How is the US-Israeli war on Iran causing havoc in Europe?

Several Western European nations have expressed their opposition to the potential resumption of the Iran war, as spiralling global oil prices have worsened the cost of living crisis across Europe.

Countries such as Germany and the UK, among other major powers, which initially remained silent on the US-Israeli bombardment of Iran, have aired their views, calling for diplomacy to end the war which has disrupted global oil supplies.

Continued disruption to energy supplies is pushing up household costs as winter in Europe approaches, adding fuel to protests over living standards that have engulfed European capitals in recent weeks.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei on Sunday drew attention to what he described as a shift in Germany’s position on attacks against Iran.

In a post on X, Baghaei recalled German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s remarks during Israel’s June 2025 military campaign: “This is the dirty work Israel is doing for all of us.”

He contrasted those words with German officials’ recent warnings against renewed attacks and calls to prevent further escalation, before citing Friedrich Schiller’s The Maid of Orleans, quoting a passage that portrays reason being helplessly dragged towards an abyss by the forces of madness.

Experts say Baghaei’s remarks reflect a broader shift across Europe, where leaders are increasingly questioning their support for the US-Israeli war on Iran.

With Washington reportedly preparing options for renewed attacks, what would further escalation mean for Europe and could the war further strain already frayed relations with the United States?

Here is what we know.

How has Europe’s position changed?

When the US and Israel launched their attacks on February 28 , the leaders of Britain, France and Germany issued a joint statement condemning Iran’s retaliatory strikes on countries across the region. “We condemn Iranian attacks on countries in the region in the strongest terms,” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and Merz said.

Their statement did not condemn the opening US-Israeli attacks. However, it called for negotiations to follow. Nearly eight months into the war, European governments are now explicitly warning against another military campaign.

On Friday, the foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany and Italy met their counterparts from Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt in Istanbul to discuss the conflict and the Strait of Hormuz. Further escalation between Iran and the US “would create nothing but losers and would undoubtedly have very serious consequences for hydrocarbon prices”, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said.

“And so the first thing this group of eight countries … will do is call on both sides to exercise the utmost restraint, because we cannot afford another escalation in the region,” he added.

The warnings against new attacks do not necessarily mean European governments have abandoned their positions on Iran’s nuclear programme or regional activities, but they do show a change of position and have revealed that European governments are not united in their approach to the Iran war.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has consistently opposed the US-Israeli campaign. At this month’s European summit, he again described the war as “illegal, unjust and unjustified”, linking it to Europe’s mounting economic costs.

Western countries have opposed Iran’s nuclear programme, which Tehran says is for civilian purposes only. European countries were part of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with Iran that limited Tehran’s nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. But during his first term in 2018, United States President Donald Trump withdrew from the deal. Both the US and Israel invoked Iran’s nuclear programme to launch their attack in February.

Have European bases been used?

Europe’s divisions have been particularly visible over access to military bases and airspace. “We did not participate in these strikes, but are in close contact with our international partners, including the United States, Israel and partners in the region,” said the February 28 statement from Britain, France and Germany.

But non-participation in the opening attacks did not mean European countries would uniformly refuse support for subsequent operations. Germany said early in the war that it would not restrict US use of its bases, including Ramstein, a major American military hub.

Britain initially withheld permission for the opening attacks. However, it authorised US use of British bases for what London described as specific, limited defensive strikes against Iranian facilities involved in attacks on regional allies. Then, after initial reluctance, Britain expanded that permission to include operations against missile sites and capabilities being used to attack shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

France allowed US support aircraft at Istres, while saying they would support the defence of regional partners rather than participate in attacks on Iran. It later blocked a weapons flight to Israel connected to the campaign. Spain went further. After refusing permission for attacks from the jointly operated Rota and Moron bases, Madrid closed its airspace to US aircraft involved in the war.

Those were different restrictions with different purposes, rather than a single European refusal to cooperate, but they provoked Trump. Calling Spain “terrible”, he threatened to cut off trade and said Washington wanted “nothing to do with Spain”.

The dispute has therefore exposed a widening argument over whether alliance commitments require European governments to facilitate a war they did not choose.

Mark Hilborne, a senior lecturer at the School of Security Studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera: “As to whether the war might push European leaders to openly challenge Trump, and limit support, it is certainly possible. What was initially a diplomatic disagreement is turning into something that has much more direct … and we could see increased resistance to any support from European countries.”

High prices and protest

After Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed in the opening strikes, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said there was “renewed hope for the people of Iran”. She also warned then that instability could push the region into a spiral of violence. But by October 16, the costs to Europe had become central to her message. “Households and industry are paying the price for a war far beyond our borders,” she said after an EU summit.

According to von der Leyen, Europe’s bill for imported fossil fuels had increased by 106 billion euros, while gas prices had risen about 140 percent since late February and diesel prices had doubled.

Disruption to Gulf supplies and restrictions on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz have also caused energy prices to spike. Brent crude settled at $72.48 a barrel on February 27, before the war began. It reached $126.41 at the end of April and remains well above $100 a barrel, with no sign of falling any time soon.

“For Europe, there is the economic interest as well, knowing it would further take a toll on energy markets, pushing up prices at a time when European countries are going into winter and the pushback to that,” Julie Norman, an associate fellow at Chatham House, told Al Jazeera.

Hilborne added that “there is an impact as well on food and fertiliser … The Persian Gulf is a hub for nitrogen-based fertilisers and disruptions have sent prices of urea up by something like 70 percent. Also, supply chains are feeling the impact as well, as shipping companies are facing large increases in their insurance premiums and/or need to reroute to longer journeys”.

“I would say that the Iranian war has had a direct, measurable and quite a rapid impact on European prices,” he added.

The search for relief from the energy crisis has created further friction, with Washington pressing European governments to release emergency diesel stocks, while Trump eased restrictions on Russian diesel in an effort to lower prices. That move provoked criticism from Ukraine and its supporters, who warned that renewed energy revenues would strengthen Moscow’s war effort.

But some of the sharpest political consequences are unfolding closer to home. Protests over living costs, housing, wages and public services have been seen across France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece and Albania. Their causes vary, and they do not constitute a single coordinated movement, but experts say the cost of living crisis, compounded by price rises caused by the Iran war, is a common thread that unites the protesters across the continent.

Donatella della Porta, a sociologist and political scientist, told Al Jazeera that opposition to war was central to recent protests by young people across Europe, alongside anger over military spending at the expense of welfare.

She pointed to opposition to military recruitment in schools, weapons-related university research and the use of ports to transport arms, linking those concerns to wider fears about the future.

“Especially the young protesters are afraid that their future will be stolen not only by global warming but also by wars in which they will be sent to die on the battlefield,” she said.

“Young people also connect wars with genocide, having often been socialised into politics during the large protests against the Israeli genocide of the Palestinians.”