European leaders have long warned that Iran must never acquire a nuclear weapon, while condemning its ballistic-missile program, financing of terrorism, proxy forces, attacks on shipping, and violations of international agreements.
When the United States concluded that military action was required, much of Europe’s response centered not on Iran’s conduct but on whether capitals had been adequately consulted.
European governments were not unaware of the threat. Their intelligence services have tracked Iran’s nuclear progress, missile development, and regional proxies for decades, reviewing the same enrichment trends and strategic warnings.
They may have lacked specific operational details, but they understood the trajectory. The danger was growing, and they knew eventual action would be necessary.
Europe’s preferred approach has been to acknowledge the threat while avoiding hard decisions, waiting for the United States to lead, and then expressing surprise at the outcome.
This arrangement is politically convenient. It allows European leaders to benefit from American power while distancing themselves from its use and preserving a diplomatic posture.
Europe cannot have it both ways. If Iran is a shared threat to the democratic world, confronting it cannot remain principally an American responsibility.
Iran does not view the dispute as limited to Washington. Its leadership regards the United States, Europe, and Israel as a single hostile bloc, with intelligence operations reaching European soil and proxies threatening citizens and interests.
Iranian missiles increasingly place European territory within range, and European economies depend on maritime routes Tehran has repeatedly threatened.
Passivity is not neutrality. A regime willing to use terrorism, hostage-taking, and proxy warfare will not reward European hesitation with immunity.
The most important European contribution now requires no military force. It requires political unity and a clear alignment with the United States on strategic objectives.
Public equivocation and procedural complaints are read in Tehran as signs of Western division, encouraging Iran to wait out pressure and exploit allied fractures.
The greatest deterrent is the appearance of unity. European leaders should state plainly that the United States and Europe share objectives and will remain aligned until achieved.
Those objectives must extend beyond the nuclear issue. Ending Iran’s reliance on proxy armies is equally critical to regional and Western security.
For decades, Tehran has used armed groups to impose costs while maintaining deniability. A strategy ignoring proxies would leave half the problem unresolved.
The proper Western objective is clear: no Iranian nuclear weapon and no proxy network operating with impunity.
Europe’s first responsibility is to support that objective publicly. Its second is to provide practical assistance, including base access, intelligence sharing, and missile-defense cooperation.
European navies can protect shipping through critical waterways such as the Strait of Hormuz, an economic necessity rather than an American interest alone.
Alliance members that obstruct operations while benefiting from protection should face political consequences. Burden-sharing means standing with the United States when common security requires difficult action.
For generations, the United States has committed forces and deterrence to Europe. Reciprocity demands solidarity when America confronts a threat Europe itself has identified.
Weakness and division invite miscalculation by authoritarian regimes. Deterrence depends on adversaries believing the West has both capacity and unity to act.
Europe has long separated diplomacy from power, treating negotiation as a substitute for leverage. The result has been delay while Iran advanced its capabilities.
Diplomacy remains necessary but is ineffective without credible force. The goal should be to eliminate capabilities that threaten the West and restore deterrence.
Europe has already concluded Iran poses an unacceptable danger. The question is no longer understanding the threat, but whether Europe will finally act accordingly.
