Former Ambassador-at-Large Gordon Sondland has criticized European leaders for condemning Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and its regional aggression while simultaneously complaining about U.S. military actions taken to counter these threats. Sondland contends that Europe's strategy of acknowledging the danger posed by Iran but avoiding decisive action, while relying on U.S. power, is politically convenient but ultimately unsustainable.
In an opinion piece, Sondland asserted that European governments possess sufficient intelligence on Iran's nuclear program, missile development, and support for terrorism to understand the threat. He argued that these nations cannot expect to benefit from security provided by American military actions without sharing the associated risks and burdens. "Europe cannot have it both ways," he wrote. "If Iran is a common threat to the democratic world, as European leaders have repeatedly said, then confronting it cannot remain principally an American responsibility."
Sondland emphasized that Iran views the U.S., Europe, and Israel as a unified bloc and that Iranian intelligence operations and threats extend to European soil, interests, and trade routes. He warned that passivity does not purchase immunity, as Iran is unlikely to differentiate between an American adversary and a European government benefiting from U.S. protection.
He called for political unity among Western allies, stating that public disagreements are interpreted by Tehran as a sign of division, encouraging Iran to wait out international pressure. Sondland urged leaders, including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and the heads of government in Germany, France, Italy, and the UK, to publicly align on strategic objectives.
These objectives, he argued, should extend beyond preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon to also dismantling Iran's network of proxy forces like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. Sondland stated that addressing only the nuclear issue while allowing Iran's proxy network to continue destabilizing the region would only solve half the problem.
Furthermore, Sondland suggested that Europe could provide practical assistance by making allied bases available, expanding intelligence sharing, and contributing capabilities such as minesweepers and escort vessels to protect international shipping. He highlighted that freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz is an economic necessity for Europe, and that the continent would bear a significant share of the costs if trade routes are disrupted without a united response.
Sondland also addressed the issue of burden-sharing, arguing it involves standing with allies during difficult actions, not just military spending targets. He concluded that weakness and division invite miscalculation, while deterrence requires adversaries to believe opponents have both the capacity and the unity to act. Diplomacy, he stated, must be supported by credible force to be effective, and the goal should be to destroy capabilities that threaten the West and restore deterrence.