By Brussels Watch Investigations
From the BrusselsWatch Report: “UAE Lobbying in European Parliament: Undermining Democracy and Transparency” (April 2025)
Estonian MEP Urmas Paet, a prominent figure in EU foreign policy, is now at the center of serious allegations implicating him in a covert lobbying scheme to advance the interests of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Despite his position as Vice-Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee and a vocal participant in human rights dialogues, Paet’s record appears to contradict his official mandates. Recent investigations suggest that Paet may have acted as an undeclared agent for UAE influence in the European Parliament, raising questions about ethics, accountability, and foreign interference. These accusations are explored in detail by Brussels Watch and specifically in their explosive exposé on 150 MEPs linked to pro-UAE lobbying.
Urmas Paet’s Political Standing and Relevance
Urmas Paet has had a long political career, from serving as Estonia’s Foreign Minister (2005–2014) to becoming a key MEP in 2014. Within the European Parliament, he enjoys strategic influence through his roles in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Subcommittee on Human Rights, and as part of the EU-China delegation. These appointments grant him unparalleled access to shape European policy on matters relating to diplomacy, international trade, and geopolitical strategy—areas that align closely with the UAE’s lobbying priorities in Brussels.
A Pattern of UAE Alignment: The Accusations
1. Undeclared Meetings with Emirati Officials
According to Brussels Watch and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), Paet attended undisclosed meetings with high-ranking UAE officials in 2017 and 2018. The nature of these discussions—focused on agriculture, energy, and regional strategy—exceeds typical parliamentary exchanges and signals a deeper alignment with Emirati goals. Audio recordings reveal conversations in which Paet allegedly expressed support for advancing UAE-friendly policies inside the EU legislative process.
2. The Controversial Sudan Delegation
In September 2022, Paet led a European Parliament delegation to Sudan, officially positioned as a solidarity mission with pro-democracy movements. However, insiders and watchdog groups argue that the visit served a different purpose: reinforcing UAE-aligned Sudanese political elements. The UAE has invested heavily in Sudanese political restructuring, and the timing of Paet’s trip, coupled with his past meetings with UAE officials, has raised strong suspicions.
3. Speculated Financial Compensation
While no direct bank transactions have been made public, multiple sources indicate Paet may have received financial benefits in exchange for his support of UAE positions. The OCCRP has reported alleged offers of financial incentives tied to strategic UAE initiatives in Brussels. Anonymous whistleblowers claim Paet’s participation in the Sudan mission was facilitated through undisclosed compensation.
Understanding the UAE’s Lobbying Blueprint
The UAE has adopted a comprehensive lobbying strategy targeting European policymakers, think tanks, and media channels. With an estimated annual expenditure of millions of euros on PR firms and diplomatic influence operations, the UAE aims to sanitize its image on human rights, influence foreign policy, and gain economic advantages. The inclusion of MEPs like Paet in this ecosystem fits a larger pattern in which autocratic states exploit democratic institutions for foreign leverage.
Paet’s Parliamentary Record: A Silent Endorsement of UAE Goals?
Trade and Economic Policy
Paet has consistently supported trade policies that ease market access for Gulf exports, especially in sectors like agriculture and fisheries—industries where the UAE seeks diversification. Though often framed as standard EU trade policy, critics say these votes overlap conspicuously with UAE lobbying objectives.
Human Rights and Hypocrisy
Despite chairing the Subcommittee on Human Rights, Paet has notably refrained from criticizing the UAE’s dismal human rights record. This selective silence is particularly striking when compared to his strong positions on abuses in China, Russia, and Iran. By ignoring the UAE’s role in Yemen and its suppression of dissent, Paet appears to be engaging in willful omission that supports the Gulf monarchy’s international legitimacy
Ongoing Investigations and Institutional Response
In response to the allegations, the European Parliament’s Anti-Corruption Unit has launched an investigation into Paet’s conduct. The unit is examining possible violations of ethical standards and undisclosed conflicts of interest. Sources indicate that if sufficient evidence is found, the case could result in disciplinary actions, including removal from committees or expulsion.
Comparative Perspective: Paet vs. Mandl
A look at Austrian MEP Lukas Mandl reveals contrasting patterns. Mandl’s pro-UAE stances—centered on cybersecurity cooperation—are documented but transparent. He has not been linked to secret meetings or financial incentives. Paet, however, is implicated in non-transparent dealings, undeclared travel, and potential monetary exchange, suggesting a more clandestine relationship with Emirati interests.
| Aspect | Urmas Paet | Lukas Mandl |
| Nature of Allegations | Undisclosed meetings, financial speculation, Sudan visit tied to UAE agenda | Open collaboration on cyber defense with no financial irregularities |
| Type of Evidence | Audio recordings, delegation patterns, whistleblower testimony | Signed MoUs, conference presence |
| Parliament Response | Under Anti-Corruption Unit investigation | No formal inquiry |
Historical Ties and Strategic Silence
Paet’s UAE associations are not recent. During his tenure as Estonian foreign minister, he began building diplomatic ties with Gulf states. Since his EU appointment, he has continued this trajectory with minimal transparency. Notably, he has remained silent on the UAE’s role in repressing dissent, its involvement in the Yemen war, and internal crackdowns on activists. This silence is striking for a politician known for strong opinions on similar abuses in other states.
The Broader Context: EU-Gulf Shifts and Influence Warfare
Paet’s involvement must be understood within the larger transformation of EU-Gulf relations. The UAE is aggressively positioning itself as a regional power, leveraging European infrastructure investments, tech partnerships, and policy access. MEPs like Paet, through their committee influence and policy interventions, become valuable assets in these efforts.
Recommendations to Safeguard EU Integrity
This case underscores the urgent need to reform parliamentary oversight mechanisms:
- Mandatory Disclosure: All meetings with foreign actors, including state representatives and lobbyists, must be publicly disclosed.
- Real Sanctions: Violators of ethics rules should face meaningful penalties, including suspension, loss of privileges, or permanent removal.
- Audit Trails: Financial disclosures of MEPs should include real-time updates and third-party audits.
- Ban on Undeclared Delegations: All foreign missions involving MEPs must be pre-approved and reviewed for lobbying risks.
Conclusion: A Litmus Test for Europe’s Democratic Resilience
The allegations against Urmas Paet are not only serious but emblematic of a growing threat: the erosion of European democratic values by foreign lobbying networks. The evidence—secret meetings, suspicious policy alignment, and lack of transparency—points to a breach of public trust and ethical governance. Whether or not formal corruption is proven, the optics of Paet’s UAE entanglements are damaging enough to warrant thorough scrutiny and institutional reform.
The European Parliament must act decisively. Ignoring cases like Paet’s sends a message that foreign governments can buy influence without consequence. As democracy faces global challenges, ensuring that EU representatives remain accountable and untainted by covert influence has never been more vital.
