As a tenuous ceasefire holds, Europe faces a critical test: strengthen energy security, shape the peace, and act collectively to maintain global credibility
Image Source: Getty Images
Over the past few weeks, US-Europe relations have been thrown into disarray yet again after US President Donald Trump called NATO a “paper tiger” and said he was “absolutely” considering withdrawing the US from the almost 77-year-old alliance. Comments like these aren’t new, but they do carry extra weight this time. They stem from Europe’s general unwillingness to join military operations against Iran to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and decisions by specific member states to deny the US access to key military bases for use in the war.
Counter to the opinions of the current US administration, these decisions shouldn’t be construed as acts of betrayal. Instead, they are coherent acts of strategic sovereignty brought about by Washington’s own actions toward Europe. Now, with a two-week (albeit shaky) ceasefire in place, Europe must decide for itself what it does next rather than fall prey to the pressure of Washington.
Since President Trump entered office last year, his administration has slapped Europe with the highest tariff rates in a century, threatened to annex Greenland, and supported various far-right parties throughout Europe. When the US began its bombing campaign against Iran in February – a military decision the Europeans neither sought nor were consulted on – Europe’s leaders were rightly stunned. They were even more taken aback when the US president started demanding that they help reopen the Strait of Hormuz after Iran effectively shut it, and then railed against them when they refused.
Just this week, after threatening to “make an entire civilization disappear,” a last-minute ceasefire fell into place after efforts by a coterie of unlikely actors: Pakistan, US Vice President JD Vance, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and even China. The ceasefire is vague, with no written agreement being released as of this writing. Now, US and Iranian officials are set to meet in Pakistan to hammer out negotiations.
This buys time for Europe to decide what it wants to do next, and it should use this time to its advantage.
This two-week break of relative calm could offer Europe the opportunity to lock in some energy supply diversification.
First, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz served as a wake-up call for Europe to understand just how vulnerable it remains to oil and gas disruptions from the Middle East. Various types of fuel and petrol costs saw sharp spikes around Europe, which buyers immediately felt at the pump. This sent European governments into a frenzy, with some imposing price caps and others allowing petrol stations to increase their prices only once a day. This two-week break of relative calm could offer Europe the opportunity to lock in some energy supply diversification. It might be too short a timeline to accelerate, for example, LNG terminal deals with the US, the Gulf states, and Africa, but the goal of securing longer-term supply contracts and reducing the continent’s vulnerability to a single transit chokepoint has rarely felt more urgent.
Europe must use its power to present a united front, which is the only option that will ensure its credibility on the world stage.
Second, Europe must decide how it wants to be involved in the future of any peace deal. Even though it did not seek this war, it’s not immune to its consequences. Energy market disruptions, price increases, and threats to global shipping all land on Europe’s doorstep, whether European governments act or not. This means that if the negotiations in Pakistan are successful, the ceasefire holds, and the talks produce a workable framework, Europe will have to decide what role it plays in guaranteeing that framework. It may eventually have to deploy naval assets to help escort tankers or provide air cover. The EU does have precedent here, launching EUNAVFOR ASPIDES in 2024 to help secure freedom of navigation for commercial vessels through the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Gulf in response to Houthi attacks on international shipping. Europe should do this because it is in its own interests, not because of pressure from the United States.
Finally, European capitals must recognise that they are far stronger when they act together as a unified body capable of making strategic decisions. The world’s largest single market holds significant leverage, but only when it is used collectively. It can actively shape outcomes rather than simply absorb them, but only when it chooses to throw its weight around effectively. When fragmented, Europe is a collection of smaller nations, often with competing interests and limited leverage. In this moment, Europe must use its power to present a united front, which is the only option that will ensure its credibility on the world stage.
Although the ceasefire is tenuous at best, this moment offers rare flexibility for Europe, one that it must be sure to use to its advantage.
Rachel Rizzo is a Senior Fellow with the Strategic Studies Programme at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Rachel Rizzo is a Senior Fellow with ORF’s Strategic Studies Programme. Her work focuses on US foreign and defence policy, the transatlantic partnership, and US-Europe-India ...
Read More +
PREV
