Europe’s Subdued Response to Bombing Iran

By Judson Berger

Friday, June 27, 2025

 

condemnation toward Israel on Gaza, European leaders’ support for the nation’s ferocious campaign to strike Iran’s nuclear program was probably one of the many shocks of the past two weeks.

 

Consider these statements from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz:

 

“There is no reason for us, or for me personally, to criticize what Israel started a week ago, nor is there any reason to criticize what America did last weekend.”

 

“The evidence that Iran is continuing on its path to building a nuclear weapon can no longer be seriously disputed.”

 

“This is dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.”

 

Merz noted that the actions were not “without risk” and has since turned attention back to Gaza in calling for a cease-fire there. Reactions from other top European leaders were more qualified regarding the Israeli-U.S. operation — but still supportive of the overall goal of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran and understanding of Israel’s desire to eliminate that risk.

 

French President Emmanuel Macron said there was “no legality” to America’s strikes, while acknowledging France “supports the objective of preventing Iran from getting the nuclear bomb.” Earlier, he said Israeli strikes that hit “civilian or energy facilities” must stop, while conceding that Iran posed an “existential risk” for Israel. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, calling for de-escalation and negotiation, said in a video on X, “We’ve long had concerns about the Iranian nuclear program,” and described the prospect of Iran getting a nuclear weapon as “the greatest threat to stability in the region.”

 

A joint statement from all three leaders last weekend affirmed that Iran “can never have a nuclear weapon” and urged the country to engage in negotiations. It put the onus on Iran “not to take any further action that could destabilize the region.”

 

Before the American strike, even European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen “reiterated Israel’s right to defend itself and protect its people” while calling for de-escalation and restraint from both sides. National Review’s Michael Brendan Dougherty, marking these “strange days,” also flagged the effusive praise for President Trump’s handling of Iran from NATO’s secretary-general.

 

We can infer from these reactions a few things.

 

One, the determinations of the International Atomic Energy Agency indeed rattled the Europeans as well as the Israelis. As NR’s original editorial on Israel’s strikes noted, “Iran had significantly ramped up its enrichment capacity, with even the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (not exactly friendly to Israeli militarism) having determined that Iran had been enriching uranium well beyond the level of civilian use, and closer to military grade.”

 

Two, Iran’s support for Russia in its war against Ukraine — via cooperation on the production of attack drones for use on the battlefield — has won Tehran few sympathizers inside Europe’s political establishment.

 

Three, relatedly, Europe’s well-founded fear of Iran is greater than its misgivings about Israel, given Iran’s history of targeting regime opponents there. A 2024 report by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy mapped a long trail of Iranian-linked plots often using criminals as proxies, including “surveillance of Jews and Jewish businesses in Paris, Munich, and Berlin,” as well as a foiled 2018 attack outside Paris (an interactive map of the data can be found here). The report tracked 102 plots in Europe since 1979 — everything from assassinations to abductions — with activity picking up in recent years:

 

The pace of Iranian operational activity in Europe has spiked, with over half of these plots (54 cases) occurring between 2021 and 2024. These operations have focused on targeting Iranian dissidents (34 cases), including journalists broadcasting news in Farsi that Tehran would rather not see the light of day, Israeli citizens and diplomats (10 cases), and Jews (7 cases).

 

Of course, the opinions among European officials on this month’s strikes against Iran are far from unanimous. There was grumbling inside the EU, including concerns about chaos in Iran potentially leading to another migration wave. And at the United Nations, it’s business as usual where the Middle East is concerned. Jimmy Quinn reports:

 

In the aftermath of U.S. strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities this weekend, U.N. leaders put their long-running anti-U.S. bias on display.

 

“I am gravely alarmed by the use of force by the United States against Iran today. This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge — and a direct threat to international peace and security,” U.N. secretary general António Guterres wrote in a post on X Saturday night. He added that “member states” should “de-escalate” and abide by their obligations under international law, though he seemed to be referring primarily to the U.S. and Israel. The U.N.’s top human rights official, Volker Türk, echoed Guterres’s remarks and said that he is “deeply concerned” by President Trump’s strikes.

 

That the surgical U.S. targeting of a handful of nuclear sites rose to the level of a direct, public rebuke by Guterres makes for a glaring double standard, considering the patently belligerent and unlawful behavior he has overlooked from Beijing.

 

But Israel, and America, can’t expect the impossible. That top European leaders have mostly sided with their cause in this operation is another victory the Israelis can pocket from the “twelve-day war,” provided the cease-fire holds — and new tensions don’t cause Israel’s Western supporters to reconsider.