Tensions between the United States and Spain have escalated amid the ongoing Middle East conflict as political leaders on both sides exchange criticism over military cooperation and the broader justification for the operation against Iran.
Earlier this week, reports indicated that President Donald Trump had directed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to examine options for cutting off trade with Spain after Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez reportedly declined to allow U.S. forces to use Spanish military bases in support of Operation Epic Fury. The decision added strain to the longstanding NATO relationship between Washington and Madrid, which has historically relied on Spanish bases for logistical support in operations across Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.
The Muslim world is divided about Iran:
Muslim countries in favor of removing the regime:
Jordan 🇯🇴
Kuwait 🇰🇼
UAE 🇦🇪
Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦
Oman 🇴🇲
Qatar 🇶🇦
Bahrain 🇧🇭Muslim countries against the removal of the regime:
Great Britain 🇬🇧
France 🇫🇷
Spain 🇪🇸— Moy Miz (@moymiz) March 4, 2026
While the Spanish government has not publicly framed its position as a break with NATO commitments, the refusal has been interpreted by some analysts as part of a broader political divide within Europe over how aggressively Western powers should confront Iran during the current crisis.
At the same time, political rhetoric surrounding the conflict has spilled into cultural and ideological debates within Europe. Spanish politician Irene Montero, currently serving as a member of the European Parliament, drew attention after criticizing the operation through a feminist and anti-imperialist lens during public remarks.
🚨🇮🇷🇪🇸 BREAKING — PM Sanchez:
“If We Really Care About Iranian Women Let’s Stop Bombing Them” pic.twitter.com/pGLUVLgymd
— ✦✦✦ 𝙿𝚊𝚖𝚙𝚑𝚕𝚎𝚝𝚜 ✦✦✦ (@PamphletsY) March 5, 2026
Montero argued that Western governments sometimes invoke women’s rights as a moral justification for military intervention. According to her comments, such rhetoric can mask what she described as geopolitical or economic motivations behind wars.
The criticism reflects a broader strain of political thought among some European left-wing parties that frame military interventions by Western countries as examples of imperialism or resource-driven conflict. Advocates of this perspective frequently argue that humanitarian language is used to build public support for military action.
BREAKING
Spain’s MEP Irene Montero:
“No woman has ever been freed by American bombs or illegal aggression.
Not in Syria. Not in Iraq. Not in Lebanon. Not in Afghanistan.
And it will not happen in Iran either.
They hide behind women’s rights to justify their colonial wars.” pic.twitter.com/Es3EuJMxpw
— sarah (@sahouraxo) March 5, 2026
However, supporters of the U.S. and Israeli campaign against Iran reject that interpretation. They argue that the operation is primarily aimed at neutralizing military threats, including missile systems, drone programs, and nuclear infrastructure linked to the Iranian government.
The debate has also highlighted deeper divisions within Europe over foreign policy and security priorities. While some European leaders have supported stronger measures against Iran, others have urged restraint and emphasized diplomacy over military escalation.
Full statement:
“No woman has ever been freed by American bombs or illegal aggression. Not in Syria. Not in Iraq. Not in Lebanon. Not in Afghanistan. And it will not happen in Iran either.
We are fed up with our rights, our bodies, and the violence women suffer being used as… pic.twitter.com/7JNHbTC3tv
— sarah (@sahouraxo) March 5, 2026
Meanwhile, the European Parliament itself holds limited direct authority over military decisions made by member states. Defense and foreign policy remain largely under the control of national governments, meaning comments from members of parliament often reflect political messaging rather than binding policy positions.
