• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Cornelius Adebahr"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Transatlantic Cooperation",
    "Europe’s Southern Neighborhood",
    "Iranian Proliferation"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Europe",
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Iran",
    "Western Europe"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Security",
    "Political Reform",
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Europe

Europe Should Stand Its Ground After U.S. Iran Deal Pullout

U.S. President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal should propel Europeans to stand their ground and mark the beginning of a more independent role for Europe in the world.

Link Copied
By Cornelius Adebahr
Published on May 11, 2018

Source: Euractiv

On Europe Day 2018, the continent woke up in a particularly tight spot. While President Trump’s announcement of the US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal did not come as a surprise as such, it deals a particular blow to Europeans who have tried to find a compromise over the last months.

What is worse, the unilateral US pullout from the agreement will not only cause more instability in the Middle East but also a long-lasting upheaval to the transatlantic relationship. European leaders will have to simultaneously work on many foreign policy fronts in order to break out of this situation.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as the Iran nuclear deal is officially known, is the shared success of American, Chinese, European and Russian negotiation efforts with the Islamic Republic. Since January 2016, the deal’s implementation has contributed to regional as well as European security by effectively blocking Iran’s possible pursuit of a nuclear bomb. Dismantling the deal without necessity, as Trump is now doing, is folly and worse.

Although transatlantic differences over Iranian policy have been the rule rather than the exception in the past, the US pullout is an extraordinary escalation–even provocation.

The move is even more provocative given that the imminent reinstatement of US secondary sanctions undermines the sovereignty of all EU member states. Without proper instruments in place, it will be Washington that decides on the legitimacy of European business interests in Iran. And mind you, the latter is not primarily about commercial interests, but about the West living up to its side of the nuclear bargain with Iran.

Moreover, Europe is directly affected by increased insecurity in the Middle East: be it Iran’s intentions to resume uranium enrichment; the intensification of violent clashes between Israel and Iran in Syria, or between Saudi Arabia and Iran in Yemen; or, the US President’s thinly veiled threat of fostering regime change in Tehran.

Finally, it is worth noting that President Trump chose 8 May to announce this profound policy change – the day marking the end of WWII in Europe, also known as “Victory in Europe” Day in the US. In view of the withdrawal’s profound consequences for European security and the transatlantic alliance, it looks as if he was aiming for a Victory over Europe.

What should Europe do now? Saving the deal—or what is left of it—now squarely falls on the Europeans, in particular on the EU and the three member states involved in the negotiations (E3), namely France, Germany, and the United Kingdom.

As the main facilitator of the talks leading up to the JCPOA, the EU is its guardian of sorts. Moreover, Europe has the most to lose from a direct confrontation with Washington over Iran. The bottom line: its very self-respect as an international player is at stake.

If Europeans want to keep the deal and continue to trade with Iran, they will have to think long and hard about which instruments they are willing to apply.

One option is to revive the so-called blocking regulation dating back to the late 1990s, which shielded European companies from the extraterritorial effects of US sanctions. It will be hard to implement —given the diverging interests of the 28 member states —and it may be insufficient, at least initially, to make European companies believe that their Iran business interests are safe.

Yet, it would be an important political signal—both to Washington and Tehran—that the EU is serious about maintaining the deal.

Another possibility for Europe is to improve the financing conditions of trade with Iran, e.g. by offering euro-denominated credit lines or project financing from the European Investment Bank. This would at least allow medium-sized companies without a stake in the US market to pursue legitimate business with Iran, for which currently no major international banking finance is available.

Without a doubt, any of the aforementioned steps Europeans would take would likely intensify the trade standoff that Trump has set off by imposing tariffs on steel and aluminium. Nevertheless, it will be crucial to maintain European unity, among the E3 as much as among all 28 member states.

The drastic and reckless decision taken by the US president should propel Europeans to stand their ground. On November 9, 2016, they woke up to the news of Donald Trump’s electoral victory; exactly 18 months later, Europe Day 2018 should mark the beginning of a more independent role for Europe in the world.

This opinion piece was first published on Euractiv.com.

About the Author

Cornelius Adebahr

Former Nonresident Fellow, Carnegie Europe

Cornelius Adebahr was a nonresident fellow at Carnegie Europe. His research focuses on foreign and security policy, in particular regarding Iran and the Persian Gulf, on European and transatlantic affairs, and on citizens’ engagement.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    EU-Iran: Time to Revisit Assumptions and Strategize

      Cornelius Adebahr

  • Research
    Making an Inclusive EU Strategy on Iran a Reality

      Cornelius Adebahr, Barbara Mittelhammer

Cornelius Adebahr
Former Nonresident Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Cornelius Adebahr
Foreign PolicySecurityPolitical ReformNuclear PolicyMiddle EastEuropeNorth AmericaUnited StatesIranWestern Europe

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Article
    What Could a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement Do for U.S.-India Ties?

    India and the United States are close to concluding a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement (RDPA) that will allow firms from the two countries to sell to each other’s defense establishments more easily. While this may not remedy the specific grievances both sides may have regarding larger bilateral issues, an RDPA could restore some momentum, following the trade deal announcement.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?

    On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil Imports

    This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    Military Lessons from Operation Sindoor

    The India-Pakistan conflict that played out between May 6 and May 10, 2025, offers several military lessons. This article presents key takeaways from Operation Sindoor and breaks down how India’s preparations shaped the outcome and what more is needed to strengthen future readiness.

      Dinakar Peri

  • Book
    India and the Sovereignty Principle: The Disaggregation Imperative

    This book offers a comprehensive analysis of India's evolving relationship with sovereignty in a complex global order. Moving beyond conventional narratives, it examines how the sovereignty principle shapes India's behavior across four critical domains—from traditional military power to contemporary data governance.

      Rudra Chaudhuri, Nabarun Roy

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.