When a leaked Pentagon memo from Elbridge Colby floated the idea of reviewing US support for Britain’s claim to the Falkland Islands, most commentators reached for the obvious parallel: Greenland. Another instance of Trump-era territorial revisionism, another ally blindsided.

But this reading misses the deeper mechanism at work. The Falklands gambit is not really about the Falklands. It is about Iran — and, by extension, about Israel.

The Colby memo is explicit: the proposed reassessment of European “imperial possessions” is a punishment for NATO allies who refused to grant the United States access, basing, and overflight rights for the US-Israeli war against Iran. Spain closed its airspace. Britain and France declined to join the naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, arguing that doing so would constitute entering the war. The Pentagon’s response is to treat these refusals not as sovereign decisions but as defaults on an implicit contract.

This is where the transactional logic of the new Washington becomes visible. For decades, NATO allies enjoyed American defence guarantees on the implicit understanding that solidarity ran both ways. The premium was paid through burden-sharing: defence spending, interoperability, and operational support when Washington needed it.

The Iran war has revealed that many allies consider this bargain renegotiable. They want American protection when Russia threatens, but refuse to stand........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)