The leaked Pentagon e-mail suggesting that Washington could punish NATO allies for refusing to join Donald Trump’s Iran war should be read as yet another warning shot in transatlantic politics.

Listen to this article

The internal message floated options, including suspending Spain from parts of NATO and reconsidering US diplomatic support for Britain’s position on the Falkland Islands. The latter is the most revealing. Washington has never fully recognised British sovereignty over the Falklands.

Its formal line has been to recognise de facto UK administration while taking no position on sovereignty, so the threat is less a dramatic reversal than the weaponisation of an old ambiguity.

That should concern London. The Falklands are a British Overseas Territory. A decisive British military victory in 1982 should have settled the matter, and the territory’s people have repeatedly made their preference clear.

Downing Street is right to restate that sovereignty rests with the UK and that self-determination is non-negotiable, but the deeper point is that the Trump administration is prepared to treat allied security concerns as bargaining chips in a dispute over a war many Europeans believe they had no obligation to join.

It would be naive to assume every leaked email is accidental. Washington leaks are often instruments of policy by other means. Whether this one was sanctioned, freelanced or careless, its political effect is obvious: to intimidate allies, to test reactions and to remind Europe that US support is increasingly conditional.

That cuts both ways. The Iran war has exposed NATO’s structural weakness, but also America’s. The United States still relies on European access, basing and overflight to project power towards the Middle East. Britain allowed US use of bases for defensive action against Iranian missile threats.

Spain, by contrast, has resisted US access to its bases and airspace. Those decisions shape whether American operations can be mounted quickly, legally and credibly.

Europe, therefore, has more leverage than it often admits. The correct response should be strategic seriousness. Britain and Europe need to stop conflating the United States’ presence with a permanent guarantee of American alignment.

Some intelligence, surveillance, targeting, command and logistics structures remain heavily dependent on US enablers. That dependency cannot be wished away, but it can be reduced.

For the UK, the Defence Investment Plan should mark the start of that process. It must be funded, not merely announced; linked to industry, not confined to speeches; and focused on capabilities that make Britain useful, resilient and harder to coerce.

That means munitions, air and missile defence, drones, maritime endurance, cyber, space, logistics and the personnel to operate them.

Trump’s officials should also be careful. If Washington alienates Europe, it may find Europeans less willing to underwrite American operations outside Europe. The Iran war is already an example of that. NATO can survive disagreement, but not if one ally treats the others as clients to be disciplined.

Europe should push back more robustly, and Britain should do so without illusions. Alliance solidarity now has to be earned, reinforced and defended before the next crisis arrives.

Andrew Fox is a former British Army officer and senior associate fellow at the Henry Jackson Society

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk

© LBC