Iran, Kallas: “This is not the EU’s war; for now, Aspides will not be extended to Hormuz”

Brussels – The Aspides mission to safeguard the Red Sea will not be extended to the Arabian Sea to restore normal maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, because “there is no appetite for it, for now.” The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, is not entirely ruling out the option, which she personally views with great interest as a means of resolving the crisis arising from the war with Iran because there is still hope that the green light may come at a later date, once the resistance and fears of EU Member States—concerned about being dragged into a conflict they did not want and want even less now—have been overcome. 

“This is not the European Union’s war,” Kallas emphasised at the end of the Foreign Affairs Council meeting. Of course, the cruelty of the Iranian regime is acknowledged, and this is done by adopting new sanctions against a further 16 individuals and three entities deemed responsible for Iran’s repressive apparatus, but that does not preclude caution. “The EU’s interests are affected” by what is happening in Iran and across the Middle East, but “Europe has no interest in an endless war,” the High Representative reiterates. 

This is another reason why the governments sitting around the table would prefer the Aspides mission to remain as it is—and, even more so, to stay where it is. “Nobody wants to get involved in an open war,” admits the EU High Representative, all the more so because, she explains, “it is easy to start wars, but it is always difficult to stop them.” That is why, for Member States, “the priority is to ease tensions,” a de-escalation that implies a reduction in the intensity of the conflict, if not an outright cessation of hostilities. The EU’s “focus” lies entirely here: reducing the uncertainties that threaten freedom of navigation, and there are fears that deploying the Aspides mission—which is an EU mission, not an international one—to the Arabian Sea could yield results contrary to those hoped for. 

This, then, explains that deliberate emphasis, that desire to make it clear that “there is little appetite for extending the mandate of the Aspides mission, for the time being.” In reality, this change to the mandate may ultimately prove unnecessary, as the EU is attempting to play the Indian card in its search for that preferable and preferred diplomatic option. Talks with the Indian government are underway in the hope that New Delhi can bring about the shift in thinking needed to avert large-scale economic crises. 

Iran threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz to its enemies’ ships, and this is where India, a country with which the Islamic Republic enjoys good relations, comes into the picture. Treaties on political and economic cooperation and friendship date back to 1950, and even after the fall of the Shah and the establishment of the theocratic regime, these relations continued with two further memoranda of understanding (2001 and 2003). It was from the 1990s onwards that India and Iran strengthened their relations, when together they supported the Northern Alliance, General Massoud’s anti-Taliban coalition, which in 2002 was nominated for the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought by the Union for Europe of the Nations (UEN) group, of which Alleanza Nazionale was a member. 

So far, the Indian government has chosen to stand by and watch rather than intervene. In effect, it does not aid those whom Tehran regards as enemies, and India could therefore act as an intermediary with the rest of the world. This is another reason why negotiations are taking place with New Delhi, a factor that prompted Kallas to hold a brief press conference, to resume dialogue with the Indian government. India can try to play both sides. It has no interest in a protracted war in Iran, the US’s moves are weakening the country economically, and its good relations with the EU enable it to mediate.