NATO allies are declining to join a potential effort to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, frustrating President Donald Trump and prompting questions among some U.S. officials about the alliance’s reliability in a major global crisis.
Trump has warned the Hormuz standoff with Iran could have serious consequences for NATO, arguing that allies benefit from global security without sharing the burden.
“The United States has been informed by most of our NATO ‘Allies’ that they don’t want to get involved with our Military Operation,” the president wrote on Truth Social Tuesday.
“We will protect them, but they will do nothing for us, in particular, in a time of need,” he said.
IRAN HOLDS WORLD ENERGY HOSTAGE WITH ‘NIGHTMARE’ STRAIT OF HORMUZ SEA MINES, FORMER CENTCOM OFFICIAL WARNS
The Strait of Hormuz is a vital artery for the global economy, carrying about 20% of the world’s oil supply. Even limited disruption can send energy prices soaring and strain economies worldwide.
Though NATO’s core mission is regional defense, allied involvement in securing the strait would demonstrate whether the alliance can project power beyond Europe — or whether it relies primarily on the U.S. to safeguard global commerce.
The frustration is spreading beyond the White House.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said the lack of allied support “makes me second guess the value of these alliances,” warning the repercussions could be “wide and deep.”
Trump also has questioned the future of the alliance.
“If there’s no response or if it’s a negative response, I think it will be very bad for the future of NATO,” he told the Financial Times.
IRAN WAR JEOPARDIZES TRUMP ECONOMIC BOOM BEFORE KEY MIDTERM ELECTIONS
European allies, however, have shown little willingness to join a U.S.-led military effort against Iran in the Strait of Hormuz.
The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway between Iran and Oman that serves as the primary transit route for roughly 20% of the world’s oil supply.
The current standoff follows escalating U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets, raising fears Tehran could retaliate by disrupting shipping through the strait using naval mines, drones or fast-attack vessels.
Insurance companies have begun refusing to insure ships traversing the strait and a very limited number of ships have passed since the start of the U.S.-led mission against Iran known as Operation Epic Fury.
The United Kingdom has ruled out sending warships into the Strait of Hormuz or nearby Iranian waters, signaling it will avoid direct involvement in combat operations.
Instead, British officials have discussed more limited support, including the use of minesweeping drones — unmanned systems designed to detect and help neutralize naval mines, which Iran historically has used as a low-cost way to threaten commercial shipping. While such systems can help keep sea lanes open, they are typically used after mines are deployed and do not deter attacks in real time.
The UK has permitted the U.S. to use two of its military bases — Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and Royal Air Force Fairford in England — for “specific and limited” defensive actions against Iran. Diego Garcia has long served as a staging ground for U.S. long-range bomber operations and logistics in the Middle East, while RAF Fairford is one of the few European bases capable of hosting U.S. strategic bombers, including B-52 and B-2 aircraft, which can be used for strike missions or deterrence patrols.
France similarly has declined to participate in combat operations, with French President Emmanuel Macron saying any potential escort mission would only take place once the situation stabilizes. Germany has taken an even firmer stance, ruling out involvement entirely and emphasizing that NATO is a defensive alliance not designed for intervention in conflicts like the current Iran crisis.
While larger European allies have declined to participate, some smaller partners have signaled a willingness to contribute.
Estonia’s foreign minister, Margus Tsahkna, said the country is prepared to discuss how it could assist if Washington makes a formal request.
Ukraine also has moved to provide expertise and technology to counter Iranian drone attacks, including low-cost interceptor drones and battlefield-tested air defense tactics developed during its war with Russia. U.S. and Gulf partners already have requested Ukrainian assistance, with Kyiv signaling it is prepared to share both systems and personnel to help defend against Iranian aerial threats.
“Estonia joined NATO barely 20 years ago, Ukraine isn’t even a member, and they’re both ready to roll,” one European policy analyst said. “Meanwhile the rest of Europe is still debating how to form a committee to form a working group to study the matter.”
The Strait of Hormuz — a critical chokepoint for global energy supplies — has seen shipping disrupted amid escalating conflict, with tanker movements slowing or halting after repeated attacks and threats from Iran.
The waterway carries roughly 20% of the world’s oil and significant volumes of liquefied natural gas, and the disruption has pushed crude prices above $100 per barrel.
The Trump administration has said the U.S. could deploy naval escorts to protect commercial tankers, but so far have not done so as officials weigh the risks and resources required.
Naval capability across Europe is uneven, with only a handful of countries — particularly the United Kingdom and France — able to deploy the kind of assets required for a high-risk mission in the region.
“Only England and France really have any type of naval power that could be helpful,” said Harley Lippman, a geopolitical analyst who regularly engages with Gulf leaders, adding that other European navies are “too small and too weak.”
Securing the narrow waterway likely would require naval escorts, air and missile defense, and mine-clearing capabilities, all while operating within range of Iranian forces.
“There are significant operational considerations. … It is not a simple operating environment,” said Kristine Berzina, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, a Washington-based think tank focused on transatlantic relations. “But there’s also an overarching political climate” shaping decisions about involvement.
That broader context includes concerns about escalation, as well as differences over how the conflict began and how it should be handled.
European officials were not involved in the initial decision-making around the current U.S.–Iran military operation, and several governments have emphasized de-escalation and diplomatic engagement rather than direct participation.
Some countries are pursuing alternative approaches, including diplomatic efforts to secure safe passage through the strait, while others are wary of entering a crowded and volatile operating environment where miscalculation could trigger a wider conflict.
Domestic political pressures and competing priorities also play a role, as European governments remain focused on security challenges closer to home, particularly Russia and the war in Ukraine.
Berzina said the situation also reflects the limits of the alliance itself.
“NATO is a defensive alliance,” she said. “Once you get to the Middle East, you’re looking at the capabilities of individual allies.”
Lippman argued that Europe’s reliance on energy flows through the region makes the current reluctance difficult to justify.
“They benefit from the oil coming out of the Strait of Hormuz more than we do,” he said.
While U.S. consumers may feel more immediate price spikes, Europe is more exposed to longer-term disruptions due to its reliance on imported natural gas and limited ability to quickly replace supply.
HORMUZ ERUPTS: ATTACKS, GPS JAMMING, HOUTHI THREATS ROCK STRAIT AMID US-ISRAELI STRIKES
Even if allies chose to participate, coordination would be a major hurdle.
“Who controls under what rules of engagement … is as important as whether participants have enough ships,” she said.
The tensions come amid broader questions about the strength and expectations of the transatlantic alliance.
EU PUSHES FOR END OF IRAN WAR IN A MANNER WHERE ‘EVERYBODY SAVES FACE’
Trump long has been critical of NATO, repeatedly arguing that the United States bears a disproportionate share of the burden and questioning whether allies would come to America’s defense in a crisis.
The U.S. has played a leading role in supporting Ukraine following Russia’s invasion — a conflict with direct implications for European security — while European allies have contributed significant aid and resources.
But European governments are quick to note that after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, NATO invoked its collective defense clause for the first time in response to an attack on the United States. European allies also deployed forces to Afghanistan alongside U.S. troops and sustaining significant casualties over the course of the war.
The current standoff may signal a broader shift in how the U.S. and Europe approach security cooperation.
“This is a moment of recalibration,” Berzina said. “We’ll see negotiations over the roles Europeans would be willing to consider.”
Trump’s push to acquire Greenland, territory of NATO ally Denmark, has already exposed fault lines within the alliance, with European leaders pushing back forcefully and warning the move risked undermining unity at a time of rising global threats.
Those tensions are now colliding with the crisis in the Middle East, as the U.S. looks for allied support in the Strait of Hormuz and finds limited appetite among key European partners.
At the same time, disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz could hand a strategic advantage to Russia. Any sustained spike in global oil prices — driven by threats to shipping through the waterway — would boost Moscow’s energy revenues as it continues its war in Ukraine under Western sanctions.
The White House and NATO could not immediately be reached for comment.