PARIS — Nostalgia is a poor guide — especially in diplomacy. These days, it’s almost impossible to discuss the Israel-Iran war without someone invoking Dominique de Villepin’s 2003 speech at the United Nations. France’s then foreign minister had warned the United States against invading Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. The chaos that followed ultimately proved him right.
For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.
Villepin’s speech is often cited by those lamenting that, in 2025, France — and Europe more broadly — are speaking up too timidly. Of course, comparisons have their limits, but Israel is increasingly open about its intention not just to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, but to bring down the regime in Tehran altogether.
“Khamenei cannot continue to exist,” declared Israeli Defense Minister Israël Katz yesterday, referring to Iran’s Supreme Leader.
Europe is struggling to find its footing in this major confrontation, which primarily involves three players: Israel, Iran, and the United States. Once again, Europeans risk missing the chance to stake out a principled, united, and independent position amid the din of war.
The award for worst diplomatic misstep and political blunder goes to Germany’s new Chancellor, Friedrich Merz. At the G7 summit in Canada this week, he stated that Israel was “doing the dirty work for all of us.” His remarks drew criticism within Germany — including from members of his own coalition — and abroad.
Force or law?
By aligning uncritically with Israeli policy, Merz drives yet another nail into the coffin of international law — at a time when Europe has every reason to defend it. His stance also undermines the narrative of holding Russia accountable for violating international law in Ukraine.
Without clarity and principle, Europe may once again shoot itself in the foot.
The issue here isn’t about defending the Iranian regime — it’s indefensible, both in terms of human rights and regional destabilization. The question is one of principle: how should conflicts be handled: through force, or through law?
Merz’s statement is all the more shocking given that Germany, alongside France and the UK, is currently engaged in a diplomatic effort with Iran’s foreign minister to preserve dialogue. The goal is to end a conflict that has already taken civilian lives on both sides and threatens to set the region ablaze.
Double standard?
Even if not as blunt as Merz’s position, France’s stance also contains its own ambiguities. On day one, President Emmanuel Macron oddly categorized Israel’s attack as an act of “self-defense,” echoing the response to the Hamas-led massacre of October 7, 2023. It was as if Paris, having recently criticized Israel over Gaza and its treatment of Palestinians, felt compelled to rebalance its posture. Since then, Macron has moderated his position: he has condemned regime change by force and is working to revive diplomacy.
The challenge runs deeper. Europe continues to face accusations of “double standards” — invoking international law in Ukraine but not in the Middle East, a criticism it has faced for decades.
Without clarity and principle, Europe may once again shoot itself in the foot — at precisely the moment when it should be leading by example, especially in the face of a volatile U.S. administration that believes only in the law of the strongest, survival of the fittest.
