War Powers Act is an unconstitutional infringement on the executive branch's powers," Hassan El-Tayyab, legislative director for Middle East policy with the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), told Middle East Eye. "What we've seen on the congressional side is really an unwillingness to force these votes in debates [and] use the mechanisms and procedural tools inside the War Powers Act, because it's just a little bit easier... these [lawmakers] would rather just let the executive branch do what it does and not have to be on the record," he added. Congress has recently twice been able to successfully push through a war powers motion - during the first Trump administration on Yemen in 2018, and again on Iran in 2020 - but the president vetoed the resolutions. So what's the point? "What's important with these resolutions is that we want to put every single member of Congress on public record of where they stand specifically on war with Iran," Cavan Kharrazian, senior policy advisor with Demand Progress, told MEE. Demand Progress, as well as FCNL, have been lobbying lawmakers on Capitol Hill to publicly take an anti-war stance along with other civil society organisations. "It's become extremely popular to criticise past disasters like the Iraq War... [and this vote] will now be an opportunity to show whether they're willing to act when it counts," Kharrazian said. And in spite of Trump's past vetoes, there was in fact no further escalation with Yemen or Iran at the time, making a war powers resolution a "de-escalatory vehicle that can help pump the brakes and prevent full escalation and full US involvement in a war of choice," Tayyab told MEE. Pressure A survey conducted by YouGov, an international online research data and analytics technology group, asked on 17 June whether US strikes on Iran would make America safer. The largest portion, 37 percent of the 3,471 US adults polled, said the country would be "less safe". Around a quarter of respondents each said they are "not sure" or that the country would "neither" feel safer or less safe. Only 14 percent said the US would be safer if the US joined Israel's war. Another poll published by The Washington Post on Wednesday found that almost half of the 1,008 Americans it surveyed oppose US strikes on Iran, with that figure dwarfing the number of people who do support military action. Trump is not looking at a green light from the public. Trump promised not to go to war. His most ardent supporters want him to keep his word Read More » That said, there is an undeniably influential pro-war bloc in Washington that has been pervasive regardless of the president and party affiliation. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) and Christians United For Israel (Cufi) are among the leaders in this regard. Since Israel attacked Iran, Aipac has pushed for House Democrats, some of whom have shown scepticism, to issue statements saying that they stand with Israel. It has also shown particular animosity toward one Republican, Massie, who put forward the resolution of the war powers in the House. Earlier this year, an Aipac affiliate group proclaimed that 'Israel, the Holy Land, [is] under attack by Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and Congressman Tom Massie" for his numerous votes against US military aid packages for Israel. "I mean, the pressure is real. We know neoconservatives, the pro-Israel lobby, they're leaning incredibly hard in this moment. They've leaned incredibly hard on every single moment this has come up," Kharrazian told MEE. "We're not naive on the pressures that are against us [but] from [this] past election, we've seen a tidal shift in the narrative and opposition to endless wars in a way that we haven't seen before. So we're really excited for this," to build anti-war momentum, he said. Advocacy groups are also contending with Trump's billionaire donors. Among the top five is Israeli-born Miriam Adelson, whose Adelson Foundation has also bankrolled organisations such as Birthright Israel and Friends of the IDF. "One thing that's not talked about enough is just the forces of Christian Zionism," Tayyab told MEE. "I think some of those groups believe that this is part of just some end times prophecy, which, despite how you know how off the wall it seems, it is a driving force for a lot of the decisions that are being made." That sentiment was perhaps most famously on display earlier this week when former Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson asked Republican Senator Ted Cruz about why he supports Israel. "I was taught from the Bible, those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective, I want to be on the blessing side of things," Cruz said. Cufi is holding its annual summit in the US capital at the end of June.
