- Despite shared concerns, US has increasingly sidelined Europe’s role in negotiations, not just on Iran, but also on Ukraine and Gaza, reducing EU to bystander in crises where it once held leverage
ISTANBUL
Flaring tensions over Israel’s conflict with Iran have deepened political divisions within the EU, exposing fault lines in the bloc’s approach to the Middle East.
Once a central player in the Iran nuclear deal negotiations, observers say the EU now finds itself marginalized and internally fractured, hindering its ability or capacity to prevent further escalation.
Now, EU foreign ministers are set to meet on June 23, following an emergency video conference called by the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, to assess “possible next steps.”
European countries are struggling to reach a common position, torn between supporting Israel’s security and preserving diplomatic channels with Tehran.
Yet, they remain aligned on one key point: Iran must not be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon.
But consensus appears elusive.
While there is broad agreement on the need to avoid a regional war, EU member states are still far from common ground on nuclear proliferation, a possible government change in Tehran, military escalation, and the broader diplomatic approach toward Iran and Israel.
Major European powers
France, the UK, and Germany, collectively known as the E3, have issued a unified statement backing Israel’s security while underscoring the importance of diplomacy.
However, French President Emmanuel Macron was explicit in ruling out offensive action, saying Paris “would not participate in any offensive operations” and warning that “regime change by military means” would be a “strategic mistake.”
So far, France remains the only European country to speak against “regime change” in Iran.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has also urged restraint and called for a “return to diplomacy.”
London was careful to deny any involvement in the Israeli operation, though it quietly deployed Royal Air Force assets to the region, just in case.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy has since engaged with both Israeli and Iranian counterparts, pushing for de-escalation and the resumption of nuclear negotiations.
Germany followed suit. Speaking at the G7 summit in Canada, Chancellor Friedrich Merz praised Israel for doing the “dirty work” of containing Iran’s nuclear threat.
Berlin, like many others in Europe, stopped short of backing the strikes outright and has instead expressed growing unease about the prospect of regional war.
“If the regime were willing to return to the negotiating table, then there would be no need for further military intervention. If not, then the complete destruction of Iran's nuclear weapons program may be on the agenda,” he said.
Meanwhile, Polish President Donald Tusk warned that the conflict is edging toward a wider war.
“Since WWII, we haven’t been so close to a global conflict,” he said, urging joint US-EU action before it’s too late.
Other European nations: mixed tones, unified worry
Beyond the major European powers, several other European governments also voiced concerns.
Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares called for an arms embargo on Israel and stressed the need to resume nuclear talks with Iran.
“The European Union is Israel’s largest trading partner in the world. We must impose an arms embargo, not sell weapons to Israel while this war continues,” he said.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, speaking at the G7, defended Israel’s actions as self-defense, citing Iran’s nuclear activities as confirmed by the IAEA.
She said that Iran has been a major source of instability in the region and a nuclear Iran would threaten the West as well, not only Israel.
Yet, she also maintained that a diplomatic solution remains both possible and necessary.
Sweden’s Foreign Minister Tobias Billstrom said Stockholm is “monitoring developments with deep concern” and remains in close coordination with EU and NATO partners.
Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide went further, condemning the escalation as a breach of international law that “threatens global security” and sets back efforts to reach a diplomatic solution.
Slovakia’s Foreign Minister Juraj Blanar urged restraint, while Romania reaffirmed Israel’s right to self-defense but underlined the importance of non-proliferation and diplomatic efforts.
Can US, Europe find a common stance?
At the outset, the Trump administration maintained a mixed approach toward the Iran-Israeli conflict.
“We are not involved in strikes against Iran, and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on the first day of the strikes, distancing itself from Israel’s military action.
“I’d love to avoid conflict,” Trump said the same day, before adding: “Iran’s going to have to negotiate a little tougher, meaning they’re going to have to give us some things that they’re not willing to give us right now.”
Trump has since escalated his rhetoric, while the US has also increased its military presence in the region, deploying the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier, mid-air refueling planes, and additional fighter jets.
On Tuesday, Trump called for Iran’s “unconditional surrender” and warned that US patience was “wearing thin.”
He also implicitly threatened Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, saying: “We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now... Our patience is wearing thin.” Minutes later, he posted: “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”
For now, the US and Europe seem to have one main point of agreement: Iran must not be allowed to build a nuclear bomb.
However, despite this shared concern, analysts note that Washington has increasingly sidelined Europe’s role in negotiations, not just on Iran, but also on Ukraine and Gaza, reducing the EU to a bystander in crises where it once held leverage.
The divide between Europe and the US was made most evident at this week’s G7 summit in Canada. After Trump departed the meeting early amid rising tensions in the Middle East, Macron told reporters the US president was leaving to negotiate a ceasefire between Israel and Iran.
“The US is assured they will find a ceasefire, and since they can pressure Israel, things may change,” he said.
That drew a strong rebuke from Trump just hours later: “He (Macron) has no idea why I am now on my way to Washington, but it certainly has nothing to do with a Cease Fire. Much bigger than that. Whether purposely or not, Emmanuel always gets it wrong.”
The final G7 communique gave some semblance of unity among the world’s major powers, labeling Iran the “main source of instability and terrorism in the region,” but observers say that has done little to assuage fears in some European capitals that Israel’s approach might lead to a wider and deadlier unwanted war.
