How does Brussels view the crisis between the U.S. and Spain? Four MEPs respond

Spain’s decision to deny use of its bases at Rota and Morón for U.S. attacks against Iran has opened a debate that ranges beyond the bilateral framework and involves the European Union. At stake is more than the relationship with Washington; Europe’s ability to defend its own positions on security, trade, and international legality are all under discussion.

The EU is a key player in this crisis for two reasons. The first is strategic: European autonomy in defense remains a distant aspiration, but every episode of geopolitical turmoil advanced by the White House reopens the question of how far Europe can respond without subordination to the Atlantic alliance. The second is institutional: trade policy is a competence of the European Community, and any retaliation by the U.S. would, or should, affect the whole of the Union.

At this crossroads between NATO, international law, and European sovereignty are the perspectives of four MEPs, all contributors to the Agenda Pública EU section. Hana Jalloul, Antonio López-Istúriz, Javi López, and Jonás Fernández respond to the situation with knowledge of Spanish politics as well as a full understanding of the European Community framework.

By denying the United States use of Rota and Morón for attacks on Iran, is Spain affirming its independence, or is it putting the credibility of the alliance at risk?

Jonás Fernández: Spain is exercising a prerogative acknowledged in agreements between the U.S. and Spain that regulates the use of such bases, wherein any military operation outside the umbrella of NATO or the United Nations requires formal authorization from Spain.

Spain is therefore acting with complete normality under the framework of cooperation signed with the United States.

Antonio López-Istúriz: Spain has the full right to defend its own sovereignty and to participate in decisions that affect its security and foreign policy. However, that legitimate autonomy must be exercised responsibly and, above all, in coordination with our allies. The bases at Rota and Morón are part of a framework of strategic cooperation with the United States and within our commitment to NATO.

"An ally’s credibility is built precisely on predictability and cooperation"

Therefore, any decision that affects their use should be managed with transparency and dialogue within the alliance, and we should avoid sending signals that might be interpreted as a lack of reliability. An ally’s credibility is built precisely on predictability and cooperation. Sánchez has acted in imitation of regimes that are not on the democratic side of history; he has made decisions outside the rulings of the Cortes Generales, without informing His Majesty the King and without consulting with his European allies.

Hana Jalloul: That dichotomy doesn’t accurately represent the reality of the situation. Spain isn’t reaffirming its independence but acting within the framework of the 1988 cooperation agreement with the United States, which gives Spain the power to authorize movements taking place at those bases, such as traffic of aerial bombers. This has happened on previous occasions, and it is part of the normal cooperation that prevails on U.S. bases within our national territory.

What we need to emphasize is the illegality of this intervention. The attacks on Iran launched by the U.S. and Israel are against both international law and the UN Charter, and they lack the backing of the Security Council or even of the U.S. Congress.

This position is compatible with condemnation of the Iranian regime and its oppression of Iranian citizens, especially women, which we’ve repeatedly condemned, and with the designation of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group.

Javi López: Spain is a reliable and first-rate partner in the context of NATO and the United Nations. What it’s doing is affirming its unwavering commitment to international law and peace by rejecting use of its territory for a war that is unjustified and illegal, and that has neither the endorsement of the UN Security Council nor articulation within the NATO framework.

Unlike the Aznar government in 2003, the government of Pedro Sánchez is rejecting participation in a war that will only bring more violence and destabilization to the region, and that threatens world peace.

What puts the credibility of the alliance at risk are unilateral military interventions co-organized with external third states outside it, not the acts of members in compliance with their obligations under international law.

Does the threat of trade retaliation from the U.S. force Spain to choose between economic interest and strategic autonomy?

H. J.: Spain’s position on the alleged retaliation in matters of trade mentioned by President Trump has also been emphatically expressed by the European Commission. The unity of Spain and the Commission – which leads our trade policy – shows that Trump’s comments don’t hold up.

Trade-related competences fall exclusively to the Community, not to the Member States, so this isn’t a threat to Spain but to the EU as a whole.

"This position is compatible with condemnation of the Iranian regime and its oppression of Iranian citizens, especially women"

In any case, we have to remember that this isn’t anything new. Since the agreement reached with the U.S. last summer, when Ursula von der Leyen agreed to assume tariffs at 15%, the Trump administration has threatened various countries for their support of Danish sovereignty over Greenland. The EU’s economic interests depend precisely on that strategic autonomy and on acting as a union in the face of threats.

J. L.: Trump’s threat isn’t against Spain but against the entire EU. His ignorance of how transatlantic trade relations work is also nothing new. Nor are his unpredictability and lack of moderation regarding the consequences of his actions.

Honestly, there’s nothing new under the sun. Trump has already liquidated the precepts of the Turnberry Agreement following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on his tariff measures, to which he responded with public statements about a new general global tariff of 15%.

The Trump administration isn’t a reliable partner. It responds to any setback, external or internal, in the same way: impulsively and indiscriminately. Europe’s economic interest also depends on actually achieving strategic autonomy.

A. L. I.: We shouldn’t accept a false dilemma between strategic autonomy and economic prosperity. As a member of the European Union, Spain is part of a common market and commercial policy that exists precisely to strengthen our negotiating capacity against great powers.

What we need to do is act with strategic intelligence: defend our economic interests, but also maintain a strong relationship with the U.S., which is still a critical partner in security, trade, and democratic values.

Impulsive decisions or short-term political gestures can have consequences beyond the diplomatic sphere... We still remember Zapatero’s disregard for the flag and the consequences it still carries today.

J. F.: Trade policy is a full competence of the European Union, not of the Member States. Therefore, there’s no room for trade retaliation against a particular EU country.

We can also recall, by the way, the case of Algeria and its gas exports to Spain, where the government of that North African country threatened reprisals that it couldn’t implement.

To what extent has public opposition to interventions in the Middle East conditioned the government’s decision? Can political caution prevail over strategy?

J. L.: I think that, more relevant than public opposition to interventions in the Middle East – which does indeed exist – is the public consensus on our need to respect international law and to preserve peace.

"This decision by the government is based on the firm values and legitimate interests of Spanish society"

The government isn’t merely aware of this fact – it’s part of the government’s DNA: defense of multilateralism, dialogue, diplomacy, de-escalation, and peace. All this has been expressed both within the European Union and in every multilateral forum. The entire archival history of this government and president is right there. He’s said all this before about Ukraine, Gaza, and Greenland.

This decision by the government is based on the firm values and legitimate interests of Spanish society. An illegal war benefits no one.

A. L. I.: It’s clear that, in Spain, the government has made a great effort to polarize society; Sánchez himself said so in his investiture speech.

Democratic governments are democratic only if they respect the separation of powers. In that regard, the Cortes Generales are the institutional expression of popular sovereignty and the main forum where the public opinion of citizens is articulated and represented. Sánchez repeatedly ignores the Cortes. He makes decisions without the Congress and Senate, and without submitting himself to questions from the press: these ‘institutional declarations’ are like a bad joke to journalists.

J. F.: I see a clear strategy in the actions of the Government of Spain when, under the cooperation agreement with the U.S., it chooses to reject the use of military bases for operations outside the framework of NATO and the UN.

That strategy is based on the commitment to denounce any flagrant breach of the UN Charter, whether in the case of Russia in Ukraine, or Israel against Palestine, or currently the U.S. and Israel against Iran, or Iran against its regional neighbors.

H. J.: Any strategy we adopt cannot legitimize military intervention outside international law, which endangers the stability of the region and doesn’t contribute to de-escalation or diplomatic dialogue. If that inspires public opposition, it’s because citizens care about international law, know history, and understand the importance of peace. We can’t be ambiguous about condemning the illegitimate use of military force and violations of international law.

The position expressed by the Government of Spain coincides with that of a large majority of citizens, who beyond ideologies and parties reject war and the illegal use of violence. Two decades ago, Spaniards took to the streets and raised their voices against the war in Iraq, whose dire consequences brought violence and instability to the entire Middle East and where it was later shown that there were no nuclear weapons.

We remember. And for that reason, Pedro Sánchez’s government has opted not to stand aside and to firmly defend a return to the UN framework as the only way to de-escalate and bring peace to the region.

Is the position of Sánchez a commitment to European strategic autonomy, or does it expose Spain to isolation within NATO? 

A. L. I.: Europe has to move toward greater strategic autonomy, especially in defense and security. But that autonomy isn’t incompatible with a strong NATO. In fact, both dimensions must be mutually reinforcing.

The risk arises when certain decisions are presented as internal political gestures rather than part of a coordinated European strategy. Spain must be an actor that builds bridges, not one that generates doubts around its position within the alliance. Our country holds a key geostrategic position and must use it to strengthen both transatlantic cooperation and European capacity for action.

J. F.: This military operation was launched without the participation or approval of NATO.

"The only country isolating itself by launching military operations without requesting NATO support is the United States"

Rejecting the use of military bases in our country can’t be interpreted as an element of isolation within NATO, since the only country isolating itself by launching military operations without requesting NATO support is the United States.

H. J.: The position expressed by President Sánchez is a commitment to responsibility, multilateralism, and peace. Spain has been and remains and will continue to be a committed partner in NATO, which gives great importance to its role within the Atlantic Alliance. Our commitment to peace and international law is compatible with and necessary to the importance we attach to NATO membership.

The Government and the PSOE have always been committed to promoting a European defense architecture grounded in respect for the dictates of the UN Charter.

Proof of that commitment includes the support shown by our country for Ukraine, or the recent deployment of a Spanish frigate to Cyprus within the framework of a joint European operation, to contribute to protection of that country against attacks. We’ve rejected the attacks that Iran has launched against numerous countries, and we continue to ask the EU for coherence and forcefulness and to stop acting according to double standards, as occurred with Gaza.

J. L.: Many European leaders have been stuck in complacency and vassalage to the U.S. ever since Trump took office. That strategy has had disastrous results in political, economic, and security terms. That’s evident.

Spain questioned that approach from the outset and argued that the EU should be a stronger pillar within NATO, capable of defending its values and interests autonomously. Today, that position has been fully vindicated.

The same thing has happened in regard to this illegal war. Spain was the first to denounce it, but Spain’s position has been followed by other European countries, and not only European countries.

It reflects a willingness to exercise our geopolitical potential autonomously, to defend our values and interests. The EU and many of its Member States are mistaken, in my opinion, in their inability to see the enormous consequences of participating in this new debacle from Trump and Netanyahu.