{"id":315108,"date":"2026-04-20T12:00:53","date_gmt":"2026-04-20T11:00:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=315108"},"modified":"2026-04-18T04:37:31","modified_gmt":"2026-04-18T03:37:31","slug":"why-the-israeli-and-us-war-in-iran-is-not-europes-war","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2026\/04\/why-the-israeli-and-us-war-in-iran-is-not-europes-war\/","title":{"rendered":"Why the Israeli and US War in Iran Is “Not Europe’s War”"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

At a funeral ceremony for a killed Iranian military commander, Tehran, April 2026\u00a0 Majid Asgaripour \/ West Asia News Agency \/ Reuters<\/p><\/div>\n

17 Apr 2026\u00a0<\/em>– Since the launch of the Israel and US war against Iran on 28 Feb 2026, European countries have been exposed to the consequences of a conflict they neither initiated nor sought to join. Beyond triggering an energy crisis, the Middle East war has shifted European leaders’ attention away from Ukraine, plunged the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) into an existential crisis<\/a>, and raised fears of a migration wave<\/a>\u00a0and security threats<\/a>\u00a0that will increase support for anti-immigrant \u00a0parties. Whether or not the current ceasefire in the Middle East holds, the war\u2019s repercussions will be long-lasting for Europe.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Europe\u2019s Collective Refusal to Follow Washington into War<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Despite the difficulty European states faced in articulating a unified position since the outset of the war, the announcement of a two\u2011week ceasefire agreement between the United States (US) and Iran was broadly welcomed<\/a>\u00a0by European Union (EU) members on April 8. European countries are widely represented in the coalition<\/a>\u00a0launched by the United Kingdom (UK) to restore free passage through the Strait of Hormuz.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

European nations are united in their refusal<\/a>\u00a0to become directly involved in the Israeli and US war. Their reluctance reflects a desire for autonomy from the US policy following a year of US President Trump\u2019s threats and hostile actions. Since returning to the White House in January 2025, Donald Trump has imposed arbitrary tariffs<\/a>\u00a0on European Union exporters. He engaged Russia in negotiations over Europe\u2019s future while excluding both European countries and Ukraine. Trump incredibly blames Ukraine for Russia\u2019s invasion and its genocide against Ukraine. Trump has declared his intention to seize Greenland<\/a>, which for centuries has been a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, a loyal member of NATO.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Europe\u2019s shared refusal to join the war against Iran reflects Europe\u2019s memory of the collective trauma caused by its involvement in the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars<\/a>. In 2003, American neoconservatives dragged the UK, Spain, and numerous post-communist Central and Eastern European states into the Iraq war, ignoring opposition from France and Germany. The George W. Bush administration created a division<\/a>\u00a0between the \u201cnew Europe\u201d, compliant with US policy, and the \u201cold Europe\u201d which resisted US domination. Today, European nations are determined<\/a>\u00a0not to be drawn into another US-led war, regardless of Donald Trump\u2019s aggressive attacks on NATO and his tariff blackmail policies.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Ukraine, the Collateral Victim<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

European countries have rejected military involvement in the Iran war because \u201cThis is not Europe\u2019s war,\u201d as EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas<\/a>, stated. \u201cEurope\u2019s war is Ukraine.\u201d As rising oil prices and suspension of US sanctions on Russian oil boost Russia\u2019s wartime economy<\/a>, Ukraine needs even greater financial and military support. Since the outbreak of the Iran war, Russia has earned over $150 million every day<\/a>\u00a0in added sales of oil.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Meanwhile, the US administration has cut off most of its direct security assistance to Ukraine. Under European pressure, the US agreed to supply US made military equipment purchased from the US by Europeans under the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL<\/a>) program implemented by NATO.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In early April, Donald Trump threatened<\/a>\u00a0to block even those weapons supplies to Ukraine if European allies refused to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Before the temporary ceasefire agreement, the Pentagon was even considering redirecting<\/a>\u00a0weapons bought by Europe for military assistance to Ukraine to resupply US arsenals depleted by the Iran war. The Trump regime has adopted a strategy of meddling<\/a>\u00a0in the domestic political affairs of European countries. Trump and Vice President Vance have publicly endorsed a German right-wing party and directly campaigned for the autocratic Orban party in Hungary.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

To prevent Ukraine from falling to Russia\u2019s relentless aggression in Ukraine, European states and the EU must continue to support Ukraine independently of the NATO alliance. European leaders should also collectively condemn and counter attempts by Trump to interfere in their political affairs.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Europeans must maintain a firm stance against Putin\u2019s goal of reestablishing the Russian and Soviet empire. The Belgian prime minister\u2019s appeasement proposal<\/a>\u00a0to normalize relations between the EU and Russia to secure cheaper energy supplies sparked a European outcry. The Iran war demonstrates how crucial energy independence<\/a>\u00a0is to Europe\u2019s defense strategy against Russian aggression.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

European Division Weakens Europe<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Despite their shared refusal to engage directly in the Iran war, European leaders have reacted in a fragmented<\/a>\u00a0and inconsistent way to the Iran war. Most European states have not directly condemned the US and Israel for the illegality of their war under international law. The initial statement<\/a>\u00a0by the E3 group (UK, Germany, France) emphasized the threat presented by Iran\u2019s nuclear program without stressing the importance of complying with international law. The Italian Council of Ministers President, Giorgia Meloni, opted to \u201cneither condemn nor condone<\/a>\u201d the war, kissing the golden ring of the narcissistic Donald Trump<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Finland, Norway<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0and Spain<\/a>\u00a0were among the few European states to explicitly say \u201cno to war\u201d and to call on all parties to uphold international law. Spain denied<\/a>\u00a0US forces permission to use their joint military bases of Rota and Mor\u00f3n. Spain also withdrew<\/a>\u00a0its ambassador to Israel, and closed Spanish airspace<\/a>\u00a0to American aircraft involved in strikes on Iran. Access to airspace by the US Airforce was also denied<\/a>\u00a0by Italy and France., Switzerland and Austria invoked their wartime neutrality policy to deny access to US military aircraft.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Nevertheless, many countries, notably Germany<\/a>, are reluctant to deny the United States access to their joint military bases out of respect for their obligations in NATO. The 31 permanent bases and 19 military sites operated<\/a>\u00a0by the US across Europe are governed by bilateral agreements that allow the US to use them for NATO purposes. However, these military facilities remain under the sovereign control of European states. European governments should leverage<\/a> their strategic influence assertively to protect European interests when faced with the America First policies of the US President.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The End of NATO?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In response to the increasingly united policies of European countries toward the US, Donald Trump has openly threatened to withdraw<\/a>\u00a0from the NATO alliance. US withdrawal would be a fatal blow to the world\u2019s largest and most successful military alliance. US withdrawal from NATO would prove detrimental<\/a>\u00a0to Europe. But it would also be disastrous for the US with its heavy reliance on its European allies for military bases, intelligence sharing, and diplomacy. Mediation<\/a>\u00a0by T\u00fcrkiye, NATO’s second largest military power, might help prevent this strategic disaster. Withdrawal from NATO would require Congressional approval under US law. But Republican control of the US Congress makes this a weak reed to grasp.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

US officials<\/a>\u00a0have told their European counterparts to prepare to assume primary responsibility for Europe\u2019s defense by 2027, Europeans could seize this opportunity to step out from under the US military umbrella. To do that, the EU would have to substantially increase its defense spending to compensate for the loss of US security. European defense budgets have already doubled since the Russian invasion<\/a>\u00a0of Ukraine in 2022 and since Donald Trump\u2019s return<\/a>\u00a0to the White House. In countries with low growth and high public debt, financing massive rearmament will mean cutting social spending<\/a>, which will increase social and political instability across Europe. Popular insecurity leads to the rise of \u201cpopulist\u201d security states led by right-wing parties.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The EU has historically struggled to achieve coordination in defense matters. This fact was demonstrated in 1954 by the failure<\/a>\u00a0of the European Defense Community following the French Parliament\u2019s rejection of the NATO treaty. European Union military decisions still require unanimity. With this barrier to acting swiftly and unanimously on defense issues, the future of European security will rest on a few powerful states<\/a>: Germany, which has the fourth largest defense budget in the world, Poland which has the largest economy on Europe\u2019s eastern front and already spends 4.5% of its GDP on defense, and France and the UK, the two European states that possess the strategic power of nuclear deterrence.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Spillover Risks<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Military experts have outlined<\/a>\u00a0two possible escalation scenarios outside the Middle East. One would be set off by Iranian strikes on the US military base in T\u00fcrkiye that stores US nuclear weapons for Europe\u2019s defense. A second would be a ballistic missile attack on Europe using long range missiles that could reach London or Paris.<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0Iran has launched<\/a>\u00a0two long range ballistic missiles at the joint British – American military base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Neither hit its target.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Both these scenarios for escalation are unlikely. Iran is likely to limit attacks against countries beyond Israel, the US, and tiny Gulf states to avoid<\/a>\u00a0widening the war and increasing the number of adversaries it must confront. \u00a0European governments are strengthening defense of critical infrastructure<\/a>.\u00a0European countries fear<\/a>\u00a0an increase in proxy-led terrorist attacks orchestrated by Iran, similar to the thwarted attack on March 29 against the Paris offices of Bank of America, which was allegedly<\/a>\u00a0carried out by a pro-Iranian group that has called for attacks against the Jewish community in Europe.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

A New Migrant Crisis in Europe and Strategic Opportunism for Far-Right Groups<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Europeans fear<\/a>\u00a0a new migration surge as refugees flee the wars in the Middle East. Lebanese<\/a>\u00a0are likely to flee to Europe, as southern Lebanon has been emptied by Israeli evacuation orders and intense bombardment by the Israeli military in its war against Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite militia. The Israeli offensive has displaced more than 1.2 million<\/a>\u00a0people in Lebanon – one-fifth of the country\u2019s population.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) has not yet recorded<\/a>\u00a0a massive cross-border movement of refugees leaving Lebanon or Iran. But EU leaders, fearing a migration crisis like the Syrian displacement of 2015<\/a>, have already held consultations with T\u00fcrkiye, the transit route between Iran and Europe. T\u00fcrkiye has agreed to confine refugees at the border. Huge refugee camps could create a new humanitarian catastrophe.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

T\u00fcrkiye is leveraging its strategic geographical position and seeking to position itself as a mediator in numerous conflicts, particularly in the Middle East and Ukraine. T\u00fcrkiye hopes to bolster its candidacy for acceptance into the European Union. European nations are asked to avert their eyes and ignore T\u00fcrkiye’s backsliding into authoritarianism and its commission of crimes against humanity \u00a0against Kurds in T\u00fcrkiye, Iraq and Syria.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Anti-migrant parties<\/a>\u00a0have already significantly increased their support all over Europe. The Iran war could have a long-term negative effect on European democracies. Temporarily ending Iran\u2019s development of nuclear weapons is a laudable outcome for this war. But unless the theocratic tyranny in Iran is overthrown, the war will not be \u201cwon.\u201d Only the Iranian people can do that. All democracies should generously support non-violent resistance by Iranians, the best way, the only good way, to defeat tyranny.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Genocide Watch Recommends:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n