Q. Is Europe ready?<\/p>\n
A. No<\/p>\n
Q. What should it do?<\/p>\n
A. We must prepare for the end of American military protection. We\u2019ll see if NATO survives. We Europeans would do well not to renounce NATO, to keep the European part united, and to invest massively in security. We have no other option.<\/p>\n
Q. Should Europeans try to win over Trump by feting him like NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte<\/a> does?<\/p>\n A. I can\u2019t fault Rutte, but I also can\u2019t criticize Pedro S\u00e1nchez<\/a> [the Spanish prime minister who, unlike Rutte, is standing up to Trump]. They are both right.<\/p>\n Q. They follow opposing strategies.<\/p>\n A. And this highlights the difficulty of the situation. Europe needs to adopt a clear position and, at the same time, must try to take advantage of every opportunity to maintain the relationship [with Trump] for as long as possible.<\/p>\n Q. In 2003, on the eve of the invasion of Iraq, you told then-U.S. secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, \u201cI\u2019m not convinced.\u201d What would you do today if you were foreign minister?<\/p>\n A. I don\u2019t know. As foreign minister, one has to try to take advantage of the available margins of influence. On the other hand, I\u2019m glad I don\u2019t have to. I know myself\u2026<\/p>\n Q. Would you act more like S\u00e1nchez, or like Rutte?<\/p>\n A. Just as Rutte couldn\u2019t. But that\u2019s not a criticism of him.<\/p>\n Q. Back in 2003, there was already talk of a transatlantic crisis because of the Iraq War. Could anyone have imagined that things would get to the point they are today?<\/p>\n A. That was the beginning. The Iraq War played a significant role in Trump\u2019s rise. Trump believed this [the current conflict with Iran] would be a Venezuela 2.0 \u2014 although instead of capturing the regime leader [as happened in January with Nicol\u00e1s Maduro], they killed [Ayatollah Ali Khamenei<\/a>] \u2014 and that the regime would fall, but it remains firmly in power and the promised destruction of the nuclear program has not occurred. The regime has managed to close the Strait of Hormuz<\/a>, which was predictable. The objectives of the war have not been achieved. If the regime remains in power, and becomes more radicalized, the biggest loser will be the Iranian people.<\/p>\n Europeans must think in European terms when it comes to security, because we are alone. It\u2019s not just about Ukraine: Behind it is Europe<\/p>\n Q. At first it was believed that the intervention could be good for the Iranian people, after the massacres during the January protests.<\/p>\n A. I wouldn\u2019t regret the fall of this regime, quite the contrary. It\u2019s a murderous regime that hasn\u2019t hesitated to shoot tens of thousands of protesters in the streets. They shot people at close range. It\u2019s terrible. But, if we analyze the facts, [the U.S. military intervention] wasn\u2019t well thought out.<\/p>\n Q. Was S\u00e1nchez right to say \u201cno to war\u201d?<\/p>\n A. Participating in that war would have been irresponsible. Spain\u2019s position is commendable, although I would have preferred a greater commitment to Ukraine, especially considering Spain\u2019s history. It reminded me a lot of General Franco\u2019s coup and the Civil War.<\/p>\n Q. Do you think Spain should spend more on defense?<\/p>\n A. The issue of rearmament is, first and foremost, a matter for the major member states, not for Luxembourg.<\/p>\n Q. Are you referring to the 5% of GDP NATO spending target, which Spain does not want to meet?<\/p>\n A. Yes, but what I mean is that we Europeans must think in European terms when it comes to security, because we are alone. It\u2019s not just about Ukraine: Behind it is Europe.<\/p>\n Q. Regarding Iran, in Germany, Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz<\/a> disagreed with S\u00e1nchez. He said at the beginning of the war that he wanted to avoid lecturing the U.S. and Israel, and downplayed the argument of defending international law to oppose the intervention.<\/p>\n A. I would proceed with caution regarding international law. Is it in accordance with international law to massacre one\u2019s own population? I believe we need international law, but it is unacceptable for a government to massacre its own population, and in that sense, it is a difficult situation from the perspective of international law. That also happened with [Serbian leader Slobodan] Milo\u0161evi\u0107<\/a>.<\/p>\n Q. Are you comparing it to Kosovo in 1999?<\/p>\n A. In Kosovo, what happened was that the Security Council was blocked by the Russian veto. It was unacceptable that the killings, expulsions, and rapes were protected by international law.<\/p>\n Q. And you said at the time: \u201cNever again war,\u201d yes, but also \u201cnever again Auschwitz.\u201d That is, never again indiscriminate massacres of civilian populations. Could it be argued that this also applies to Iran and that we should help the Iranian people, the opposition, the young people who are being massacred, even through armed conflict?<\/p>\n A. If this were all Trump and [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu were concerned with, I would say yes, but of course, there are also broader political objectives. I understand Israel to some extent. I have been to Iran several times, and I have always told them that Israel will never accept an Iranian nuclear weapon. It\u2019s not just Netanyahu; it\u2019s Israel, and also the Israeli left. But what we are experiencing in the Middle East is Israeli hegemonic ambition. I fully understand the anger following October 7 [2023, when Hamas-led militias attacked Israel]. But what has happened in Gaza cannot be ignored, and I fear that Israel has done itself a great deal of harm. Because Israel has always rested on three pillars: the pillar of its own strength, the pillar of its close relationship with the U.S., and the pillar of humanitarian and political legitimacy, as the only democracy in the Middle East and the only safe haven for Jews, for the Jewish diaspora, so that something like the Holocaust will never happen again. And this last pillar has disappeared. In the long run, this will represent a very serious loss for Israel.<\/p>\n Q. You already mentioned Ukraine and Russia. If Trump really does withdraw [U.S. support], can Europe stop Russia on its own?<\/p>\n A. If we can\u2019t, we have a huge problem. That\u2019s why we must do everything possible to support Ukraine. As long as Ukraine continues to fight and is able to do so, it acts as a guarantee of security for us, because [Russian President] Vladimir Putin will not stop; he will continue to advance westward.<\/p>\n I don\u2019t want to say anything about Schr\u00f6der. I worked closely with him for seven years, and we worked well together. I do not share his opinion about Russia or Putin at all<\/p>\n Q. If we\u2019re talking about the prehistory of the current situation, we have to talk about Gerhard Schr\u00f6der, chancellor during the coalition years with you, and close to Putin. Did you already notice that closeness back then?<\/p>\n A. I don\u2019t want to say anything about Schr\u00f6der.<\/p>\n Q. Why?<\/p>\n A. I worked closely with him for seven years, and we worked well together. I do not share his opinion about Russia or Putin at all.<\/p>\n Q. In your book you write that you see a duopoly between China and the United States in the future.<\/p>\n A. A new world order is taking shape, determined by the major global powers, with China and the U.S. at the forefront. The way the U.S. behaves under Trump is playing into the hands of the Chinese every day. It weakens the U.S. and strengthens China.<\/p>\n Q. So are we heading not toward a duopoly, but toward a monopoly?<\/p>\n A. Let me remind you that 1492, Christopher Columbus\u2019s famous voyage<\/a>, marked the beginning of a Eurocentric world. With the rise of China as a leading power, this Eurocentrism, this Eurocentric view of the world, has definitively come to an end.<\/p>\n Q. And what does this mean for Europeans?<\/p>\n A. If we stay as we are, decline is guaranteed. Europe must become a power.<\/p>\n Q. You talk of Europe, but not the West.<\/p>\n A. In my opinion, the West has reached its end. The West was the transatlantic West. North America and Europe. That was the West, and Trump has destroyed it.<\/p>\n Q. We talk about Trump and the United States, but in Europe there are many \u201clittle Trumps.\u201d The far right is strong, also in Germany.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/XDVLPWXFHRGF3BJFFQVHD7ZE7Q.jpg\")
Daniel Cohn-Bendit (center) and Joschka Fischer (right), of the Greens, attend Fischer’s appointment as minister of environment and energy in Hesse, October 1985.R\u00e9gis BOSSU ( Sygma \/ Getty Images)<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/A74MGOS5EFBGBJEHIXVSC3TELA.jpg\")
Gerhard Schr\u00f6der (left), then chancellor, with Joschka Fischer, then foreign minister, in Berlin in December 2001.LS-PRESS \/ Ullstein bild \/ Getty Images<\/p>\n