At the expense of Israeli Shahar Peer and its reputation around the world, the United Arab Emirates bent to widespread condemnation and will grant Andy Ram the chance to become the first player from Israel to compete in the Persian Gulf nation next week. The reversal is certainly a win for tennis, and evens the score after Peer’s rejection this week. Let’s hope Ram enjoys a safe and protest-free debut.

Kudos to the ATP for putting the tournament and UAE officials’ feet to the fire. “We’ve been unambiguous about our stand,” ATP spokesman Kris Dent said Thursday, adding that he was satisfied UAE officials had made the right call. Dent seemed to draw a distinction between what happened to the WTA last week and the ATP this week when he told me that the men’s tour was “different” since no player seeking to enter Dubai had ever been banned. However, spinning this as some victory for men’s tennis is not the point. Had the ATP's event preceded the women’s, wouldn’t we be talking about Peer’s pyrrhic victory at the expense of Ram?

I have little doubt that Ram was due to receive the same treatment as Peer -- he would have had his visa rejected -- until the events of the last few days. What’s more, I’m more persuaded than ever to believe that Ram and Jonathan Erlich’s withdrawal from Dubai last year merely prevented them from a Peer-like fate. The reality is that the UAE government caved in to the cavalcade of pressure and negative attention it received from groups in and outside of tennis.

The two Israelis were ultimately pawns in a chess match of political gamesmanship that earned the UAE the ire of constituencies from around the world. The flurry of statements that inundated my email this morning -- from ATP chief Adam Helfant to Jewish groups to Ram and Peer themselves – did nothing to dispel that notion. “If there is a silver lining,” WTA CEO Larry Scott told me by phone, “it’s that the number of people who rallied behind Shahar and the idea that sports should be free of politics was amazing. That ideal is alive and well.”

Ram’s lawyer, Amit Naor, said he was “delighted for tennis” and he was “happy the people won.” “The end result is important one,” he added. “This is a milestone for tennis.” But there has been a cost. The image of the sport has been damaged and Peer’s right to earn a living has been undermined. The fact the tours had to take this down to the wire when they knew it was coming a year ago shows shortsightedness, at best. At least the outcry has put others that do business in the UAE or operate expensive universities there on alert. The progressiveness the desert state seeks to promote may be a marketing mirage.

The story is not over. Scott said he was meeting with his board Friday to determine how Peer will be compensated in ranking points and prize money she might have collected in Dubai. He also said that the tournament would be penalized. “The fact that the policy appears to be corrected for the future doesn’t fix what happened last week,” he said. And how will Ram be received? It will be best if protests or extra security stay in the background. It would be a double shame if they had to hold the event behind closed doors or under restrictions, as they apparently will do next month in Malmo when Sweden faces off against Israel in Davis Cup. For the most part, tennis’ global clan does manage to get along quite well, as Kamakshi Tandon points out in her piece on ESPN.com today. We'll see how that plays out in the days ahead.

Guess who’s happiest he sat this one out? Ram’s regular partner Erlich, who is injured and recovering from elbow surgery. Second to him is Player Council President Roger Federer, who maintains a home in Dubai but announced this week he’ll miss the tournament with a back injury. At this point, everyone needs a breather.