Officials in Germany, France, United Kingdom, and Spain cited strategic uncertainty, domestic opposition, and concerns over escalation as key reasons for refusing direct participation in operations linked to the United States and Israel.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz delivered one of the clearest rejections in a Bundestag session on Wednesday, stating that Berlin had not been consulted and remained unconvinced by Washington’s rationale. "To this day, there is no convincing plan for how this operation will succeed,” Merz told lawmakers. "We would have advised against this course of action.” He added that Germany would not deploy military assets to protect shipping routes in the Strait of Hormuz while hostilities continue.

Defense Minister Boris Pistorius echoed the position earlier in the week, saying, "This is not our war and we did not start it.”

Across Europe, leaders signaled similar caution. French President Emmanuel Macron stated that France is "not a party to the conflict,” while Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez described the strikes on Iran as "reckless and unlawful.” Spain also dismissed reported U.S. pressure to allow expanded use of joint military bases.

In London, Prime Minister Keir Starmer faced criticism from Trump, who publicly compared him unfavorably to wartime leader Winston Churchill. British officials, however, maintained a cautious stance amid polling that indicates limited public support for military involvement.

Public sentiment across Europe appears to reinforce government positions. Surveys in Germany, the United Kingdom, and Spain show majorities opposing military engagement, reflecting broader skepticism toward entering a conflict perceived as lacking clear objectives.

The divergence underscores growing strain in transatlantic relations, already tested by disagreements over Ukraine policy, trade disputes, and defense commitments. Analysts say Europe’s reluctance to align with Washington in this instance may signal a recalibration of strategic autonomy.

The dispute also raises fresh questions about NATO’s unity. While the alliance remains formally intact, differing threat perceptions and political priorities among members could complicate coordinated responses to future crises.