March 23, 2026

With Trump’s second term in the White House, transatlantic relations entered challenging times. First came his largely understandable criticism of the European contribution to common defense, to which Europeans responded by committing to raising defense spending from 2% to 5% of their GDP. Second, came his tariff wars. On July 28, 2025, the White House announced a trade deal with the EU, reached during a meeting between Commission President von der Leyen and Trump, “fundamentally rebalancing the economic relationship between the world’s two largest economies”. The deal drew some criticism from within the EU. Third, Washington ignored the European countries’ views on the war in Ukraine. Trump did not allow them a seat at the negotiating table but lectured them in the Oval Office following his Alaska Summit with Putin. His remarks on the EU remained mostly condescending.

Lastly, with the Israel-US attack on Iran and the European reluctance to get involved, his language turned into insults. He said that NATO would be a paper tiger without the US, and Europeans are “cowards”.

This is what British historian Timothy Garton Ash said in a The Guardian article about European leaders’ attitude toward Trump:

“To be fair, a lot of other European leaders have spent much of the past year sacrificing their dignity as they suck up to Trump, condoning his trashing of everything that liberal Europe has stood for since 1945. Mark Rutte, the secretary general of Nato, would beat Starmer to win Private Eye’s premier satirical medal, the OBN (Order of the Brown Nose). The reasons for this sycophancy are obvious: Europe’s dependence on the US for supporting Ukraine, for our own security in Nato and, to a significant degree, for our prosperity…”[i]

It goes without saying that European leaders will not respond to Trump by using similar language. They will not say that Trump and his Gang of Three are not only a problem for Europe and the transatlantic alliance, but also for the US and the rest of the world.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez remains the only European leader to object to the attacks on Iran. He issued a clear and firm refusal on March 6, “No to war,” he declared, denying the US permission to use the joint Spanish-American military bases

to launch attacks against Iran.

Last Monday, “This war has nothing to do with NATO. It’s not NATO’s war,” Stefan Kornelius, a spokesperson for German Chancellor Merz, told reporters in Berlin. “NATO is a defensive alliance, an alliance for the defense of its territory,” he added.

Merz himself told German ‌lawmakers on Wednesday that he agreed Iran must not be allowed to pose a threat to its neighbors but expressed doubts about the rationale behind the U.S.-Israeli war. He said, “We would have advised against pursuing this course of action as it has been pursued. Therefore, we have declared that as long as the war continues, we will not participate in ensuring freedom of navigation in the Strait ​of Hormuz, for example, by military means.”[ii]

At the beginning, Prime Minister Starmer kept his distance from the attack on Iran.

On March 8, the UK’s Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper hit back at President Trump’s criticism of the UK’s response to the conflict in Iran. She said, “It won’t surprise you that we don’t agree with President Trump on every issue.” It’s the prime minister’s job to “take decisions in the UK’s national interest… not in the interest of any other country”, she added.

Last Friday, however, the UK  government said that it would allow the US to fly missions from British bases to bomb Iranian missile sites that are targeting shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Trump said the “UK should have acted a lot faster.”

Iran’s resistance to the Israel-US attack, its de facto closure of the Hormuz Strait, and its targeting of oil and gas infrastructure in Gulf countries have led to growing pressure on Washington, prompting Trump to ask not only Washington’s NATO allies but also China, Japan, and South Korea for help in keeping Hormuz open.

In the absence of any response, Trump said he is considering “winding down” the war, while deploying 2,500 additional marines to the region and asking Congress for 200 billion dollars to fund the war. On Saturday, he threatened to “obliterate” Iran’s power plants if the Strait of Hormuz is not open within 48 hours.

Upon the death of Robert S. Mueller III, the former FBI Director, Robert Mueller, Trump messaged, “Good, I’m glad he’s dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people!”, reflecting his current state of mind and his frustration with the Iran war.

Today marks the 24^th day of the war, with no one having a clear idea, including Trump, as to when and how it will end. Only one thing is certain: The Iran war will not come to an end with a ceasefire. At some stage, the fighting will lose its intensity or even end. This, however, will not mean lasting peace. It will not mean that a third major Israel-US attack will not follow.

When the fighting ends, both the Trump administration and the rulers of Iran will claim victory. The former will focus on the operational and tactical success of Operation Epic Fury, rather than its strategic dimension. Tehran is more likely to claim success on all three dimensions of the conflict, emphasizing its determination to stand up to the world’s number one military power and its number one ally Israel,  the disregard of the two for the security and economic interests of other nations, and the lack of international support for operation “Epic Fury”.

On March 19, 2026, the “Consultative Ministerial Meeting of Foreign Ministers of the Group of Arab and Islamic Countries on Iranian Aggressions”, representing Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, the State of Kuwait, Lebanon, Pakistan, the State of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Türkiye, and the UAE met in Riyadh and issued a joint statement on the current situation in the Middle East. (Except Lebanon, all are members of “Trump’s Board of Peace”.)[iii] Since Ankara has been urging diplomatic engagement to stop the war, its participation in the meeting has rightly drawn some criticism in Türkiye.

Also on March 19, the European Council adopted conclusions on Ukraine, the Middle East, European defense and security, migration, multilateralism, and other items.[iv]

Both documents explicitly condemned Iran’s recent military strikes. There was a unified call for Iran to immediately cease all attacks and provocative acts against neighboring states.

The Joint Statement avoided any reference to the US.

The European Council conclusions, while not mentioning the US directly in a negative light, contained extremely veiled criticism and some strategic distancing. The Council called for de-escalation and maximum restraint, the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure, and full respect for international law by all parties, including the principles of the United Nations Charter and international humanitarian law. It deplored the loss of civilian life and said that the EU is closely monitoring the far-reaching impact of the hostilities, including on economic stability.

On Gaza/West Bank, the European Council reaffirmed the EU’s commitment to international law and a comprehensive, just and lasting peace based on the two-state solution and strongly condemned Israel’s unilateral actions aiming to expand its presence in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the continuing and growing settler violence against Palestinian civilians.

President Trump will remain at the White House for almost three more years. These will be testing times for Europe and NATO. While Trump may continue with his criticism of the EU, European countries would do their best to accommodate Trump, as the European Council’s conclusions on Iran show. Moreover, yesterday, the G7 Foreign Ministers and the High Representative of the EU, reflecting their desire to avoid further tensions with Trump, “strongly condemned the unjustifiable attacks by the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies.” [v]

Regardless, the erosion of trust between the two sides of the Atlantic will remain a problem during and beyond Trump’s second tenure.

---

[i] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/mar/21/britain-us-special-relationship-trump-starmer?CMP=share_btn_url

[ii] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/not-our-war-europe-says-no-trump-2026-03-18/

[iii]https://www.mfa.gov.tr/joint-statement-issued-by-the-consultative-ministerial-meeting-of-foreign-ministers-of-the-group-of-arab-and-islamic-countries-on-iranian-aggressions-19-march-2026.en.mfa

[iv] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/lwhk3itd/en-20260319-european-council-conclusions.pdf

[v] https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/en/newsroom/news/2760058-2760058