For several weeks, Europe has taken a firm stance regarding the ongoing conflict in Iran, asserting that it did not instigate this misguided confrontation and should not be expected to intervene, especially given the unpredictability of potential actions by Donald Trump. Particularly for Keir Starmer, this situation presents a rare opportunity for the Labour Party to align itself with public sentiment by opting for non-involvement. However, the notion of “not our war, not our problem” has become somewhat complicated as the situation develops.
While it remains true that this is not Europe’s war, the UK government has made it clear that it will not deploy warships to participate in Trump’s newly established naval blockade against Iran. This blockade aims to restrict Iranian oil exports while demanding unobstructed passage through the Strait of Hormuz for all vessels. Nevertheless, Trump’s inclination to escalate tensions rather than seek diplomatic solutions makes this conflict a concern for all nations, regardless of their preferences.
As oil prices surged and stock markets reacted negatively following the weekend, Monday’s scheduled IMF meeting in Washington transformed into an urgent crisis gathering before Rachel Reeves even arrived. The prospects for a swift resolution to the conflict appear dim, leading to pessimistic forecasts for global economic growth amidst fears of a drawn-out energy crisis. This situation poses dire risks for the world’s poorest nations, as the UN warns of potential regression in development. In wealthier countries like the UK, living standards were anticipated to rise this year, but the Resolution Foundation now predicts a decline for average households, with only the most vulnerable likely to be sheltered from increasing energy costs. Small businesses are already feeling the pinch, with reports indicating that many rely on diesel, and without normal shipping through the Gulf, there could be severe shortages of essential goods, including medicines and fertilizers.
Furthermore, Trump’s aggressive actions, including threats to prevent tankers from reaching Iranian ports and seize vessels that pay tolls to Iran, risk escalating tensions further. The potential for conflict with countries, such as China, that have maintained free passage through the Strait of Hormuz complicates the situation. It is now crucial for all parties to find a diplomatic solution that allows Trump to back down without losing credibility.
In the week following Trump’s alarming threats against Iran, two key points have emerged: he is eager to withdraw from this conflict but is struggling to determine how to do so. The expectation that a complex nuclear agreement could be reached swiftly with such an obstinate regime was overly optimistic. Trump’s administration has largely abandoned the diplomatic and military expertise that previously existed, leading him to resort to heightened aggression, albeit from a position of political vulnerability.
This past weekend, Trump faced public disapproval while attending a mixed martial arts event in Miami, as many Americans frustrated with rising living costs are not inclined to support a party that appears to advocate for escalating foreign conflicts. Internal divisions within the MAGA movement have become apparent, with Vice President JD Vance reportedly distancing himself from the situation. Additionally, Viktor Orbán’s recent defeat in Hungary serves as a reminder to American populists that they cannot expect free rein if they fail to deliver tangible benefits to the populace.
Surprisingly, Boris Johnson, the former UK Prime Minister, has voiced an opinion worth considering. Recently returned from the US, he suggested that Trump had made a significant error and that it was wise for the UK to refrain from joining the bombing of Iran. He contended that it is now in Europe’s interest to assist the US in navigating the predicament it has created. Johnson proposed that former allies could leverage their willingness to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz as a bargaining tool to secure increased American support for Ukraine, especially as tensions within NATO rise.
While I do not concur with Johnson’s belief that the UK should endanger its military personnel in a naval operation in the Gulf, offering capabilities for mine detection, as indicated by Defense Secretary John Healey, is reasonable. The current need for NATO is not so much for troops but for diplomatic solutions to the crisis. Europe must also cultivate discreet connections within the US administration that share its goals of resolving the conflict, moving beyond mere military action.
