In his editorial, Philippe Gélie highlights the growing discord between U.S. President Donald Trump and European leaders regarding NATO's role in conflicts related to Iran. Trump believes this disconnect demonstrates that NATO is a 'one-way street' that primarily benefits the U.S. and its military strategies without account for the concerns of European allies. As tensions rise around Hormuz, the responsibility for the resulting geopolitical challenges may increasingly fall on Europe, which has shown reluctance to align itself with U.S. policies in the region.

European leaders are portrayed as being disinclined to participate in what they did not initiate or agree to: a conflict with Iran. Their public sentiment is against further engagement in military actions, especially when such involvement seems to stem from a sense of obligation rather than informed consent or strategic planning. Gélie points out that entering a conflict through following U.S. directives could lead to disastrous outcomes without clarity on objectives or operational control.

The editorial also argues that invoking Article 5 of the NATO charter is unlikely in this context given the dynamics of offensive actions—where the U.S. initiated hostility, undermining collective defense arguments. Trump's pressure for European support in military initiatives against Iran raises critical questions about NATO's future coherence and efficacy if member states remain divided over defense priorities and responses to threats in the region.