United Arab Emirates Withdraws From OPEC And OPEC+ Effective May 1, 2026

The United Arab Emirates announced it would withdraw from OPEC and OPEC+ in a decision that takes effect on May 1, 2026, ending more than five decades of membership in the Vienna-based oil cartel.

“After decades of membership, the United Arab Emirates has decided to quit the oil producers’ group, OPEC, in order to focus on “national interests” and forge its own path, it has said”

Al Jazeera

The UAE said the move reflects “policy-driven evolution aligned with long-term market fundamentals,” and it framed the step as “sovereign” and “in line with its long-term energy strategy, its true production capability and its national interest, as well as global energy market stability,” according to Suhail Al Mazrouei and Dr Sultan Al Jaber.

Al Jazeera

In statements carried by state-linked reporting, the UAE also said the decision reflects “national interests” and that it would continue to increase production “gradually and prudently.”

The Times of Israel reported that UAE Energy Minister Suhail Mohamed al-Mazrouei told Reuters the decision was made after a “careful look at current and future policies related to level of production,” and he said the UAE did not raise the issue with any other country.

Multiple outlets tied the timing to the Iran war and the resulting energy supply crunch, with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation describing the move as coming “as an energy crisis triggered by the Iran war exposes splits among Gulf nations.”

Reuters-linked reporting in CBC said the UAE made the announcement via its state-run WAM news agency and that it would leave OPEC and OPEC+ as of Friday, while the broader reporting across outlets consistently placed the effective date at May 1.

Across the reporting, the UAE’s exit is repeatedly linked to the interaction between OPEC quota limits, the Strait of Hormuz disruption during the Iran war, and the UAE’s stated push to expand production capacity.

Al Jazeera reported that before the Iran war the UAE’s production capacity had grown to 4.8 million bpd, but under its OPEC agreement it was only allowed to produce 3.2 million bpd, and it said the UAE decided to quit after years of dissatisfaction with OPEC’s policy of capping members’ production to control prices.

Al-Yawm al-Sabi'

The National said the UAE’s decision came as the “widespread energy supply collapse from the Iran war” left the market tight, and it described the UAE as close to achieving a goal of reaching 5 million bpd by 2027 after a $150 billion spending programme.

CBC similarly described the UAE’s exit as a response to an “unprecedented energy crisis triggered by the Iran war,” and it said the UAE would be freed from OPEC quotas once exports via the Gulf resume.

The Times of Israel emphasized that OPEC Gulf producers had already been struggling to ship exports through the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint “through which a fifth of the world’s crude oil and liquefied natural gas normally passes,” because of Iranian threats and attacks against vessels.

Al Jazeera also said the UAE’s exports are constrained by Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz, but the UAE can sell some oil via the Fujairah terminal, and it reported that last year it exported 1.7 million bpd of crude oil and refined fuels this way.

Reactions to the UAE’s withdrawal span Gulf officials, US lawmakers, and energy analysts, with each framing the move through different lenses of market impact and regional politics.

In the US Congress, Jewish Insider quoted Sen. Chris Coons saying the decision shows “the continued fragmentation of the Gulf Cooperation Council and of the relations between our Gulf partners as Saudi and the Emirates are pursuing different security paths,” and it quoted Sen. John Cornyn saying he was “trying to understand” what the move would mean but that if the UAE “wouldn’t be limited in terms of what they can produce into the world’s oil supply,” it would be “a positive development.”

Cornyn added that “more supply would be good and hopefully bring down gas prices,” and Sen. Richard Blumenthal told Jewish Insider that Abu Dhabi’s departure “may signal that the cohesion of OPEC is splintering and its power may be lessening … and there may be a freer market ahead.”

On the UAE side, The National quoted Suhail Al Mazrouei saying the decision reflected “policy-driven evolution aligned with long-term market fundamentals,” while Dr Sultan Al Jaber said the move was “sovereign” and tied to “global energy market stability.”

In Reuters-linked reporting, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation described the win for Donald Trump, quoting the idea that Trump has accused OPEC of “ripping off the rest of the world” by inflating oil prices, and it also quoted Anwar Gargash criticizing Gulf response to Iranian attacks, saying “the Gulf Cooperation Council countries supported each other logistically, but politically and militarily, I think their position has been the weakest historically.”

Energy analysts also offered competing interpretations: Al Jazeera Net quoted economist Amer al-Shobky warning that the UAE exit strikes at OPEC+’s “image of cohesion and collective discipline,” while Al Jazeera Net also included energy expert Mamdouh Salama arguing the withdrawal “will have only a modest effect on OPEC’s position and will not undermine OPEC+ as the world’s largest player.”

The same decision is portrayed with markedly different emphasis across outlets, ranging from a “historic blow” to a “win for Trump,” and from a potential fracture in cohesion to a limited near-term market effect.

The Times of Israel called the move “a historic blow to global oil cartel,” describing it as potentially creating “disarray and weaken the group,” and it framed the decision as a “win for US President Donald Trump” in the context of Trump’s accusation that OPEC was “ripping off the rest of the world.”

Australian Broadcasting Corporation

The Guardian similarly described the UAE’s exit as “a win for Donald Trump as oil cartel weakened,” and it said the UAE’s departure “laid bare the long-running tensions between the UAE and Saudi Arabia over the group’s approach to oil production limits and geopolitics.”

By contrast, CBC and Al Jazeera both stressed that the immediate market impact would likely be muted because exports are constrained by the Strait of Hormuz disruption, with CBC saying the exit “would not have a huge impact on the market because of the situation in the strait.”

Al Jazeera’s framing also leaned toward a longer-run strategic shift, quoting Kingsmill Bond that “They are clearly preparing for the period after the war,” and it contrasted the UAE’s approach with Saudi Arabia’s goal of keeping production capped to maintain high oil prices.

Al Jazeera Net added a structural argument about cohesion, saying the UAE exit raises “a broader question about the future ability of OPEC and OPEC+ to manage supply, curb prices, and maintain the image of cohesion,” and it quoted energy expert Nahad Ismail that the withdrawal of a major producer will create “at least a temporary state of confusion and instability within OPEC.”

The reporting repeatedly returns to the question of what happens after May 1, 2026, when the UAE is no longer bound by OPEC and OPEC+ quota frameworks and can align production with “national interests” and demand conditions.

Al Jazeera said the UAE’s departure is unlikely to have an immediate impact because exports are constrained by Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz, but it warned that if the conflict ends with an agreement between Iran and the US that allows for the resumption of free navigation through the strait, the UAE could potentially flood the market with its “1.6 million bpd of extra production,” which it described as “equivalent to about 1.5 percent of global oil supply.”

BBC

The National similarly described the UAE’s capacity trajectory, saying Adnoc is close to achieving the goal of reaching 5 million bpd by 2027 after a $150 billion spending programme, and it said the UAE would “gradually increase production to supply global markets, once freedom of navigation is restored in the Strait of Hormuz.”

The Guardian added a pricing framing, saying the UAE said it would bring additional production “in a gradual and measured manner, aligned with demand and market conditions,” and it quoted David Oxley saying the announcement “will not have any immediate implications for the global energy market, but it does suggest that global supplies will be higher than would otherwise be the case once the strait of Hormuz reopens.”

In the longer-run, Al Jazeera Net argued that the UAE exit weakens OPEC+’s tools, including production quotas, voluntary cuts, and spare capacity, and it said the full impact may not be immediately evident because of Hormuz disruptions and the regional war.

Finally, other outlets extended the stakes beyond prices: South China Morning Post reported that for major importers such as China, “any potential supply increase is positive as it means pressure on prices,” and it quoted Muyu Xu saying “I would expect China to increase purchases from the UAE,” while Kpler data in the same piece said China imported 692,000 barrels per day from the UAE in 2025.