Three weeks into the Iran War, President Trump faces a growing, self-inflicted economic mess. In response to an aggressive American and Israeli bombing campaign, Iran has largely closed the Strait of Hormuz to shipping, touching off a predictable oil and gas crisis that the Trump administration did little to prepare for. Now, Trump is demanding that a coalition of countries including France, Germany, and the U.K. — whose leaders he has so often castigated over the years — help bail him out by sweeping mines out of the vital waterway, among other measures. On Sunday, Trump told the Financial Times of his demands that “If there’s no response or if it’s a negative response, I think it will be very bad for the future of NATO.” Though Europe has tried to stay out of the war, Trump has already successfully pressured British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to allow a U.K. air force base to be used as a staging ground for Iran-bound American planes. Now, faced with U.S. pressure and voters who are unenthusiastic about military conflict, European powers must decide how much ground they want to give. To understand their dilemma better, I spoke with Mujtaba Rahman, the managing director of the Europe division at the Eurasia Group and a keen political observer of the continent.

Trump is all but threatening dire consequences for European countries if they don’t help secure the Strait of Hormuz, but there’s no indication yet that Germany or France or any of the other major countries will actually do so. Could this be a turning point for Europe in this conflict — asserting itself more as a sovereign entity, less as a vassal of the U.S.?Let me start by saying I think there are a set of competing constraints, and the absence of very hard power, I think ultimately and fundamentally, will keep the E.U. divided and weak over Iran. Europe has been quite robust in their opposition to the U.S. and Israeli attacks, but I think ultimately it’s going to be hard for the E.U. to remain fully unified over a war in which they have very little domestic diplomatic influence. Their governments are critical of what they consider a blatant breach of international law, but they’re in this odd position where they are in opposition to what the administration is doing, and they’ve not been hugely involved or consulted — but they see some strategic benefit........

© Daily Intelligencer