EU countries and UK respond in unison: Not our war |
EU countries and UK respond in unison: Not our war
Kallas is trying to chart a wholly European middle ground that, while not outright fulfilling Trump's demands, still takes them into consideration.
After a chorus of negative responses from Australia to Japan, it was now Europe's turn to say no to Trump, determined not to be dragged into a conflict that – to quote High Representative Kaja Kallas – “is not Europe's war.”
European Union countries and the United Kingdom are collectively rejecting Donald Trump's demands to use force to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and ensure free passage for ships carrying gas and oil. They are also rejecting the possibility of a NATO mission in the region, pushing back against the tycoon's threats of a “bleak future” for the Atlantic pact if the partners in the alliance fail to join in.
His demands were thus met with a double no, with undertones of unity across the Old Continent for once. Leading the “revolt” is Berlin, which is abandoning the policy of appeasement pursued by Chancellor Friedrich Merz ever since the still-unresolved tariff dispute. “I don't see that NATO has made any decision in this direction or could assume responsibility for the Strait of Hormuz,” German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul stated bluntly, while Merz himself has denied any possibility of German military participation.
The rationale against a NATO intervention seems almost trivial: so far, none of the Alliance's member countries have been directly attacked. The incident that most directly affected Europe was the Iranian drone that struck the British base at Akrotiri in Cyprus during the early hours following the US and Israeli military action. However, while the Mediterranean island is part of the EU, it is not a member of the Alliance due to Turkey's veto over the territorial dispute with Greece, which dates back more than 50 years.
In any case, “no such consultations had yet been triggered” within NATO, added Poland's top diplomat, Minister Radosław Sikorski, confirming this prevailing line of thinking. The implication is that, in theory, this is something that could be considered, but it will only be discussed if and when the proposal is actually put on the agenda.
From London, Prime Minister Keir Starmer – although concerned about the consequences of the shipping blockade – offered an even more emphatic no: “We will not be drawn into the wider war.”
Trump, visibly irritated, commented: “I'm not happy with the United Kingdom. I think they'll be involved, yeah, maybe. But they should be involved enthusiastically. We've been protecting these countries for years with NATO.”
But the British government also sees no room for NATO action; instead, it is considering autonomous measures, such as sending drones to search for mines. A future plan to restore freedom of navigation – currently being looked at together with international allies, including European ones – has not been ruled out. Such a strategic plan has not yet emerged; in any event, the Labour leader admits it will be neither simple nor immediate.
The opportunity to gauge the extent of non-acquiescence to Trump's wishes was given by the meeting of the 27 member states' foreign ministers in the EU capital on Tuesday. Brussels' foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, put several options on the table to overcome the Hormuz blockade. The main one involves modifying the mandate of the Aspides mission – deployed in the Red Sea since the start of the Houthi attacks from Yemen – to transform it into an escort for vessels over that same stretch of water. Kallas is trying to chart a wholly European middle ground that, while not outright fulfilling Trump's demands, still takes them into consideration. However, since the 27 member states are not willing to follow her lead on this – another point on which they are unusually united – Kallas is floating an additional second possibility: a “coalition of the willing” for Hormuz, while admitting that the best solution would be to recalibrate the existing operation.
But this project is itself a bridge too far by the High Representative, who is quite often contradicted by the very states she is mandated to coordinate. “Everything stays as it is,” stressed Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani as he left the meeting. At most, the Forza Italia (FI) leader added, it will be possible to “reinforce the presence of military ships in the Red Sea to increase the number of frigates” engaged in maritime transport security operations. Nothing more, for the time being. Ultimately, it was Kallas herself who summed up the foreign ministers' meeting, admitting that “nobody wants to actively enter this war.” That is a prospect that worries Europe so deeply that it has managed to keep the continent united against Donald Trump.