WSJ says NATO members are quietly backing US operations against Iran

Despite Donald Trump’s harsh criticism, European NATO members are “quietly” supporting the US military in the US-Israeli war against Iran.

According to a Wall Street Journal report, many European leaders continue to keep their political distance from the war and press for de-escalation, yet they are still supporting US efforts.

The report says Europeans are providing the operational platform required for American power in the Middle East.

The countries involved include the following:

Britain, after some delay, allowed the use of British bases for US strikes on Iranian missile facilities targeting ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Portugal confirmed its decision to allow the US to use Lajes Air Base in the Azores. Germany, although Berlin has insisted that this is not NATO’s war, has kept Ramstein Air Base available under existing agreements. The base is vital for logistics, power projection and drone operations outside Europe. Italy continues to allow the US access to its bases and use of its airspace, although it has said any offensive use related to Iran must first receive approval from Rome. Even France has permitted US aircraft to be stationed at French bases for missions supporting Gulf partners, while banning those aircraft from taking part in strikes on Iran. Souda Bay on the Greek island of Crete served as a working port for the USS Gerald R. Ford for resupply, refueling and repairs after a fire aboard the ship, before it headed to Split in Croatia for more extensive maintenance.

The WSJ points to Spain as “a notable exception”:

“Left-wing Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez seemed eager to pick a fight with Trump. Last year, Madrid alone refused to comply with NATO’s 5% defense spending target. Now it has barred the use of Rota Naval Base and Morón Air Base for Iran-related operations and closed its airspace to US military flights connected to the war. But when Spain blocked some routes and facilities, flights were redirected elsewhere in Europe, including to Germany.”

The report underlines that the impact of allied support is not merely symbolic. Noting that access, basing rights, overflight permissions, maintenance, refueling and logistics form “the skeleton of military power,” the WSJ writes: “Without them, American operations become slower, more expensive and more risky.”

US Air Force General Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s top commander in Europe, told the Senate in March that the continent’s geography and location allow US European Command (Eucom) to support other combatant commands with “critical logistics, ready forces, and lethal capabilities,” and wrote that US power projection depends on European allies.

During the hearing, the commander said the “vast majority” of European allies were “highly supportive.”

According to the WSJ, this is the paradox at the center of the current transatlantic debate. Politically, the war with Iran has widened the gap between Washington and many European governments. Operationally, however, it has underscored how dependent the US still is on Europe and how “cooperative” most European governments remain.

The WSJ says this has happened before, writing that some elements of the Iran operations recall the Iraq war:

“Especially during the final phase of the war in 2007–09, support across much of Europe had diminished. Washington wanted to show it was not acting alone. In that atmosphere, the political symbolism of backing the US was often as important as the actual military assistance.”

The report recalls that some allies also offered their capabilities “quietly” at the time, while the lack of political backing was conspicuous.

According to the WSJ, for various reasons, a shift in political positioning is unlikely, but that should not obscure the reality of practical cooperation.

In the fourth year of the war in Ukraine, the American newspaper writes that the risk is very high that “public sentiment could take over and NATO as a whole could suffer.” It adds that “NATO’s eastern flank will pay the highest price, because it lives in the shadow of war and cannot afford a diminished American role in Europe’s security architecture,” and continues:

“For this reason, allies should resist retaliatory rhetoric and focus on examples of cooperation. That is the backdrop to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s visit to Washington this week. The main message should be simple: Europe is not merely a consumer of the security provided by the US. By hosting around 80,000 US troops and some 40 bases that both deter adversaries and support operations far beyond the continent’s borders, Europe is part of the machinery of American power projection.”

While acknowledging that Europe may not want to assume the political responsibility for another war in the Middle East, the WSJ argues that the Old Continent remains “strategically indispensable” for Washington and concludes: “Trump’s own election campaign made that clear.”