Introduction
Following the escalation of military tensions and the commencement of attacks by the United States and Israel against Iran on 28 February 2026, the positions adopted by several European governments became an important benchmark for assessing their commitment to the principles of international law and human rights values.
Against this backdrop, the Spanish government under Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez adopted an approach that differed markedly from that of several other European governments. Spain not only declined to support or participate in these military actions, but also explicitly assessed them as incompatible with established international legal frameworks.
Its emphasis on “No to War,” opposition to unilateral action, and insistence on diplomatic solutions point to a redefinition of Spain’s role in the contemporary international order—one increasingly grounded in multilateralism, the rule of law, and the protection of civilian lives.
This position emerged in a context in which many political actors either remained silent or implicitly supported the military operations, thereby making Spain’s approach all the more significant.
Accordingly, this report seeks to examine these positions in detail and demonstrate how, during the period under review, Spain’s refusal to support the war and its emphasis on fundamental human rights principles made it a noteworthy model among many European countries.
Incidents
Spain, which has consistently been critical of Israel and has, in recent years, ranked among the countries supporting Palestinian rights, publicly expressed its opposition and condemned the attacks immediately after the United States and Israel launched their strikes against Iran on the morning of 28 February 2026.
Madrid’s response was more explicit than that of many other international leaders, who generally called for restraint, the protection of civilians, and respect for international law without directly criticising either the United States or Israel.
Writing on the social media platform X, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez stated:
“We reject the unilateral military action undertaken by the United States and Israel, which represents an escalation and contributes to a more uncertain and hostile international order[1].”
In subsequent remarks, Sánchez said:
“We will not become complicit in an action that is harmful to the world and contrary to our values and interests merely out of fear of retaliation from anyone.”
Highlighting the negative repercussions of the Iraq War—from the rise of jihadist terrorism to the sharp increase in energy prices—he stated:
“This is how the great catastrophes of humanity begin. You cannot play Russian roulette with the fate of millions of people.”
He argued that the consequences of an attack on Iran were just as uncertain as those of previous wars[2].
One day after Israeli ministers announced their intention to seize southern Lebanon, Sánchez stated:
“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has become increasingly emboldened, intends to inflict on Lebanon the same destruction and suffering that he inflicted on Gaza. It is not fair for someone to set the world on fire while the rest of us are forced to swallow the ashes[3].”
In support of Lebanon, and after Lebanon was not included in the ceasefire between Iran and the United States, Sánchez also called on the European Union to suspend the political and trade agreement concluded with Israel in 1995[4].
Spain, Ireland, and Norway formally recognised the State of Palestine on 28 May 2024, with Slovenia joining them shortly thereafter. These countries were among the first Western European states to take such a step in the new wave of recognition of Palestine[5].
Following the outbreak of the war against Iran, Spain was also the only major European Union member state to explicitly criticise the joint US–Israeli attacks against Iran, while other European governments confined themselves to condemning Iran’s attacks on countries in the region.
For example, the European Union’s statement on developments in the Middle East, issued under the coordination of Kaja Kallas, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, on behalf of all 27 member states, called for “maximum restraint, the protection of civilians, and full respect for international law, including the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international humanitarian law.”
However, the statement did not explicitly condemn the initial US and Israeli attacks against Iran and, by contrast, described Iran’s attacks and violations of the sovereignty of several countries in the region as “inexcusable[6].”
By adopting an unequivocal position against Israel’s attacks on Lebanon and the broader war against Iran, Spain established itself as one of the principal Western critics of US and Israeli military policies.
The Spanish foreign minister described the war as “the gravest assault on a civilisation founded upon reason, peace, and law,” while the government in Madrid accused Israel of violating international law and disregarding the ceasefire in Lebanon.
In line with this position, Spain prohibited the use of its airspace and military facilities under Spanish sovereignty for flights and operations connected with the attacks against Iran. Pedro Sánchez also called for the suspension of the European Union’s cooperation agreement with Israel[7].
Responding to a question about the possible use of Spanish airspace and bases by US military aircraft, Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares told the country’s public broadcaster:
“According to all the information available to me, our bases are not being used for this military operation.”
Referring to Morón Air Base and Rota Naval Base, he added:
“The Spanish government will not authorise the use of these bases for any action falling outside the framework of the existing agreements or contrary to United Nations standards.”
Spanish Defence Minister Margarita Robles similarly stated:
“These bases will provide no support, except where this is necessary on humanitarian grounds[8].”
Challenges and Responses
- Disputes over Defence Spending within NATO
One of the most significant challenges facing Spain in recent years has been the intensification of disagreements with some NATO members, particularly the United States, over the level of financial contributions and defence commitments.
The government of Pedro Sánchez had previously opposed raising defence spending targets to the levels sought by NATO, including proposals such as allocating 5 per cent of gross domestic product, and had emphasised the need to maintain a balance between security commitments and socio-economic priorities.
According to NATO estimates at the time, Spain’s defence expenditure in 2024 amounted to approximately 1.28 per cent of GDP, the lowest proportion among NATO members[9].
In this context, Pedro Sánchez rejected NATO’s proposal to increase member states’ defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP, stating that such an idea would be:
“not only unreasonable, but also counterproductive.”
He questioned the potential consequences of such an increase and argued that it would be incompatible with Spain’s welfare state and its broader vision of the world[10].
In 2025, the Sánchez government accelerated the process of increasing defence expenditure and announced that Spain would achieve NATO’s previous 2 per cent target. However, Madrid refused to accept the new target of allocating 5 per cent of GDP to defence spending by 2035, arguing that Spain could fulfil its commitments regarding personnel, equipment, and defence capabilities by allocating approximately 2.1 per cent of GDP[11].
This position, in the context of the war against Iran and Spain’s refusal to support the military operation, became an additional source of tension and was interpreted by Donald Trump as a sign of a lack of allied commitment among European partners.
Within this framework, some US officials called for a reassessment of how to engage with allies that, in their view, did not make sufficient contributions to security expenditures or joint operations.
Nevertheless, Spanish officials emphasised that the country’s commitment to NATO remained unchanged, while stressing that this commitment should not be interpreted as unconditional support for military policies or disproportionate increases in defence spending.
Overall, these disagreements demonstrate the connection between geopolitical disputes and structural divisions within NATO, particularly regarding the distribution of financial burdens and the definition of the limits of security responsibilities.
- Domestic Reactions
According to the results of two recent opinion polls, Spain’s governing Socialist Party, led by Pedro Sánchez, experienced increased voter support after adopting an explicit position against the US–Israeli war against Iran. These findings indicate changing political dynamics in Spain, with the far-right party Vox facing declining support, while mainstream parties strengthened their positions.
Sánchez was among the few Western leaders to describe the war as “illegal” and “reckless.” His government also implemented this position in practice by closing its airspace to US aircraft associated with the attacks against Iran and by prohibiting the use of joint military bases in southern Spain.
Despite criticism from opposition parties, this policy influenced public opinion. A survey conducted by Spain’s state-run Centre for Sociological Research (Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas—CIS) found that 85 per cent of respondents opposed the war.
A Sigma Dos poll conducted for El Mundo showed that support for the Socialist Party increased from 26.4 per cent to 27.7 per cent. Similarly, a 40dB poll for El País recorded Socialist support at 28.6 per cent.
By contrast, support for the far-right Vox party declined to 17.1 and 18.7 per cent respectively. However, the People’s Party continued to lead both polls, receiving 32.5 and 31.1 per cent respectively[12].
Yolanda Díaz, Deputy Prime Minister of Spain, defended the government’s position while also criticising the approach of Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, regarding Iran. Emphasising the necessity of absolute adherence to international law, she stated that any departure from these principles would constitute “a form of barbarism.”
She considered the interest-based “realist” approach presented by the European Commission President insufficient and argued that military actions could not be justified by disregarding legal rules. Díaz, while expressing solidarity with the Iranian people, stressed that justice could not be achieved through unilateral actions outside the legal framework.
She explicitly described the war against Iran as “illegal” and characterised it as a violation of United Nations law and the fundamental principles of the UN Charter. This position was expressed at a time when some European institutions sought to present an interpretation of developments based on “realism” by moving beyond traditional international legal frameworks—a perspective that faced strong opposition from Spanish officials[13].
Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares also defended the government’s position in response to escalating tensions surrounding the war in Iran. He stressed the need for de-escalation, negotiations, and adherence to international law, describing the US and Israeli air strikes as the beginning of “a new cycle of violence, confrontation, and instability” in the Middle East.
He warned that turning war into a normal instrument of power balancing would have unpredictable consequences and stated:
“Violence never brings peace, stability, or democracy; it only leads to more chaos.”
Albares also rejected accusations by the Israeli foreign minister that Spain supported authoritarian regimes, describing the claim as absurd and unfounded. He emphasised the consistency of Spain’s foreign policy in defending peace, global stability, the UN Charter, and international law in different crises.
Referring to Spain’s leading role in issues such as recognising Palestine, he rejected claims that Madrid was isolated within the European Union and described Spain’s position as reflecting “the overwhelming majority of Spanish society and many countries around the world[14].”
- International Reactions
The response of the United States, as one of the countries involved in the military operations against Iran, to Spain’s position was relatively strong, and this issue was reflected even in official statements.
According to Reuters, an internal Pentagon email presented a set of proposed options for applying pressure on NATO allies that had refused to support US operations against Iran. These options had not yet become official US government policy or a NATO decision. One of the proposed measures involved excluding “difficult” countries, including Spain, from certain important and symbolic positions within the NATO structure.
These proposals were developed in response to Madrid’s refusal to provide access to bases, the deployment or use of military facilities, and the passage of aircraft through Spanish airspace—which in US military terminology is referred to as “Access, Basing, and Overflight” (ABO)—for operations against Iran. US officials described such support as the “minimum expectation” from NATO allies.
Within this framework, the Trump administration also explicitly criticised European allies for failing to provide sufficient support and even raised the possibility of a US withdrawal from NATO. According to Reuters, these approaches were designed to reduce what was described as a European “sense of entitlement” and to send a firm message to European allies.
However, Spanish officials, including Pedro Sánchez, stated that these reports lacked an official basis and emphasised that Spain’s foreign policy was based on official documents and the principles of international law[15].
According to Reuters, the Iranian Embassy in Madrid announced that, due to Spain’s adherence to international law, Tehran would adopt a favourable approach towards any potential request from Madrid regarding transit through the Strait of Hormuz.
This position was interpreted as the first proposal of this kind extended to a European Union member state. However, it did not constitute an automatic or unconditional guarantee for the passage of all Spanish vessels.
The statement was made in a context in which Spain had been among the first countries to describe the US–Israeli attacks against Iran as reckless and unlawful.
At the same time, the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs had informed the United Nations in a note that “non-hostile” vessels could transit through the Strait provided that their passage was coordinated with Iranian authorities.
These developments occurred amid widespread disruptions to the transportation of oil and liquefied natural gas, although indications of reduced restrictions for some countries were observed following diplomatic consultations[16].
CNN also examined the position of the Spanish prime minister regarding the war against Iran. According to this report, while many European leaders attempted to balance limited support for US military actions against Iran with warnings about the expansion of the war, Pedro Sánchez adopted a different approach and openly criticised the US attacks.
This position provoked anger and threats from Trump; however, the Spanish government not only refused to retreat, but continued to emphasise its stance.
Sánchez prohibited the use of the joint bases of Rota and Morón and other facilities located in Spanish territory for operations related to the attack against Iran. In response to Trump’s trade threats, he appeared in a televised address with the message “No to War” and stressed that his country would not become complicit in such policies merely because of fear of retaliatory actions.
While some European countries, including Germany and Italy, showed greater cooperation and the United Kingdom ultimately accepted limited use of its bases, Spain maintained a consistent and critical position.
These disagreements highlighted divisions in Europe’s approach to the war and turned Sánchez into one of the most distinctive figures among Western leaders.
Domestically, this position could also contribute to strengthening his political standing, particularly given Trump’s low popularity in Spain.
Overall, Spain’s policy regarding the war demonstrates a combination of legal opposition, practical non-participation, and political confrontation with the United States[17].
Deutsche Welle also examined Spain’s position and the divisions among European Union members. According to this report, following the war against Iran, relations between the United States and Spain experienced significant tensions.
Donald Trump strongly criticised Spain during a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and threatened to sever trade relations with the country.
Meanwhile, the approach of other European countries further complicated the situation. Friedrich Merz, the German Chancellor, did not publicly defend Spain’s position during his meeting with the US President and even stated that Madrid would be encouraged in the future to increase its NATO-related defence spending.
This approach was met with criticism from Spanish officials, and the Spanish foreign minister described it as a sign of distancing from the traditional spirit of European solidarity.
At the same time, some political observers warned about the deepening divisions within the European Union and assessed these disagreements as a reflection of Europe’s inability to adopt a unified position regarding the war against Iran.
Despite concerns about widening divisions within the European Union, analysts considered the possibility of a complete breakdown in economic relations between the United States and Spain to be unlikely and interpreted the threats made as primarily political warnings[18].
The US-based website “Zeteo” also published a report introducing the Spanish prime minister and examining his positions. In this report, Sánchez was described as one of the few Western leaders who, amid growing militarism, continues to emphasise democratic principles and human rights.
The report introduced Pedro Sánchez as a different voice in Europe, describing him as a figure who characterised the US and Israeli attacks against Iran as unlawful and publicly expressed his opposition under the slogan “No to War.”
This position was assessed within the context of Spain’s previous policies, including the recognition of Palestine, support for institutions related to Palestinian refugees, and the adoption of symbolic and practical measures against Israel.
The report also referred to Donald Trump’s strong reaction, noting that, in response to these positions, he described Spain as an undesirable ally and threatened to cut trade relations.
At the same time, Sánchez was presented as a politician with extensive experience in surviving Spain’s complex domestic political environment who, despite pressures and criticism, continued to defend his anti-war approach.
The report emphasised that his positions reflected the support of a significant part of public opinion and had even generated a sense of national pride domestically as well as international attention.
However, some critics considered the government’s actions to be primarily symbolic and assessed them as being connected to domestic political objectives.
Overall, the report presented Sánchez as one of the few prominent European figures opposing war and Western interventionist policies[19].
From another perspective, the US-based think tank Foreign Policy in Focus published an analytical article entitled “Pedro Sánchez: Rise of a European Restrainer,” examining Spain’s policies and the country’s prime minister.
The article states that, in the Western world, currents opposed to interventionism have effectively become without support. It argues that Donald Trump’s decision to initiate the war against Iran has marginalised non-interventionist voices on the American right.
In Europe as well, the article argues that a weak Atlanticist centrism—and, even more so, an aggressive form of moralism represented by the German Greens—has contributed to a growing perception of hypocrisy and double standards: firm opposition to Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, alongside what it describes as shameful silence regarding Israel’s actions in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.
In this discouraging environment, attention among anti-interventionist currents has turned toward Madrid, and Pedro Sánchez, the Prime Minister of Spain, has unexpectedly emerged as a leader of this developing trend.
This perspective was reflected in Sánchez’s speech at Tsinghua University during his recent visit to China. He told the West that the unipolar era had come to an end and that what is taking place today should not be understood as a transfer of hegemony, but rather as the emergence of multiple poles.
He referred to Matteo Ricci, the sixteenth-century Italian missionary who travelled to China with a map placing Europe at the centre of the world, but discovered that China did not view itself as being on the margins.
Sánchez called for strengthening multilateralism and reforming the United Nations Security Council, although the article argues that such reforms alone would not be sufficient to manage competition among major powers.
The experience of the Cold War demonstrates that the existence of clear rules, such as arms-control treaties and crisis-management channels, can help prevent catastrophes.
Ultimately, the article argues that Sánchez may become a leader of the anti-interventionist current. He opposed the war against Iran when he was almost alone, condemned what it described as genocide in Gaza while many remained silent, and openly spoke in China about the end of the unipolar order.
According to the article, these positions demonstrate a realistic understanding of the emerging world order. In contrast to the hegemonic views attributed to some European leaders, Sánchez emphasises respect for the reality of multipolarity—an approach that is not idealistic, but rather the only rational option for a continent that is no longer the centre of the world[20].
Conclusion
An examination of the positions and actions of the Spanish government regarding the war against Iran demonstrates that, unlike many European actors, Spain has sought to present a normative redefinition of its foreign policy. This redefinition places principles such as the prohibition of the use of force, respect for international law, and prioritisation of civilian security above traditional alliance-based and geopolitical considerations.
Within this framework, Spain’s explicit opposition to the military operations, its prevention of the use of domestic military infrastructure, and its emphasis on diplomatic solutions should not be regarded merely as temporary positions. Rather, they indicate an effort to establish a model of conduct based on principled multilateralism.
At the same time, this approach has revealed deep divisions within the Western order and demonstrated that the previous consensus surrounding military interventions is facing a growing challenge of legitimacy.
On the other hand, the consequences of this position have not been limited to the international level and have also been reflected at the domestic and regional levels, ranging from increased public support to heightened tensions with some allies, particularly the United States.
This situation demonstrates that adopting an independent and principles-based foreign policy, although it may entail short-term political and economic costs, can strengthen a state’s symbolic capital and normative legitimacy in the long term.
Overall, Spain’s experience during this period can be considered a noteworthy example of the possibility of pursuing a different form of agency within Western alliance structures—an approach that, relying on international law and criticising military interventions, seeks to establish a balance between security imperatives and human rights commitments.
References
[1] Baume, M., & Tadeo, M. (2026, February 28). Spain slams US and Israeli strikes on Iran, reflecting shift in foreign policy. Euro News. From: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/02/28/spain-slams-us-and-israeli-strikes-on-iran-reflecting-shift-in-foreign-policy
[2] Latona, D., & Waldersee, V. (2026, March 4). Spain defies Trump’s threats over stance on Iran war, says it ‘won’t be vassals’. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spains-sanchez-trump-you-cannot-play-russian-roulette-with-destiny-millions-2026-03-04/
[3] Waldersee, V. (2026, March 25). Spain’s Sanchez says global citizens shouldn’t pay for fallout of Iran war. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/spains-sanchez-says-global-citizens-shouldnt-pay-fallout-iran-war-2026-03-25/
[4] Binnur Dönmez, B. (2026, April 8). Spain urges EU to suspend 1995 cooperation treaty with Israel after Lebanon strikes. Anadolu Ajansi. From: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/spain-urges-eu-to-suspend-1995-cooperation-treaty-with-israel-after-lebanon-strikes/3898737
[5] Keeley, G. (2026, March 4). An outlier for condemning Israel’s Gaza genocide, Spain says no to Iran war. Al Jazeera. From: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/4/spain-no-to-israel-us-war-iran
[6] Genovese, V. (2026, March 2). Spain rejects Israel’s accusation of ‘standing with Iran’ and other tyrants. Euro News. From: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/03/02/israeli-foreign-minister-accuses-spain-of-standing-with-iran
[7] Al Arabiya Farsi. (2026, April 10). Spain ramps up criticism of Israel and the United States over the war in Iran. Al Arabiya Farsi. From: https://ara.tv/4cqg7
[8] Reuters., & AFP. (2026, March 2). Spain refuses to let US use bases for Iran attacks. Al Jazeera. From: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/2/spain-refuses-to-let-us-use-bases-for-iran-attacks
[9] Ross, T., & Hernandez-Morales, A. (2025, October 16). How Spain’s Sánchez became NATO’s flakiest friend. Politico. From: https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-pedro-sanchez-europe-nato-gdp-spending/
[10] Jones, S. (2025, June 19). Spain rejects Nato plan for member states to spend 5% of GDP on defence. The Guardian. From: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/spain-rejects-nato-plan-for-member-states-to-spend-5-of-gdp-on-defence
[11] Chislett, W. (2025, April 8). Spain under pressure to spend more on defence. Real Instituto Elcano. From: https://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/commentaries/spain-under-pressure-to-spend-more-on-defence/
[12] Tovima. (2026, April 6). Spanish PM Gains as Anti-War Stance Lifts Support. Tovima. From: https://www.tovima.com/world/spanish-pm-gains-as-anti-war-stance-lifts-support/
[13] McMurtry, A. (2026, March 9). Disregard for international law is ‘barbarity’: Spain’s deputy premier criticizes von Der Leyen’s remarks on Iran. Anadolu Ajansi. From: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/disregard-for-international-law-is-barbarity-spains-deputy-premier-criticizes-von-der-leyens-remarks-on-iran/3856624
[14] McMurtry, A. (2026, March 3). Spain pushes for de-escalation of Iran conflict, rejects ‘absurd’ Israeli criticism. Anadolu Ajansi. From: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/spain-pushes-for-de-escalation-of-iran-conflict-rejects-absurd-israeli-criticism/3848488
[15] Stewart, P. (2026, April 24). Exclusive: Pentagon email floats suspending Spain from NATO, other steps over Iran rift, source says. Reuters. From: https://www.reuters.com/world/pentagon-email-floats-suspending-spain-nato-other-steps-over-iran-rift-source-2026-04-24/
[16] Waldersee, V., & Saul, J. (2026, March 26). Iran says it is receptive to any request from Spain, alluding to Hormuz transit. Global Banking & Finance Review. From: https://www.globalbankingandfinance.com/iran-receptive-any-request-spain-alluding-hormuz-transit-20260326/
[17] Lister, T. (2026, March 8). Most European leaders have tiptoed around Trump’s war with Iran. Not Spain’s PM. CNN. From: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/08/europe/spain-sanchez-rejection-trump-iran-war-intl-cmd
[18] Scholz, J., & Ris, N. (2026, March 5). Iran war strains US-Spain relations. DW. From: https://www.dw.com/en/iran-war-strains-us-spain-relations/a-76234578
[19] Bhutto, F. (2026, March 16). Meet Spain’s Anti-War, Anti-Trump, Pro-Palestine Prime Minister. Zeteo. From: https://zeteo.com/p/spain-israel-iran-palestine-pedro-sanchez
[20] Mamedov, E. (2026, April 22). Pedro Sanchez: Rise of a European Restrainer. Foreign Policy in Focus. From: https://fpif.org/pedro-sanchez-rise-of-a-european-restrainer/
