Europe, NATO Brace for Iran's Response After US Strikes

00:00
So how are European powers responding to the US airstrikes? How much unity is there amongst EU leaders at this point? Yeah. Yeah. So listen, Tom, over the last week we've heard a lot from European leaders and generally speaking, this sort of message has been in the message over the last 24 hours is de-escalate diplomacy has got to be the way forward. This is not going to end through military action. This needs to end basically through diplomacy. You know, we had that sort of message made in very different ways from a number of different leaders across Europe. But overall, until this weekend, you know, there was broadly support for the Israeli strikes for Iran. You are now getting a little bit of sort of reticence, it seems, from some of the statements we're hearing from some of the leaders. Overall, again, the main message has been Iran should never be permitted to get a nuclear weapon. That has been the sort of takeaway here. But we heard from Ursula von der Leyen who came out after the strikes saying, I'm just going to pull it up here, that Iran, again, has must never be able to acquire a nuclear bomb. With tensions in the Middle East at a new peak, stability must become the priority. And here is a sort of line that is a sort of tacit criticism potentially, of the United States actions, she said. And respect for international law is critical. This brings into the debate the question about whether this was a preemptive strike or a preventative strike. And the difference between the two is one being a sort of imminent danger. That is a preemptive strike that would, you know, allow the United States basically to strike within Iran. The other one is a sort of preventative strike, which is a much more abstract, a longer term sort of concept of what the sort of threat that Iran was proposing. And that is some of the concern that you hear from the international community and certainly domestically from the United States. But overall, Tom, we're here in The Hague. Trump is supposed to arrive here tomorrow to have discussions around NATO's, that 5% defense target that NATO's allies are likely to sign up to. And the last thing that the Europeans want to do is to alienate Donald Trump at a key moment not only for Ukraine, but also in the middle of a trade war. And, of course, all those American troops that still reside within Europe as a deterrent force. They don't want Trump to pull them out. All follow this into the NATO's summit then and how it changes the discussions, the focus, the priorities as you and the team and other members of NATO, of course, look ahead to that visit by President Trump. Yeah, the conversation here is going to be about basically how this bears on Europe, Right? I think that one of the main focus is that you have here, there is the idea that, you know, if Iran is extremely weak and will also sort of weaken Russia because many of the sort of drones are going over there. But I think more importantly, it's going to distract American attention. America already wanted to move a lot of its resources over to the Pacific. Now, if it is embroiled in the Middle East, that is going to be more focus there. That means less and less support for Europe. That means Europe going about it alone, which is really been the sort of message from the Trump administration since the very beginning.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

12 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Russia's former president says countries are lining up to give Iran their nukes. Analysts are calling his bluff.

A top Putin aide and Russia's former president slammed the US for its strikes on Iran's nuclear site. Among other claims, Dmitry Medvedev said other countries are ready to give their nukes to Iran. Nuclear analysts told BI that Medvedev's claim is logistically and politically ridiculous. Analysts are casting doubt on Russia's former president's claim that "a number of countries" were considering supplying nuclear warheads to Iran after the Pentagon's salvo of bunker-buster strikes there. Dmitry Medvedev, who was president from 2008 to 2012 and is a top aide to Russian leader Vladimir Putin, didn't specify which countries he was referring to in his Telegram post on Sunday. In his post, he downplayed the damage dealt to Iran's vital nuclear sites. As news of the strikes broke on Saturday, the Pentagon was careful to say that it was still assessing the destruction caused by the 14 GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs and multiple Tomahawk missiles it fired at Iran's nuclear sites. Medvedev wrote that the strikes had "entangled" the US in a new conflict. "A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads," he added. Nuclear weapons analysts speaking to Business Insider said they doubted that Medvedev's statement on such transfers is credible. "It's impossible in practice because nuclear weapons are not like a bomb or just something you can carry in a suitcase," said Pavel Podvig, a senior researcher in the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research's weapons of mass destruction program. Nuclear warheads come as an entire system, with people who need to be trained to keep and service them safely, as well as maintenance facilities and equipment. Even tactical nukes, which are more portable and produce a smaller blast, need high-level storage, Podvig added. "Unless you create a nuclear program or almost a nuclear program in the country, there is no way to just give your nuclear weapons to them," he said. Simply giving such a warhead to another country would break the first article of the UN's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Russia and China have signed. Podvig said that in Europe, where the US stations nuclear weapons, the warheads are in American custody. The same can be said of Russia's nuclear weapons in Belarus. "I don't see this being done technically," Podvig said. Politically, Medvedev could likely only be referring to three countries, said Adam Lowther, a cofounder and the vice president of research at the Ohio-registered think tank National Institute for Deterrence Studies. North Korea, China, and Russia are the only nuclear-armed states considered adversaries or rivals to the US. And Lowther said all three know that supplying Iran with nuclear weapons, even just as a deterrent, would risk intense escalation from the US and Israel. "When you give somebody a nuclear weapon, and they can use it, you can't guarantee how they're going to use it," Lowther said. He added that with Tel Aviv and Washington so focused on preventing Iran from fielding nuclear weapons, Tehran would likely only have two choices if it does receive a warhead: Use the bomb or lose it. And if Iran detonates a gifted nuke, Lowther added, American forensics would easily be able to trace the fissile material and bomb design to identify where the weapon originated. "Then that country would be on the US' hit list," Lowther said. Medvedev is known to make bold, hawkish statements toward Ukraine and the US since the outset of the full-scale Russian invasion. He serves as the deputy chairman — second in rank to Putin — of the Kremlin's security council. His rhetoric has often run parallel to the Kremlin's nuclear threats, repeatedly issued as warnings to the West over military aid to Ukraine. Moscow, however, has consistently not followed through with those threats, even when the US escalated its level of assistance to Kyiv. Lowther said he believes Medvedev's statement was a play against Ukraine, a bid to reduce the West's willingness to help Kyiv. "The Russians say: 'You know what? You give the Ukrainians these weapons? Well, we can give the Iranians weapons as well,'" he said. The Israel Defense Forces declined to comment on Medvedev's remarks. The White House and US State Department did not respond to requests for comment sent outside regular business hours by BI. Read the original article on Business Insider

Washington Post

14 minutes ago

• Washington Post

NATO leaders are set to agree a historic defense spending pledge, but the hike won't apply to all

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — NATO leaders are expected to agree this week that member countries should spend 5% of their gross domestic product on defense, except the new and much vaunted investment pledge will not apply to all of them. Spain has reached a deal with NATO to be excluded from the 5% of GDP spending target , while President Donald Trump said the figure shouldn't apply to the United States, only its allies.

Bloomberg

18 minutes ago

• Bloomberg

What's Next After the Initial Fallout from US Strikes on Iran

What's next? The unprecedented US airstrikes on Iran have set traders and governments worldwide on edge, as the Islamic Republic warns of retaliation and Israel shows no sign of letting up in its assault. Asian currencies and stocks fell, European stock futures declined while oil advanced, then erased gains, after Washington struck Iran's nuclear sites over the weekend. China and Pakistan were quick to condemn — even though China hasn't yet offered substantial assistance to Tehran besides rhetorical support and Pakistan is at the same time taking steps to build stronger ties with the White House. The US State Department issued a ' Worldwide Caution ' alert for Americans. More critically, President Donald Trump's decision to deploy bunker-busting bombs — in Washington's first direct military action against Iran after decades of hostility — has pushed the Middle East into uncharted territory. Did the end justify the means? While the US attacks have set back Iran's nuclear ambitions and dealt its clerical regime a humiliating blow, the program hasn't been completely destroyed. The move may ultimately lead Tehran to end international monitoring of its nuclear program and consider going ahead to develop a bomb. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hasn't been seen in public in 11 days but remains in control. Even as diplomatic allies Russia and China have stayed on the sidelines and its network of armed proxies in the region remains weakened, Tehran still has ways to inflict pain on the US as it plans its retaliation. Two supertankers, each capable of hauling about 2 million barrels of crude, U-turned in the Strait of Hormuz after the US airstrikes on Iran raised the risk of a response that would ensnare commercial shipping in the region, according to vessel tracking data compiled by Bloomberg. The two empty freighters then sailed south, away from the mouth of the Persian Gulf. The turning oil carriers offer the first signs of re-routing, something that oil traders will scrutinize. Any disruption to traffic through the strait, a major artery for global crude and natural gas, raises the specter of a spike in energy prices. That's bad news for Asia, which buys more than four-fifths of all the crude produced in the Middle East, 90% of which goes through the Strait of Hormuz.