Saturday, March 21, 2026

Europe Gives Trump the Cold Shoulder

By Judson Berger

Friday, March 20, 2026

 

It’s never a good sign when the word “allies” is put in scare quotes.

 

With the Strait of Hormuz effectively closed to most oil tankers, leaders of European and other normally aligned nations have been conspicuously loath to intervene despite President Trump’s calls for assistance. He’s responded by questioning their usefulness.

 

It does not help that the U.S. president shunned coalition-building before the war or that he spent the early part of 2026 needlessly needling NATO nations over Greenland. “Donald Trump seems to be learning that gratuitously antagonizing your allies can invite undesirable consequences,” Noah Rothman writes.

 

Still, as Noah notes, the present straits over the strait endanger every nation engaged in the global economy. He urges a reconciliation, and soon:

 

Whether the international community likes it or not, there will be no going back to a post-war world. Iran is no longer a potential threat to the exploration, exploitation, and shipping of commodities through the Strait. It is an active one that the globe — not just America and Israel — will have to contain for however long the Islamic Republic has left. That will be a commercial enterprise as well as a military venture, and the sooner the rest of the world acknowledges its role, the better. . . .

 

Whatever hard feelings exist between the Trump White House and America’s allies, events should compel everyone to paper over those disagreements. There’s a war to win, and the whole world has a stake in it — whether they like it or not.

 

For now, the tensions over Iran only further strain creaking Western alliances. On Friday, Trump called NATO a “PAPER TIGER,” saying of nations’ reluctance to contribute militarily on Hormuz, “COWARDS, and we will REMEMBER!” Trump had declared earlier in the week that “WE DO NOT NEED THE HELP OF ANYONE” and described NATO as a “one-way street” where protection is concerned, after facing frosty responses to appeals for help:

 

• British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the U.K. is working with other nations to “restore freedom of navigation” while refusing to be “drawn into the wider war.” (British advisers reportedly have been sent to U.S. Central Command in Florida to discuss options for the strait.)

 

• France has offered to help escort tankers — but only “once the core of the bombings has stopped,” not “in the current context.” President Emmanuel Macron may turn to the United Nations.

 

• Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, normally seen as Trump-friendly, has balked at getting involved.

 

• “Nothing to do with NATO,” a spokesman for Germany’s chancellor decreed of the conflict. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius rejected the possibility of German military involvement and scoffed at the idea that “one or two handfuls of European frigates” could accomplish anything that “the powerful American Navy cannot.” He urged diplomatic efforts to ensure security through the strait.

 

While the statements out of Berlin dripped with sloshing steins of derision, they actually point to a key hurdle in the effort to assemble an after-the-fact coalition. Rich Lowry notes that while Trump would like to put together an international force to break Iran’s grip on the waterway, “allied countries aren’t going to think it’s possible to reopen the Strait if we haven’t managed to do it on our own.” That is, America is the nation with a world-class navy, not, say, Germany.

 

Per NR’s editorial, “There has to be urgency about reopening the strait, and the administration clearly feels it,” hence the attacks on and threats against Kharg Island and potential plans to escort tankers.

 

Actively involved allies would be useful. In their partial defense, MBD explains why the Europeans have a right to be miffed. Dan McLaughlin also observes that the tensions raise a fundamental question about the NATO alliance itself: “Do the member nations of NATO see the organization as a true community of interests, or simply a set of bilateral deals that require continual renegotiation?”

 

At least Estonia is “ready to talk.”

No comments: