The EU responds lukewarmly to the offensive against Iran and risks being relegated in the midst of a shake-up of the world order | International

What Iran is experiencing its most decisive moment since 1979 It is something that no one doubts. The role that the European Union can play in its future, as full of uncertainties and dangers as it is of hope, is not so clear. After a virtual meeting of the EU Foreign Ministers this Sunday, the High Representative for Foreign Policy, Kaja Kallas, has reiterated, on behalf of the Twenty-Seven, the European call to de-escalate the conflict and to “full respect for international law”. But the EU stops short of condemning an attack unsupported by international law that, according to several analysts, sets a “precedent” in other conflicts, from Ukraine to, potentially, Greenland.

“We call for maximum restraint, the protection of civilians and full respect for international law, including the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international humanitarian law,” says the joint statement, underlining that the new conflict “must not lead to an escalation that could threaten the Middle East, Europe and other regions, with unpredictable consequences, including in the economic sphere.” As in the statements in X by Kallas herself and the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyenthroughout the day, the joint statement makes no mention of the US-Israeli attack and limits itself to urging Iran to “refrain from carrying out indiscriminate military attacks.” They are “inexcusable,” the Estonian stressed.

The division of European partners in the face of the new conflict at their doors It was evident, once again, this Sunday. After the meeting of foreign ministers, the Spanish José Manuel Albares recalled that “the unilateral action” of the United States and Israel “does not fit within the charter of the United Nations and international law, absolutely fundamental principles and concepts for the EU that must be defended at all times.”

Meanwhile, the German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, rejected an open condemnation despite also recognizing some reservations regarding the international law of action against Tehran. “This is not the time to lecture our allies, but to stay united. Despite all the doubts, we share many of their objectives, without being able to really achieve them,” said the conservative, who this Tuesday will meet in Washington with the American president, Donald Trump.

The first community responses have been marked, with exceptions such as Spain or Norway, by a lukewarmness bordering on acquiescence with an attack that, once again, as has happened previously in the Trump Government, lacks the endorsement of international institutions.

Something that, the deputy director of the Middle East program at the Council for Foreign Relations (ECFR), Ellie Geranmayeh, warns in an analysis, carries a significant risk beyond the regional implications of the new conflict. “Remaining silent or ambivalent would only convey weakness to the United States, Russia and China and encourage similar behavior in the future,” writes.

“European leaders are not seeing the big picturethe bigger picture, and are implicitly legitimizing the erosion of the post-war global legal order in favor of an international security system based on the law of the strongest,” agrees Kristina Kausch, senior researcher and representative of the think tank German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFU) in Madrid. And this, initiating military action with the sole intention of changing a regime, as has also happened in Venezuela, sets a “precedent” that can benefit China or Russia, which “there have justification to do whatever they want,” he warns in a telephone conversation.

Tepidity

The perceived European lukewarmness in the face of new military action without international authorization also worries other institutions. The lack of European assertiveness puts the Old Continent in danger of becoming a mere stone guest in a new world order where “the impulses and power of the strongest try to govern relations between States,” warned the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Alain Berset.

“The conflict unfolding in Iran, Israel and throughout the Gulf is a test of whether Europe intends to shape the emerging order or whether it will simply observe its fragmentation,” said the head of the pan-European organization, based in Strasbourg. “Inaction is not prudence. It is abdication,” the Swiss concluded with unusual harshness in a statement in which he also criticized the uncritical way in which European capitals and institutions received the news of the death of Iran’s top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, limiting himself to indicating that it opens a door of opportunity for more freedom in the Persian country, as both Von der Leyen and Kallas said. Nor did the capture and transfer to a prison in New York of the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, in a US operation at the beginning of the year, unleash a resounding condemnation from the EU towards an action lacking international legality.

“As we have seen with the crisis in Venezuela, “This situation cannot be reduced to a binary choice between condemnation and support, regardless of the leadership and nature of the regime in Tehran,” Berset stressed. “This world has no legal order, only force and double standards,” he lamented. “No one can hide behind the pretense that this order has never been violated, or that the powerful have not imposed their will when it suited them. But what we have seen in Ukraine, in Gaza, in Venezuela and, in another way, in Greenland, is a slide towards a total collapse of that order,” he predicted.

That Europe counts for little in American international plans has become clear once again with the coordinated attack by Washington and Israel against Iran. Few European governments – among them the German or Polish – were previously warned of the war plans, of which the EU as an institution was not aware until the first attacks occurred. Not even the Italian Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni, Trump’s supposed ally, knew of the imminent attack: her Defense Minister, Guido Crosetto, had traveled to Dubai on Friday to meet with his family and had to return this Sunday on a military plane. “France was neither warned nor involved,” French President Emmanuel Macron also acknowledged on Saturday.

“To our European allies: you have become pathetically soft and have lost your enthusiasm for confronting evil unless it is at your door,” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, one of Trump’s most ardent defenders, launched in X. “European ‘leadership’ is weak, fickle and afraid of its own shadow. They would not understand decisive action even if it hit them in the face,” Chris LaCivita, Republican strategist and co-director of Trump’s campaign that led him to his second presidential term a year ago, replied to the message.

The ECFR expert urged Europeans “not to prevaricate” and to make some quick decisions. It is important, Geranmayeh stressed in his analysis, “to clearly communicate that this is a war chosen by the United States, in contravention of the same United Nations Charter that the Europeans themselves have invoked to condemn Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine and insist on the sovereignty of Greenland.”