NATO at a Crossroads: The Iran War and the Strain on European Defense Order

The military confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran has plunged NATO into an unprecedented crisis. What began as a limited operation to weaken Iran's nuclear and missile systems has evolved into a strategic dilemma that calls into question the very foundation of the North Atlantic alliance itself.

February 28, 2026, marks the turning point. On that day, the U.S. and Israel launched extensive airstrikes on Iranian military facilities, missile silos, and command centers. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the first wave of attacks, along with dozens of high-ranking commanders of the Revolutionary Guards. Iran's immediate response was fierce: ballistic missiles and drones were fired at Israel as well as at U.S. bases in Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates. At least 24 people were killed in the Gulf states.

The situation became critical for NATO when Iran began firing its missiles over the territory of member states. Turkey reported on March 9 the interception of an Iranian ballistic missile by NATO air defense systems over the southern Turkish city of Gaziantep. By March 13, three missiles had already been intercepted. NATO responded by deploying an additional Patriot air defense unit to the Incirlik Air Base in southern Turkey. This process highlights a central paradox: The alliance was pushed into a defensive situation by the Iran war without having approved the conflict itself.

However, the most profound conflict within the alliance ignited over the issue of alliance solidarity. Spain firmly refused to allow the use of its military bases for U.S. operations against Iran. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on March 30 that NATO needed to be reassessed after allies blocked the use of their bases. The U.S. subsequently relocated 15 aircraft, including refueling planes, from southern Spanish military bases. At the same time, President Trump threatened Spain with a complete severance of trade relations.

Spain's stance is not an isolated case but rather a reflection of widespread European reluctance. France, Germany, and Italy had already expressed opposition to NATO's involvement in the Iran operation in advance. The European governments argued that a collective decision under Article 5 was not present and that the military action had not been legitimized by the North Atlantic Council. This position is consistent with international law but puts the principle of alliance-wide solidarity to a severe test.

The energy crisis significantly exacerbates the strategic dilemma. Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has massively disrupted Europe's oil supply. The price of oil rose by more than forty percent in the weeks following the outbreak of war. Egypt ordered the early closure of shops and restaurants to conserve energy. The European economies, already suffering from the consequences of the Ukraine war, now face the risk of another recession.

Recent budget decisions by individual member states also point in this direction. Norway announced on March 27 that it would increase its defense budget by more than eleven billion dollars over the next ten years. This represents a significant increase in Norwegian defense spending, which was already above the two percent GDP mark. Other European countries are currently considering similar increases.

The ceasefire on April 7, mediated by Pakistan, has temporarily halted the acute escalation. Iran agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz for two weeks, in return, the U.S. ceased its airstrikes. However, the ceasefire is fragile. Iran's chief negotiator stated on April 23 that violations by the U.S. and Israel made the reopening of the strait impossible. Israel also explicitly emphasized that the ceasefire did not include Lebanon—a war zone that has already become a humanitarian disaster with over 2,294 dead civilians and more than a million refugees.

For European security policy, this situation necessitates a fundamental reassessment. The transatlantic security umbrella, which has served as a guarantor of European security since 1949, is being questioned for the first time—not by an external enemy, but by the most powerful ally itself. The European Union faces the historic task of consolidating its defense capabilities. The question is no longer whether Europe needs to do more for its defense, but how quickly it can act before the next crisis overwhelms the alliance completely.