Skip to main content

Europe’s Armed Non-Belligerence in the Gulf

On February 28th, the attack launched by the United States and Israel against Iran ignited the third Gulf War. Already dealing with the conflict in Ukraine on its eastern flank, Europe now finds itself facing a second war on its borders, this time to the south. Unlike in 1991 and 2003, in the current conflict Washington has made no effort to build a coalition. No European or NATO country, nor any regional power, has been formally involved in the plans for intervention.

European exclusion and the Atlantic crisis

Europe’s initial exclusion – despite now being called upon to bear the energy, economic, and political consequences of Washington’s new war of choice – is the latest chapter of the Atlantic crisis. The issue has been at the centre of the European press’s commentary. Particularly in the early days, Brussels’ delays and impotence were highlighted. The Europe that isn’t there ran the headline of the Corriere della Sera. For Stefano Lepri, Europe’s absence constitutes one of the most disturbing aspects of this crisis that risks setting the world ablaze. This lament is steeped in the crocodile tears of imperialist Europeanism. For the Corriere, without Europe, one of the key players would be missing – one that has always striven to defend the values of freedom and justice – given that obligations exist and that Iran must be stopped at all costs [March 3rd].

In June 2025, moreover, it was Friedrich Merz himself who stated on TV that Israel is doing the dirty work for all of us, referring precisely to the targeted military operations against Iran’s nuclear programme. This stance already reflected the goal, shared by Rome, of mitigating friction, as much as possible, with Washington.

Dramatising Europe’s absence may serve as an invitation to accelerate its process of political, economic, and military rearmament. This prospect emerges clearly from the realist perspective featured in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. For Nikolas Busse, the fact that the war against Iran is the first major war the United States has fought without Europe’s direct involvement reflects a harsh strategic reality: American and European interests are no longer aligned, neither in the Middle East nor in Europe [March 12th]. For Berthold Kohler, one of the four editors of the FAZ, Europe cannot afford to remain a bystander. If anything, it must reduce its dependence, not only on oil and gas from the Persian Gulf, but also on the United States for defence [March 17th]. Caroline de Gruyter, writing in the Dutch liberal daily NRC Handelsblad, directly calls for action. With every bomb dropped on Iran and with every costly mistake by Trump, she writes, European strategic autonomy is taking shape [March 7th].

European delay and forward deterrence

European imperialism’s delay in centralising its foreign and security policy is certainly a matter of fact. This is nothing new. In the past, we have already observed how, during the second Gulf War, American interference ended up freezing for two decades the substantial steps that Europe was taking in the field of common defence. The third Gulf War has struck Europe in the midst of a colossal rearmament process, which has its foundation in the crisis in the world order. It is underpinned by massive industrial and spending programmes, which now also explicitly include a nuclear dimension.

In this context, the French have declared a policy of forward deterrence in the wake of the Israeli-American attack and established an embryonic nuclear directorate within the E3 (France, Germany, Britain). This also represents a substantial political response, in the name of continental strategic autonomy, to the unilateralism of the current American administration and of any which may later follow suit.

A coordinated European defensive game

On the one hand, the Old Continent is playing a defensive game, given the impossibility of speaking with a single voice from the outset. At the same time, this is also how European imperialism’s projection of power is expressed: on this occasion, one can at least note the relative speed with which, from the very first days of the conflict, a common line has been taking shape.

On February 28th, the first day of the war, there was a joint statement by the E3, followed by a second on March 1st. In the first, Friedrich Merz, Emmanuel Macron, and Keir Starmer reiterated Europe’s non-participation in the US and Israeli intervention, criticised Iranian attacks on countries in the region, and called for the resumption of negotiations. In the second, in the name of defending European interests and those of regional allies, non-belligerence became active, with the E3 pledging logistical support to the US and Israel for actions aimed at striking Iran’s offensive capabilities.

Within 24-48 hours, the core of the European line was thus defined; while subsequently subject to further adjustments, in substance it was confirmed and accepted without significant distinctions across the continent. A Europe that claims not to be a co-belligerent – it is not our war – but whose defensive stance does not rule out logistical and military support for Washington’s intervention. Furthermore, it seeks to be a committed player in the diplomatic solution, without, however, positioning itself as a neutral party between its Atlantic ally and the Iranian theocracy.

European shield in Cyprus

On March 2nd, after a drone attributed to Hezbollah struck the British base at Akrotiri in Cyprus, the European response also took the form of an air and naval mission in the name of defending a member State. Paris deployed the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier group. Rome sent the frigate Martinengo. Further naval units were dispatched by Greece, the Netherlands, and Spain, including the frigate Cristóbal Colón, the jewel of the Spanish Navy. London, in coordination with the European mission, diverted the destroyer HMS Dragon to the area. Alongside these naval units, the Europeans deployed air assets and anti-missile systems. A European Shield for Cyprus, headlined Il Messaggero on March 6th. Il Foglio described it as a new coalition of the willing, in this case directed towards the eastern Mediterranean [March 9th].

Paris has taken the lead in the mission. On March 9th, the French president visited Cyprus and then boarded the Charles de Gaulle. When Cyprus is attacked, it is Europe that is attacked, Macron proclaimed. For the president, the military deployment demonstrates France’s power, its capacity for projection, but at the same time is intended as a means of contributing to de-escalation. Macron, Le Monde further reports, believes that a blueprint for European defence might emerge around the defence of Cyprus [March 11th].

The French deployment has not been limited to Cyprus. Covering the eastern Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, via the Red Sea, Paris has mobilised eight frigates and two helicopter carriers, in addition to the Charles de Gaulle. As Le Figaro points out, the French aircraft carrier has taken the place of the American USS Ford, moved by Trump to the Persian Gulf [March 10th]. Looking ahead, Macron sees the French naval force potentially taking part in a future international mission to protect freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf, but only once the conflict has subsided, and within the framework of an intergovernmental mission involving various countries beyond Europe, including India [Le Monde, March 11th].

Coinciding with the European Council summit, a proposal by France, Germany, Britain, Italy, and the Netherlands – extended beyond the EU to include Japan and Canada – has taken shape, envisaging a UN-mandated initiative in the Gulf once a ceasefire has been agreed with Tehran. At the time of writing, according to Defence Minister Guido Crosetto, the initiative is aimed not only at India but also at China.

The timing of continental rearmament

The collective refusal of Europeans to join the war against Iran, despite Donald Trump’s threat of a bad future for NATO, comments the Financial Times, was remarkable for its force and unanimity. Europe has found a common voice that contrasts with the deep divisions over George W. Bush’s war in Iraq two decades ago [March 19th]. The difference is indeed striking. Today, Paris and Berlin are avoiding a head-on confrontation with Washington, as happened with the no to Bush in 2003, but are distancing themselves from the intervention by the United States and Israel. London is not only declining to follow the US, as Tony Blair did, but is operating within the E3 framework and accelerating its retreat from Brexit. Spain has changed tack with respect to 2003, moving from Aznar’s Atlanticism to a European recalibration which is more critical towards Washington, while remaining within the framework of armed non-belligerence. Although an idol of European social-imperialists, Sánchez’s Spain is fully participating in continental rearmament, and the Cristóbal Colón is there to remind us of it.

Finally, despite the war in Ukraine and the Russian threat, no New Europe seems to be emerging in the East or the Baltics to stand behind Trump, although – as the Financial Times observes – it is here that new cracks may open if the conflict should continue. The question, for the City’s newspaper, is how long the unity will last: whether Europe is effectively on the way to strategic autonomy, or whether divisions will begin to emerge. Dependence on American security is shaping up as a race against time. Although European countries are dramatically increasing their defence spending, notes the Financial Times, even the most optimistic assessments reckon it will take at least a decade to get anywhere near a position of self-sufficiency.

Italy with the E3

As for Rome, the Meloni government has moved with extreme caution, emphasising its distance from Trump’s interventionism. Whereas in 2003 the then Prime Minister Berlusconi wavered between Washington and Brussels – ultimately being brought back into line with the European position by the intervention of the Quirinale and the Euro-Vatican party – today Giorgia Meloni has sought and even flaunted coordination with the continent’s major capitals, finding allies in the Quirinale and the Euro-Vatican party. In her first speech, on March 5th, Meloni emphasised her stance that we are not at war, we do not want to go to war, a message she repeated on several occasions.

Equally significant was the openness, however cautious and understated, to Paris’s forward deterrence, described as an important contribution to the debate on security in Europe. The following day, Meloni initiated a consultation with the E3, extended to Rome. This E4 agreed on the need to coordinate closely on the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. The storms of Trumpian activism, writes Flavia Perina, are pushing Rome towards Brussels [La Stampa, March 6th]. Euro-soluble sovereignty is confirmed as one of the forms of imperialist Europeanism. It remains to be seen to what extent the Meloni formula will emerge weakened by the defeat in the referendum.

The wars of European rearmament

Ultimately, what has gradually emerged from this complex, multifaceted, and, for Europe, defensive game is what former ambassador Giampiero Massolo has called the Europe of the possible: a Europe sometimes caught off guard by an interventionist America, yet committed to demonstrating pragmatism [Corriere, March 4th].

Let us add two observations. The first is that in differentiating itself from the Trump line, the profile of a balancing Power-Europe is taking shape, able to turn to Asia and the Gulf, where alarm bells are ringing over the economic consequences of a crisis that appears dominated by American strategic confusion. The second is that over the last four years, European imperialism has armed Ukraine in order to arm itself. In the Gulf, a new war of European rearmament has begun.

Translated from the original work by , published in Lotta Comunista, , p. 3.

Labels:

Popular posts in the last week

China’s Electromechanical Champions

Internationalism No. 85, March 2026 Page 9 From the series Major industrial groups in China Analysing the WTO data for 2023, it emerges that China exported goods worth $3,379 billion, surpassing the European Union and the United States. Industrial machinery accounted for over 7% of exports and electrical machinery 9%. In the same sectors, Chinese imports did not reach 40% of the value of exports, indicating that these are among the pillars of Beijing’s export economy. Sany Heavy Industry In this newspaper we have already examined the Chinese mechanical engineering giant Sinomach. But in the field of machine construction, Sany Heavy Industry also holds a prominent position, particularly in excavators, cranes, industrial elevators, and cement machinery. The company, based in Changsha (Hunan) since 1991, was founded by Liang Wengen, who had previously been an executive at a State-owned arms factory, and is its main shareholder. Sany had a 2023 turnover...
Read more

The EU Commission Plans for Rearmament and a Clean Industrial Deal

Internationalism No. 71, January 2025 Page 2 From the series European news Following the European elections which took place on June 6th - 9th, the leaders of the Member States met on June 27th at the European Council. Ursula von der Leyen was nominated as president of the next European Commission, after she was chosen as the European People’s Party’s (EPP) Spitzenkandidat (“leading candidate”). The agreement also included the election of former Portuguese Prime Minister Antonio Costa as president of the European Council, and the appointment of former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas as High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Subsequently, on July 18th, Parliament elected von der Leyen as president of the Commission by an absolute majority, with 401 votes out of 719 MEPs. On September 17th, von der Leyen presented her team of commissioners to the European Parliament and, two days later, the Council adopted this list of...
Read more

The Munich Soviet Republic

Internationalism No. 87, May 2026 Page 9 From the series Pages from the history of the workers' movement The Munich Soviet Republic With the Munich Soviet Republic, the German Revolution, which began on November 9 th , 1918, seemed to be flickering its last. In the Bavarian capital, after the fall of the Wittelsbachs, power had fallen into the hands of Kurt Eisner, a pacifist intellectual, member of the USPD, and contributor to the revisionist newspaper Münchner Post since 1910. Eisner had managed something unheard of in Germany – to gain the support of the farmers, in particular Karl Gandorfer, head of the Bavarian Peasants' League. Workers, soldiers, and peasants "Traditionally a stronghold of Catholicism and reaction" , Bavaria "had declared early for the November Revolution, largely because its people hated the Prussians and re...
Read more

Innovation Incubators

Internationalism No. 87, May 2026 Page 7 From the series Industry and pharmaceuticals II South San Francisco is considered the birthplace of biotechnology. Here, in 1976, the biochemist Herbert W. Boyer of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), and the venture capitalist Robert Swanson founded Genentech, commonly considered the first biotech company in the world. Swanson had studied at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), then moved to San Francisco and cultivated a passion for molecular biology. Genetic engineering was about to take off in Californian universities, starting with the pioneering DNA manipulation experiments carried out by Boyer in collaboration with Stanley N. Cohen, a geneticist at Stanford University. At the time, observes Nature , leading scientists proposing involvement with industry was considered heresy . Swanson and Boyer...
Read more

The Court: From Civil Rights to Individual Rights

Internationalism No. 87, May 2026 Page 11 From the series Chronicles of the new American nationalism Edward Lazarus, a clerk for Justice Harry Blackmun at the Supreme Court in 1988–89 and chief of staff at the Federal Communications Commission during Barack Obama's administration, published Closed Chambers in 1998, an account of the work of the Supreme Court under Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Lazarus considers that it is history and geography that have shaped the character of the Court. The author identifies four decisive battles in its history: in 1937, the bitter clash over the powers and economic policy of the New Deal; in 1954, the fierce battle over the civil rights of Black Americans; in 1973, the struggle for individual rights; and in 1974, the ruling that marked the end of Richard Nixon's presidency. Lazarus's supreme regionalism ...
Read more

The Social Brain and Artificial Intelligence

Internationalism No. 87, February 2026 Page 1 From the series Artificial Intelligence There is an anthropological question linked to the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on human consciousness, analogous – though at a higher level – to the effects of online communication and even television. We consider three aspects of this. Physical , concerning changes in the brain’s neural connections as a social product. Functional , concerning capacities that are stunted or developed by the internet and the use of artificial intelligence. Epistemological , concerning the implications for the theory of knowledge and the very notion of an objectively defined principle of reality . The Church, as it has already done with biotechnologies capable of intervening in human DNA, is developing its own reflection on artificial intelligence and its anthropological impli...
Read more

American Convulsion and the Crisis in the World Order in Hormuz

Internationalism No. 87, May 2026 Pages 4 and 5 With the war against Iran and the naval blockade of Iranian ports in response to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the United States has plunged the energy artery of the Persian Gulf into chaos. This has triggered economic, social, and political upheavals from East to West, the full extent and uneven distribution of which have yet to be fully assessed. That the third Gulf War of American imperialism would have unintended consequences had long been written into the laws of politics. Every political action, all the more so if conducted by military means, is part of a parallelogram of forces, the result of which can never correspond to the intention of any individual actor involved. The objective each power pursues is either hindered or aided by the others. Therefore, the course of the conflict will correspond, to a greater or lesser extent, ...
Read more

Rearmament and State Policies in the Battle for Minerals

Internationalism No. 88, June 2026 Page 13 In 2025, China was the only power to respond decisively to Donald Trump's trade war, forcing him into an autumn truce through tariffs and, primarily, by blocking exports of some critical minerals. According to the White House, Beijing made a mistake in using the nuclear weapon of its near-monopoly on rare earths, as it triggered a global rush to diversify supplies. That process is indeed underway, but given its high costs and long timescales, it does not seem able to neutralise, at least in the short term, the powerful mineral deterrent established by the Chinese government. A multilateral Trump The US government's counteroffensive is underway both domestically, in an attempt to rebuild an industrial sector for the extraction and processing of these substances in the US, and internationally, through a series of agreements. Among the mo...
Read more

Revolutionary Spain

Internationalism No. 86, April 2026 Page 8 From the series Spain 1936 Spain, Marx observed in 1854 in the article Revolutionary Spain , was the first European feudal State to develop absolutism in its most unmitigated form , but political and fiscal centralisation never really took hold there. Similarly, it was Spanish caravels that opened up the era of the world market, and the Kingdom of Spain was the first great bourgeois maritime-trading empire. Yet that early and rapid rise ended up transforming itself from a favourable precondition for development into the cause of Spain's subsequent failure. In fact, the maritime overextension of the empire, combined with the failed political and fiscal centralisation of the Iberian heartland, resulted in stagnation and a subsequently inglorious and protracted putrefaction . While the economic and social arteries were becoming scl...
Read more

The Four Petrochemical Giants

Internationalism No. 86, April 2026 Page 15 From the series Major industrial groups in China When the People's Republic of China was founded in 1949, oil extraction in the country was practically non-existent, and the country was completely dependent on imports. The exploration and development of domestic oil resources required a major effort. As Jin Zhang reports in his book Catch-up and Competitiveness in China [Routledge, 2004]: The required massive human resources were supplied by the People's Liberation Army (PLA). In 1952, Mao Zedong ordered the reorganisation of the 57 th Division of the 19 th Army of the PLA into the 1 st Division of Oil . The effort led to the discovery of several oil fields, the most significant of which was in Daqing, Heilongjiang Province, in northeastern China, in 1959. It became operational the following year, reaching a ...
Read more