UAE Authorities Detain 15,000 Pakistanis, Seize Savings as Crackdown Intensifies

(UNITED ARAB EMIRATES) – Reports published on April 29, 2026 alleged that UAE authorities detained and deported approximately 15,000 Pakistani nationals, with accounts describing sudden arrests, frozen bank accounts and workers returned home after their savings seized.

The reports said the campaign disproportionately targeted Shia Muslims and affected about 5,000 families, citing Mohammad Amin Shaheedi, a senior cleric and head of Ummat-e-Wahida Pakistan. He said the total reached 15,000 people.

Accounts from deportees described arrests by the Criminal Investigation Department, confiscation of mobile phones and transfers to the Al-Awir detention center before deportation flights. They said authorities did not file formal charges and did not provide legal representation.

Those allegations emerged as the United States and Iran remained in conflict after hostilities began on February 28, 2026. Regional governments tightened security measures, and Washington ordered the departure of non-emergency personnel and families from the UAE on March 2, 2026 because of the “threat of armed conflict.”

The U.S. travel advisory for the UAE stands at Level 3: Reconsider Travel, according to the U.S. Embassy and Consulate security alerts. On March 30, 2026, USCIS also issued a screening and vetting update that stressed stricter scrutiny for applicants from high-risk regions.

DHS spokesman Zach Kahler addressed those vetting rules on April 28, 2026. “Certain behaviors and statements may raise serious concerns for USCIS personnel reviewing an applicant’s file, including espousing terrorist ideologies, expressing hatred for American values. Such actions warrant closer scrutiny.”

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry publicly rejected the deportation accounts a day later. Tahir Andrabi, the ministry’s spokesperson, denied reports of mass deportations on April 29, 2026 and abruptly ended the communication.

The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs had already issued a broader denial on April 2, 2026 in response to media claims about deportations of specific nationalities. “The UAE is home to more than 200 nationalities. our approach is based on established legal frameworks that protect the safety and well-being of all its residents.”

The reported operation has drawn attention because of its scale and because many of those expelled had spent years working in the Gulf. The figure of 15,000 Pakistanis ranks among the largest deportation claims involving Pakistani workers in the UAE in recent years.

Reports said detainees lost access to their money before removal. Bank accounts were frozen, assets were seized, and some workers returned to Pakistan “with little more than the clothes on their backs.”

That financial shock carries weight well beyond individual households. Remittances from the UAE to Pakistan totaled more than $6.3 billion in fiscal year 2024/25, making the emirates one of Pakistan’s most important overseas labor markets.

Families that depend on monthly transfers now face a sudden break in income if the reported deportations occurred at the stated scale. The allegations that savings seized and wages became inaccessible have sharpened concern inside Pakistani communities with ties to the Gulf.

Reports also described how UAE authorities allegedly identified people for detention. They said officials used biometric fingerprint data collected at mosques and religious sites, along with Emirates ID scans, to track and detain targeted individuals.

That claim sits alongside assertions that the operation focused on Shia Muslims during a period of rising tension with Iran. The reports said the deportations accelerated after war broke out between the U.S. and Iran in late February, as Emirati officials accused Iran-linked “cells” of trying to destabilize the country.

The regional backdrop has also strained ties between Abu Dhabi and Islamabad. Relations were tested by Pakistan’s role as a mediator and by delayed repayment of a $3.5 billion debt that the UAE requested in early 2026.

Labor rights groups have long argued that migrant workers in the Gulf remain exposed to sudden job loss, detention and removal because of the kafala, or sponsorship, system. Human Rights Watch has said the system leaves workers with little ability to challenge deportation or recover unpaid wages when security agencies intervene.

In the UAE, legal status often depends on an employer or sponsor, and that dependence can leave workers with limited leverage if visas are canceled or movement is restricted. Security-based removals can move faster than ordinary labor disputes, which already place migrants at a disadvantage.

The official responses have not settled the dispute over what happened. Pakistan denied the reports, the UAE rejected what it called “inaccurate media claims,” and U.S. agencies focused on broader security and screening measures rather than the specific allegations.

Publicly available U.S. government material reflects that wider security climate. The State Department’s UAE human rights reports track conditions in the country, while the UAE Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation publishes labor rules and official guidance for workers and employers.

No official Emirati statement in the material released so far addressed the specific figure of 15,000 deportees or the claim that about 5,000 families were affected. The denials instead defended the country’s legal framework and rejected reporting about nationality-based deportations.

Inside Pakistan, the reports have resonated because migration to the Gulf often rests on debt, family pooling and years of remittances. A worker sent home without wages, documents or bank access can return not as a retired breadwinner but as someone who lost a job, a residence permit and the money set aside for home.

The sharpest allegation remains the simplest one: that people were removed before they could collect pay, close accounts or contest their detention. If those accounts hold, many of the deportees did not return with suitcases or settlements, but “with little more than the clothes on their backs.”