By Lionel Laurent
Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer have become two of Donald Trump's favourite "punch bags" as the US president tries to disengage from a war with Iran that has shut down a critical oil route, thereby depleting global energy reserves and destabilizing financial markets.
However, despite Trump's tactical provocations, due to their (and Europe's) logical refusal to join the conflict and "take the oil" by force, the leaders of France and Britain are key figures as America's allies try to find a way out of the geopolitical situation created by Trump. The Old Continent had nothing to do with the war chosen by the US and Israel, and yet its effects threaten the safety, security and well-being of its citizens, with diesel prices hitting a four-year high and the risks of terrorism increasing. Their efforts, however, may bear fruit.
The Franco-British initiative focuses on opening the Strait of Hormuz - through which about a quarter of the oil transported by sea passes - not by force, but through alliances and diplomacy. Macron met this week with Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, who equally wants a ceasefire and de-escalation in a region from which her country gets almost all its crude oil.
The French president dismissed calls to send warships as "unrealistic" (and the US itself has not yet tried an attack on Hormuz), but Tokyo and Paris are open to an expanded naval role after the ceasefire.
Meanwhile, British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper on Thursday held a video conference with her counterparts from about 40 countries - excluding the US and Iran - with the aim of restoring navigation through the strait. Its purpose was to broaden the scope sufficiently to include countries that maintain open channels of communication with Tehran, as well as to form a group that could eventually exert pressure through economic sanctions and consider military options only as a last resort.
"The opening of Hormuz is now Europe's main goal in the short term," says Christina Kausch of the German Marshall Fund. "There is no appetite for military action without the US, which means that Iran's incentives to continue the blockade must be reduced."
It is a reversal of roles, 70 years after the Suez crisis, when the United Kingdom and France allied with Israel in a misguided and doomed attack aimed at wresting control of the canal from Egypt. At the time, it was America that was trying to prevent the region from a generalized conflagration, while the Soviet Union and the United Nations were also pushing for an end to the war.
It is also a step away from the diplomatic tightrope that Macron, Starmer and other Europeans have been walking since the attacks against Iran began in late February. Saying "this is not our war" was a smart policy for voters in their own countries and a fully justified reaction to Trump's recklessness and intimidating behaviour. However, the US seems to be belatedly realizing that pressure and threats of annexation are not the best way to secure the support of allies (and their military bases) after starting wars in their "backyard". And Europe understands that it is in this battle, whether it likes it or not.
The longer the strait remains closed, the greater the risk to its economies, with the result that German growth could be halved this year. At the same time, Europe's allies in the Gulf are being attacked by Iranian missiles, while Russia is emerging as the obvious winner from rising oil prices, the easing of energy sanctions and the depletion of weapons stockpiles that may have been destined for Ukraine. The risk of domestic terrorist attacks is also increasing, with French authorities charging and imprisoning four people for a failed bomb attempt near Bank of America's Paris offices, which was seen as potential retaliation for the war.
And while the American leader monopolizes interest, other parts of his administration are not closing the door on transatlantic cooperation. It was rather strange to see Trump's French-born official, Jacob Helberg, visit Brussels this week and declare, amid criticism, that America "wants a strong Europe".
The question now is what the potential coalition of countries that participated in the London video conference – which included Japan, Australia, Canada and some Gulf states as well as Europeans – can achieve. As long as it does not fall into the European trap of endless discussions and announcements, this is an opportunity for the most sober Western allies to reconnect with a region where they have lost their influence. The ultimate measure of success would be to find a way out for Trump that does not involve escalation.
What remains unknown, of course, is the price Iran hopes to extract if it agrees to a long-term settlement for Hormuz, as Antonio Barroso of Bloomberg Economics tells me. Tehran may demand an easing of economic sanctions. Her insistence that Israel and the U.S. never attack again seems like an impossible demand. Iran says it is drawing up a protocol with Oman to monitor traffic through the strait.
China, which also obtains much of its energy needs through the Gulf, could play a key role in offering Iran incentives to de-escalate. Beijing is enjoying the damage Trump is doing to longstanding U.S. security ties, and perhaps there is an opportunity here to fill the vacuum by helping Europeans and Gulf monarchies. But would it be willing to offer security guarantees to Iran and expose itself to a possible confrontation with the US in the future?
Regardless of geopolitical uncertainty, any option that prevents escalation on the part of the US or the involvement of other countries in hostilities is worth exploring. There may even be some benefits for London and Brussels, as the UK and the European Union are pushed towards a rapprochement due to the actions of the White House. Considering that this year marks the 70th anniversary of the Suez crisis and a decade since the Brexit referendum, this would indeed be a welcome change.
