Iran might appear to be on the ropes in terms of its diminished military capabilities, imploding economy, and the growing animosity it faces from its neighbours, who it turns out do not appreciate being bombed by Tehran.
Nonetheless, the events of the recent past have proved once again that no matter how malevolent its actions, the world’s greatest sponsor of terror can still count on a coalition of the willing in Europe to argue its corner.
How else to interpret the recent move by Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez to reopen Madrid's embassy in Iran, for example?
"Spain's decision to reopen its embassy in Tehran has become the clearest demonstration yet of Madrid's steadfast opposition to the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran," the Tehran Times, a regime organ, recently commented in a rare moment of clarity.
Sánchez recognised the political potency of attacking Israel just weeks after the October 7 attacks. He has been the face of Europe's political jihad against the country ever since, as he seeks to fend off a string of corruption scandals that has ensnared his inner circle.
He is far from alone, as the latest initiative he put together with Ireland and Slovenia to suspend the EU's free-trade arrangement with Israel proved. Sánchez and his allies saw an opening to kill the deal following Viktor Orbán's defeat in Hungary. Alas, they were disappointed when Germany refused to go along.
But the very fact that Europe is even debating cancelling that agreement speaks volumes about the bloc's institutional bias. Throughout the ongoing conflict with Iran, European governments have treated Israel's right to self-defence as an inconvenience – particularly as oil prices climb – while conjuring violations of international law that seem to apply to Israel alone. And by falsely claiming that Israel is a serial violator of human rights, they, however inadvertently, have helped fuel hostility toward their Jewish communities.
EU leaders also largely sided with Iran's interpretation of the recent ceasefire, insisting it must encompass Lebanon, thereby endorsing Tehran's claim that Lebanon falls within its sphere of influence. The irony is that Lebanon itself fiercely rejects any such connection, as it works to liberate itself from that grip – and negotiates directly with the very Israel the EU routinely condemns.
Nowhere has Europe's abdication been more stark, or more consequential, than in its response to direct American requests for military co-operation. When the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran in February 2026, Sánchez moved swiftly to close Spain's airspace to American military aircraft and bar US forces from the jointly operated bases at Rota and Morón.
"Therefore, neither the bases are authorised, nor, of course, is the use of Spanish airspace authorised for any actions related to the war in Iran," his defence minister, Margarita Robles, announced – adding for good measure that the war was "profoundly illegal and profoundly unjust." Fifteen US aircraft were reportedly seen leaving the bases shortly afterwards.
Spain wasn’t an exception. Italy denied US bombers permission to land at the Sigonella air base in Sicily. France blocked overflights of its territory for American military supply flights to Israel, prompting President Trump to declare that France had been "VERY UNHELPFUL." Switzerland, citing its traditional neutrality, rejected the majority of American airspace requests. Poland refused to redeploy its Patriot missile batteries to shore up allied air defences in the Middle East.
The cumulative effect has been serious enough that an internal Pentagon email – subsequently reported by Reuters – began circulating potential retaliatory measures against the most recalcitrant allies, including the possibility of suspending Spain from Nato entirely.
It is worth pausing on this. These are countries that depend on the American security umbrella for their own defence, several of them still receiving US protection on their eastern flanks against Russian aggression. Yet when the moment came to stand with their principal ally against a common adversary – a regime that has spent decades funding terrorism, destabilising the Middle East, and developing ballistic missiles capable of reaching European cities – they chose instead to obstruct.
The only plausible explanations are domestic political calculation, an addiction to cheap moral posturing, or both. None of them reflect well on the European project.
Matthew Karnitschnig is the editor-in-chief of Euractiv, an independent pan-European media network specialised in EU affairs
To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.