{"id":834333,"date":"2026-03-18T16:18:14","date_gmt":"2026-03-18T16:18:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/834333\/"},"modified":"2026-03-18T16:18:14","modified_gmt":"2026-03-18T16:18:14","slug":"why-is-spain-challenging-trumps-foreign-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/834333\/","title":{"rendered":"Why is Spain challenging Trump\u2019s foreign policy?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<ul class=\"article-header__labels list-inline\">\n<li>\n            KOMENTARZ\n          <\/li>\n<li>\n            ANALIZA\n          <\/li>\n<li>\n            WIADOMO\u015aCI\n          <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>  <a href=\"https:\/\/defence24.com\/author-page\/natalia-potera\" target=\"_self\" class=\"article-author__wrap\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/natalia-potera.znbq.jpg\" alt=\"Natalia Potera\"  width=\"100\" height=\"100\" author=\"Natalia Potera\" caption=\"\" fullscreen=\"https:\/\/cdn.defence24.pl\/2023\/05\/04\/1920xpx\/tZ7EwiProEAKlIguLBGyRlBsyuMQD4t0APG6NfGz.zasp.jpg\" class=\"img article-author__avatar img-avatar\"\/><br \/>\n          Natalia Potera<br \/>\n        <\/a>  <\/p>\n<p>Faced with the escalation of the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran in 2026, Spain took a markedly different course from many Western countries. Pedro S\u00e1nchez\u2019s government not only refused to participate in military operations but also made decisions that led to serious diplomatic tensions with Washington and Tel Aviv. At the heart of this policy was a single slogan that continues to recur in Spanish discourse: no a la guerra\u201d \u2014 \u201cno to war.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>  <img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/jeIYuiusKwCEMYvYsfUCWKkazodOnDq2goRb0DWa.dwv4.jpg\" alt=\"The President of the Government of Spain attends the ceremony to sign the Middle East Peace Plan in Egypt (2025).\"  width=\"800\" height=\"450\" author=\"La Moncloa, Government of Spain, official website\" fetchpriority=\"high\" class=\"img image-with-caption__image\"\/><br \/>\n        The President of the Government of Spain attends the ceremony to sign the Middle East Peace Plan in Egypt (2025).<br \/>\n       <br \/>Photo. La Moncloa, Government of Spain, official website<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">While Spain clearly rejects Tehran\u2019s policies, it simultaneously opposes the use of military force outside the framework of international law. In practice, this means adopting the role of a normative actor\u2014one that does not so much take sides in the conflict as question its very logic, thereby directly undermining Washington\u2019s message. In this sense, Madrid\u2019s position is not neutrality, but rather an active attempt to redefine the principles of security policy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Madrid\u2019s stance, however, is not limited to purely symbolic criticism, but entails concrete, strategic actions that could have a real impact on the course of the war. The most important of these was blocking the use of military bases in Rota and Mor\u00f3n by American forces. The government emphasized that these bases cannot be used for operations that fall outside the framework of international agreements or the UN Charter. In practice, this meant rejecting the entire operation as illegal, or at least legally questionable. At the same time, Spain made it clear that its NATO membership does not automatically imply support for every US-initiated military operation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">This decision had immediate consequences, leading to a direct conflict with the Donald Trump administration, which threatened Spain with economic sanctions. At the same time, the current foreign policy of Pedro S\u00e1nchez\u2019s government \u2014 until now enjoying relatively low domestic support \u2014 has been met with broad public approval, suggesting that it is not simply the result of elite calculations but reflects deeper social preferences.<\/p>\n<p>    International law as the main argument  <\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Spain\u2019s decision to refuse support for the US-Israeli operation stems from several interrelated factors, some of which originate in events from previous years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Spain has repeatedly emphasized that operations against Iran are unilateral in nature and lack a proper mandate. The government in Madrid has consistently argued that military actions conducted outside the structures of the UN, NATO, or the EU cannot serve as a basis for the international order. Prime Minister S\u00e1nchez has also called for reform of the United Nations system, including the abolition of the veto power in the Security Council \u2014 in order to make it more representative and less susceptible to pressure from the \u201cBig Five.\u201d At the same time, he criticized Russia and the United States for remaining permanent members of the Security Council, even though, in his view, both countries \u201cintroduce significant instability into the world through the wars in Ukraine and Iran.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">As a result, Spanish policymakers concluded that the use of military bases to support attacks on Iran would be contrary to existing legal obligations. This argument is consistent with Spain\u2019s broader foreign policy vision, which emphasizes multilateralism and diplomatic solutions, while avoiding situations in which responding to one illegal act with another leads to further destabilization of the international system.<\/p>\n<p>    Tensions with Israel  <\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">The stance on Iran cannot be analyzed in isolation from previous diplomatic tensions between Spain and Israel, as well as the broader history of their bilateral relations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">For years, Madrid has consistently criticized Israel\u2019s actions in the Gaza Strip, viewing them as a violation of humanitarian law and a disproportionate use of force against civilians. The left-wing ruling coalition has maintained strong support for the Palestinians, recognizing the State of Palestine in May 2024, supporting proceedings against Israel before the International Court of Justice, and restricting arms exports. At present, the government\u2019s position enjoys strong public backing. A majority of Spaniards support both the recognition of Palestine and a two-state solution, while criticism of Israel\u2019s actions in third countries is also increasing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">This attitude dates back to the Franco dictatorship, when Spain, isolated in Europe, established close relations with Arab countries, which ultimately led to lasting political and cultural ties. Moreover, unlike many European countries, Spain was relatively late in recognizing Israel (only in 1986), which has also shaped its distinct perspective.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">In the context of the war with Iran, political preferences have become even more polarized. Madrid views US and Israeli actions toward Iran as part of a broader problem of unilateralism and violations of international norms, which contradict Spain\u2019s policy based on references to international law, the right of nations to self-determination, and its own historical ties with the Arab world. Consequently, Spain has taken a series of political and symbolic actions, including limiting military cooperation, banning the transport of arms through its territory, and withdrawing its ambassador from Tel Aviv. The conflict with Israel is therefore not incidental, but rather fits within Spain\u2019s long-term foreign policy strategy.<\/p>\n<p>    The Iraq Lesson and the Fear of Repetition  <\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Another factor influencing Spain\u2019s current stance is historical experience. S\u00e1nchez has repeatedly cited the 2003 Iraq War, arguing that such interventions lead to destabilization, increased terrorism, and social and economic crises. He believes that the conflict with Iran carries similar risks. The lack of clearly defined objectives, the potential for unpredictable escalation, and the risk of global consequences make the war seem like a repetition of past mistakes. It is this historical perspective that reinforces the government\u2019s message: Spain does not want to re-engage in a conflict that could cause more chaos than it would bring security. Persistent anti-war sentiment and the experience of past conflicts have also contributed to S\u00e1nchez\u2019s growing popularity, as his steadfast stance allows him to present himself as a leader acting in accordance with the will of the people.<\/p>\n<p>  Conflict with Donald Trump boosts Pedro S\u00e1nchez&#8217;s popularity  <\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Spain\u2019s stance on the war finds strong support in public opinion. According to a poll conducted by 40dB for SER andEl Pa\u00eds, over 68% of Spaniards oppose military intervention against Iran, with a majority supporting the government\u2019s decision to refuse participation in the operation and to block the use of military bases. This stance increases S\u00e1nchez\u2019s visibility on the international stage and positions him as one of Europe\u2019s most prominent leaders.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Moreover, the confrontation with Donald Trump reinforces his image as an independent politician capable of defending the country\u2019s sovereignty, despite the US president\u2019s threats of trade sanctions against Madrid or even a complete severance of economic ties. However, Spanish government officials have remained committed to their chosen course, emphasizing that the country \u201ewill not be anyone\u2019s vassal\u201d and will not succumb to political pressure. S\u00e1nchez has also argued that uncritical compliance with the decisions of other countries is not a sign of leadership, but of weakness.<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\">\n<p lang=\"es\" dir=\"ltr\">La derecha y la ultraderecha no pueden apoyar a quien incendia el mundo y luego quejarse del humo que provoca ese incendio.<\/p>\n<p>Vamos a poner todos los recursos del Estado al servicio de la gente para protegerles de una guerra que NO avala el Gobierno de Espa\u00f1a. <a href=\"https:\/\/t.co\/WL3wF7UY9i\" rel=\"nofollow\">pic.twitter.com\/WL3wF7UY9i<\/a><\/p>\n<p>\u2014 Pedro S\u00e1nchez (@sanchezcastejon) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/sanchezcastejon\/status\/2032546506771755261?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\">March 13, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">This conflict revealed a deeper problem in transatlantic relations. Spain questioned not only the specific military operation but also the manner in which Washington made decisions, i.e., without consulting partners and outside of alliance structures.<\/p>\n<p>  Spain in the European Context: An Exception or an Emerging Trend?  <\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Spain stands out among other European countries for its decisiveness, as it clearly opposes escalation and emphasizes that NATO membership does not imply unconditional support for military actions initiated by other states. The refusal to allow the use of the bases in Rota and Mor\u00f3n therefore sends a clear signal that Madrid is pursuing an autonomous foreign policy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">However, despite policies designed to be peaceful and stabilizing, Spain\u2019s current stance also reveals deeper tensions within the European Union. While some countries lean toward supporting US actions or maintain strategic ambivalence, Madrid advocates a clear rejection of military logic, emphasizing that Europe should speak with \u201cbalance and moderation\u201d and strive for de-escalation and a return to negotiations. At the same time, the Spanish government\u2019s actions indicate an attempt to strengthen the EU\u2019s strategic autonomy, understood as the ability to pursue an independent policy in response to global crises. In this sense, Spain is not simply reacting to the crisis, but is trying to shape the European response by promoting a model based on diplomacy rather than military force.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Although Spain is no longer completely isolated in its views, it remains one of the most vocal critics of the war and one of the few countries to combine political criticism with a genuine refusal of military support. At the same time, the question is no longer whether other countries will \u201crepeat Spain\u2019s example\u201d in its entirety, but rather how many levels they will begin to align with it. This trend is already visible in the absence of military support for the United States. For example, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Canada are reluctant to send troops or engage directly. Even close allies (e.g., the UK and France) have rejected certain US operational initiatives, particularly at sea.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Criticism \u2013 especially among European allies \u2013 does exist, although it is often indirect. Concerns about the risk of escalation, the lack of consultation, and the need for de-escalation are more frequently expressed than direct criticism of the United States, as seen in Spain\u2019s case.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">This suggests three possible levels of response among Western countries. The first is the hard Spanish model: public criticism of the war\u2019s legality, an emphasis on international law, and the refusal of military assistance. However, this appears least likely in the context of most European states. The second is the intermediate model, currently the most probable: no military engagement, an emphasis on de-escalation, but without open, frontal conflict with the United States. The third is the model of alliance loyalty with limitations, implying political support for the alliance with Washington while avoiding direct combat involvement. At present, most countries appear to be moving toward the intermediate model rather than the full Spanish model.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">The conclusion remains that Spain, while still the most critical in its stance, is no longer alone\u2014Europe is moving toward \u201enon-participation + cautious criticism\u201d rather than full support for the war. Most countries, largely due to their dependence on American military support, are unlikely to fully follow Spain\u2019s example.<\/p>\n<p>  Conclusions  <\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Spain\u2019s stance on the war in Iran is one of the most striking examples of opposition to unilateral military action in the Western world. Its decision to refuse participation in the operation, to deny the use of military bases to the United States, and to criticize Israel\u2019s actions demonstrates that Madrid is willing to bear political and diplomatic costs in the name of its principles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">Opposition to the actions of the United States and Israel does not imply a rejection of alliances, but rather an attempt to redefine them. Spain promotes a foreign policy model based on diplomacy, de-escalation, and multilateralism, while simultaneously strengthening its domestic and international standing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph-module\">In the broader context, Spain\u2019s case could herald a more profound shift in European politics. Madrid\u2019s diplomatic approach to security, coupled with the current mood surrounding the ongoing Russian\u2013Ukrainian conflict, offers a political framework that could find support across many European societies. However, some security circles argue that such an approach could weaken deterrence and encourage authoritarian actors to act more aggressively. In an increasingly unpredictable and escalating environment, the lack of a coherent European position further increases the continent\u2019s fragility. This crisis, more than ever, tests Europe\u2019s ability to act as a strategic and united player, rather than a passive observer of other powers\u2019 decisions.<\/p>\n<p>  <script async src=\"https:\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"KOMENTARZ ANALIZA WIADOMO\u015aCI Natalia Potera Faced with the escalation of the conflict between the United States, Israel, and&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":834334,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[5312],"tags":[2000,299,1699,774,233627,837,2821,5338,72144,104,1757,659],"class_list":["post-834333","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-spain","tag-eu","tag-europe","tag-european-union","tag-iran","tag-iran-crisis","tag-israel","tag-nato","tag-pedro-sanchez","tag-sanchez","tag-spain","tag-trump","tag-usa"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/116251086470419145","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/834333","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=834333"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/834333\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/834334"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=834333"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=834333"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=834333"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}