Europe's Strategic Test: The Multinational Naval Operation to Secure the Strait of Hormuz

The European powers are facing one of their most demanding military challenges in decades. After the Iran War has massively disrupted shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — one of the world's most critical trade routes, through which approximately 20 percent of global oil typically flows — London and Paris are working on forming a multinational naval mission to secure this vital waterway. At a conference in London at the end of April, military planners from 30 countries met to discuss the practical implementation of such an operation. What appears to be a regional crisis response actually reveals the profound structural problems of European defense policy.

The core of the British-French proposal is a "strictly defensive" multinational naval operation focused on protecting merchant ships from attacks, rather than targeting land objectives. According to Rear Admiral (ret.) Jürgen Ehle, a former senior military advisor to the EU, such a mission would involve the defense of ships against missiles, drones, and fast boats. Practically, this means deploying frigates or destroyers equipped with air defense systems, as well as mine-hunting drones, including unmanned systems, to detect and neutralize sea mines.

The European Three — Germany, France, and the United Kingdom — are expected to bear a large part of the military burden. Chancellor Friedrich Merz has signaled Germany's willingness to contribute mine clearance vessels and reconnaissance resources, subject to parliamentary approval. Merz explicitly emphasized the need for a clear legal mandate before any deployment — a position that reflects the domestic political constraints and constitutional hurdles of German foreign policy.

France already has significant naval capabilities in the region, including eight warships, an aircraft carrier, and two amphibious assault ships. President Emmanuel Macron stated that the forces currently stationed in the eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea — including the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle — could be partially redirected to support the mission. The British government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer has identified more than a dozen states willing to participate, but London's specific contribution remains uncertain. As Bence Nemeth, a defense expert at King's College London, noted, while advanced British destroyers are available, "readiness and availability remain unclear."

The operational risks in the Persian Gulf are considerable. Ehle pointed out that air defense capabilities do not guarantee 100 percent security, especially against large-scale drone attacks. David B. Roberts from the Royal United Services Institute described a "multi-tiered" threat landscape, ranging from slow, low-flying loitering munitions at the lower end to fast anti-ship missiles and contact mines at the upper end. Developments in the Ukraine War have further highlighted how quickly the drone threat is evolving: Russia is currently equipping slow propeller-driven Shahed drones with jet engines, increasing their speed to about 740 km/h at an altitude of around 8,800 meters — compared to 145 km/h and 2,000 meters for the original models. For European navies expected to operate in the Gulf against similar threats, this is a sobering prospect.

Here, a fundamental dilemma of European defense planning emerges. The deployment of naval capabilities to the Gulf necessarily means a weakening of European presence in other critical regions. Nemeth warned clearly: "Europeans need their naval capabilities first and foremost to protect themselves." Tense security situations in the Baltic Sea, the North Atlantic, and on NATO's eastern flank require a permanent naval presence. Years of neglect of European navies — decommissioned frigates, outdated minehunters, insufficient logistics ships — are now taking their toll as multiple operational theaters must be serviced simultaneously.

The strategic dimension extends beyond the immediate security of shipping. Macron and Starmer are striving to expand the coalition beyond Europe, involving countries like India, which provides about 10 percent of the world's seafarers, and South Korea. The goal is twofold: to exert diplomatic pressure on Tehran and to facilitate the resumption of commercial shipping. At the same time, India, Pakistan, and China are pursuing bilateral agreements with Iran to maintain shipping if necessary — albeit currently with marginal quantities, according to Roberts.

The Russian Northern Sea Route provides a contrasting backdrop. Moscow is investing 1.8 trillion rubles, around 20.5 billion euros, in the development of this Arctic route by 2035 and is promoting it as the "safest and most reliable" way between Asia and Europe. However, the reality is sobering: in 2024, only 38 million tons of cargo passed through the route — less than half of Moscow's target of 80 million tons and less than one percent of global trade. Over 80 percent of the cargo consisted of Russian crude oil and liquefied gas. The route remains navigable year-round only with icebreakers, and dependence on Russian control deters Western shipping companies. China's shipping company Cosco halted test voyages in 2022, and South Korea's planned test in September 2026 remains a symbolic act.

Regarding the European security architecture, the Hormuz crisis reveals an uncomfortable truth: Europe can no longer rely solely on the United States as the sole security guarantor. The necessity to conduct a multinational operation in the Persian Gulf while securing NATO's eastern flank against Russia far exceeds current European capabilities. The E3 initiative is an important step towards strategic autonomy, but it also shows how far Europe is from actually exercising that autonomy.

At the same time, the United Kingdom raised its terror alert level from "substantial" to "severe" — the second-highest level — following an anti-Semitic knife attack in the London district of Golders Green, in which two Jewish men were injured. The British government is investing an additional £25 million in increased police presence and security measures for Jewish communities. The elevation of the alert level by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center was not solely justified by this incident, but by a general increase in Islamist and far-right terrorist threats in the United Kingdom. This underscores the multidimensional security burdens currently facing European governments.

The analytical assessment is mixed. On one hand, the Hormuz initiative demonstrates the political will of European great powers to act proactively and take responsibility for the security of global trade routes. On the other hand, the operational implementation remains questionable. Without a clear mandate, sufficient naval capabilities, and a realistic risk assessment, the mission risks becoming a symbolic act that reveals rather than conceals the true weaknesses of European defense. The coming weeks will show whether diplomatic efforts to end hostilities succeed — and whether Europe is truly prepared to bear the military consequences of its strategic ambitions in a crisis. One thing is certain: the Strait of Hormuz is not only a test for Europe's naval power but also for the credibility of the entire European security architecture.