No one except maybe the UAE
Is there any indication at all that the UAE is considering retaliatory measures, let alone whether such measures would actually hurt us more than them? I hear a lot of accusations of fearmongering and chickenlittle-ism being leveled against opponents of the ports deal, but then I see statements like the one above, and it makes me wonder a little.
However, the UAE has been pretty solidly on our side and apparently already services most of our navy in the region.
They have as sophisticated a banking and business structure as can be found outside of the major western countries and in that manner have much to lose from the spread of either backward looking fundamental islam or the crises it has engendered.
They do have radicals in their society, just as does Canada and most of europe; there is virtually no place on the globe that can guarantee that no one can buy a rubber boat and load it up with explosives.
Immediately prior to what I consider a near criminal vote in congress we saw growing evidence that this was a business deal - not a national security issue.
We've also seen that both mainland Chinese and other islamic states already have very similar access ('ownership') in US ports.
We know that 'security' is largely a matter of controls at the ports of origin - including the UAE.
This was a business deal and the UAE is a business oriented assembly of smaller (presumably more homogeneous) entities.
It is THEIR interpretation that is now critical - how should they react to an openly anti-muslim turn of events between them and a western power that they have been building trade ties with & which many of their regional neighbors are just as overtly at war with?
Finally, it's for darn sure that others in the area will eventually use this 'insult' as a means to pressure UAE and to stir up both overseas & local islamists...lots more significant than a couple of cartoons.