European leaders have welcomed the initial ceasefire agreement between the United States and Iran, although crucial unresolved issues concerning their own interests – such as access to the strategically crucial Strait of Hormuz – remain vague and uncertain.
The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, stated that the agreement negotiated by Pakistan would bring “much-needed de-escalation” in the Middle East, while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called for a solution leading to a “sustainable end to the war.”
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, a vocal critic of Israeli-American strikes, welcomed the ceasefire as “good news” but cautioned against forgetting “the chaos, destruction, and lives lost.”
As the deadline approached, Pakistan presented a two-week ceasefire proposal that both parties ultimately accepted. This plan, consisting of ten points, serves as “a viable basis for further negotiation,” according to Trump.
However, several crucial questions remain unanswered for Europeans, who have been largely sidelined in the diplomatic process and are working to contain the repercussions of a war with cascading consequences.
What about Ormuz?
One major concern is the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway that carried one-fifth of global oil and gas supplies and has been virtually blocked since the onset of American-Israeli strikes. The closure has led to soaring oil and gas prices worldwide, sparking fears of shortages, rationing, and stagflation.
Europeans have repeatedly expressed their desire to secure Hormuz, but only after the hot phase of the conflict ends, due to the high risks associated with military deployments in this maritime passage, conducive to asymmetric warfare favored by Tehran.
With the ceasefire deal in place, Europeans will be expected to fulfill their promise. The focus will be on a budding coalition of over 40 countries from Europe and beyond committed to securing Hormuz.
Nevertheless, it is unlikely that all countries will contribute equally. Mine clearance and ship escorting are costly operations that only some armed forces can afford.
French President Emmanuel Macron announced that around fifteen countries would work on a “strictly defensive mission, coordinated with Iran, when conditions allow for traffic to resume,” without providing specific details.
It is improbable that transit through Hormuz will return to pre-war status quo. Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi stated that the Iranian military would remain involved in decisions regarding passage and conditions.
In the meantime, Trump proposed a “joint venture” with Iran to levy fees on ships passing through the Strait, a system Tehran has already implemented.
Europeans find any toll system unacceptable. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea prohibits charging for simple transit, a customary rule globally despite non-ratification by the US and Iran.
High Representative Kaja Kallas asserted that as a global public good, Hormuz should not be subject to “payment schemes for passage.”
What about sanctions?
Another pressing issue for Europeans is the lifting of sanctions, which Tehran claims is one of the ten points in the ceasefire agreement.
The EU has imposed a broad sanctions regime on Iran covering nuclear proliferation, human rights violations, crackdowns on protesters, and military support for Russia’s massive invasion of Ukraine.
At the beginning of the year, the 27 member states designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization. The IRGC ensures the survival of the clerical regime and controls Hormuz and various other aspects of the country.
Brussels may face a similar dilemma: when and how to ease sanctions on Iran. The pace will be influenced by Washington’s decisions during upcoming negotiations. After threatening civilizations, Trump suddenly adopted a positive tone, promising that “we will make a lot of money.”
“We are discussing and will discuss tariff reductions and sanctions relief with Iran,” he stated on social media.
Substantial support for Iran could put Europeans in a tough spot, as Tehran continues to back Russia’s war in Ukraine, a matter seemingly not covered by the agreement.
The European Commission declined to comment on the matter, stating that discussing easing sanctions at this stage was “speculative and hypothetical.”
What about Lebanon?
Europeans are also keeping a watchful eye on Lebanon, a fragile multiethnic country heavily affected by Israeli military action, first in Gaza, then in Iran.
Israeli forces expanded operations in southern Lebanon with artillery fire and airstrikes against Hezbollah, the Iran-backed Shiite militia. The offensive displaced over a million people and paved the way for long-term occupation.
During the ceasefire announcement, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif emphasized that the provisions would apply to Lebanon “and elsewhere, with immediate effect.”
However, shortly after, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office contradicted this assertion, stating that “the two-week ceasefire did not include Lebanon.” This led to a new wave of Israeli airstrikes in southern Lebanon.
Continued attacks on Lebanon have raised alarms among Europeans, fearing that increased instability and suffering may undermine government efforts to strengthen the national army and weaken Hezbollah’s influence.
The escalating situation also risks triggering a migration wave towards Europe.
“We call on Israel to cease its operation in Lebanon, respecting the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” a European Commission spokesperson declared on Wednesday.
Emmanuel Macron echoed this sentiment, stating, “Our wish in this context is to ensure that the ceasefire fully includes Lebanon.”
The EU has allocated one billion euros in financial assistance to Lebanon between 2024 and 2027, with some of the funds earmarked for border management.
