Iranian missiles late Saturday hit two southern Israeli towns close to a nuclear facility in what Tehran said was retaliation for Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear site at Natanz. More than 160 people were injured in the strikes, which hit the towns of Dimona and Arad near Israel’s Negev Nuclear Research Center, according to the Israeli health ministry. The attack came as U.S. President Donald Trump warned that the United States will “obliterate” energy plants in Iran if the government in Tehran doesn’t fully open the Strait of Hormuz, giving the country a 48-hour deadline to comply. Tehran warned in reply that any strike on its energy facilities would prompt retaliatory attacks on U.S. and Israeli energy and infrastructure facilities. Iranian state TV said Saturday’s strikes by Tehran were a response to an attack on Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility earlier in the day, according to the BBC. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of Iran’s parliament, said the fact that ballistic missiles evaded Israeli defenses and struck near the nuclear research site appears to signal “a new phase” in the war. “If Israel is unable to intercept missiles in the heavily protected Dimona area, it is, operationally, a sign of entering a new phase of the conflict,” he posted on social media network X. “Israel’s skies are defenseless.” He added that the “time has come to implement the next pre-planned schemes,” without providing further details. Israeli military spokesman Effie Defrin said the strikes did not represent a new threat. “The air defense systems operated but did not intercept the missile. We will investigate the incident and learn from it,” he wrote on X. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said it had been a “very difficult evening,” and vowed to “continue to strike our enemies on all fronts.” The International Atomic Energy Agency said it was aware of the strikes near the nuclear research center and has not received any indication of damage to the facility, nor any information from regional states indicating that abnormal radiation levels have been detected.

U.S. President Donald Trump warned late Saturday that the United States will “obliterate” energy plants in Iran if the government doesn’t fully open the Strait of Hormuz, giving the country a 48-hour deadline to comply. “If Iran doesn’t fully open, without threat, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 hours from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various power plants, starting with the biggest one first,” Trump said in a post on Trust Social. Iran warned in reply that any strike on its energy facilities would prompt attacks on U.S. and Israeli energy and infrastructure facilities — specifically information technology and desalination operations — in the region, the Associated Press reported, citing a statement by an Iranian military spokesperson carried by state media and semiofficial outlets. The warnings of escalation in the Mideast conflict come after the British government on Saturday confirmed that Tehran launched an unsuccessful attack on Diego Garcia, a joint U.S.-U.K. military base in the Indian Ocean. Media reports said Iran fired two ballistic missiles at the base but missed. Meanwhile, Israel claimed that Iran has missiles with a range of about 4,000 kilometers, capable of hitting London, Paris and Berlin. “The Iranian terrorist regime poses a global threat. Now, with missiles that can reach London, Paris or Berlin,” the Israel Defense Forces said in a post on X. Iran’s targeting of the base on Diego Garcia occurred before Britain on Friday confirmed that U.S. use of its bases includes defensive operations against “missile sites and capabilities being used to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz,” a permission that includes the Indian Ocean island.

Switzerland said it won’t allow weapons exports to the U.S. as long as Washington is involved in its ongoing military campaign against Iran. The Swiss government said on Friday that it will not sign off on any new licenses for the export of war materiel to countries involved in the conflict, citing Switzerland’s commitment to neutrality. Switzerland said that it has not issued new export licenses to send weapons to the U.S. since the U.S. and Israel launched strikes on Tehran on Feb. 28. Existing licenses to export weapons to the U.S. can continue as they are not relevant “to the war at present,” but they will be kept under review in case they conflict with Swiss neutrality laws, it said. Exports of other dual-use and military goods, and other goods affected by sanctions against Iran, will also be kept under review, it added. Switzerland has not granted weapons export licenses for Israel or Iran for a “number of years,” the government said.

Moscow proposed a quid pro quo to the U.S. under which the Kremlin would stop sharing intelligence information with Iran, such as the precise coordinates of U.S. military assets in the Middle East, if Washington ceased supplying Ukraine with intel about Russia. Two people familiar with the U.S.-Russia negotiations said that such a proposal was made by Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev to Trump administration envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner during their meeting last week in Miami. The U.S. rejected the proposal, the people added. They, like all other officials cited in this article, were granted anonymity due to the sensitivity of the discussions. Nevertheless, the sheer existence of such a proposal has sparked concern among European diplomats, who worry Moscow is trying to drive a wedge between Europe and the U.S. at a critical moment for transatlantic relations. U.S. President Donald Trump has voiced anger over the refusal of allies to send warships in the Strait of Hormuz. On Friday, he lambasted his NATO allies as “COWARDS“ and said: “we will REMEMBER!” The White House declined to comment. The Russian Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. One EU diplomat called the Russian proposal “outrageous.” The suggested deal is likely to fuel growing suspicions in Europe that the Witkoff-Dmitriev meetings are not delivering concrete progress toward a peace agreement in Ukraine, but are instead seen by Moscow as a chance to lure Washington into a deal between the two powers that leaves Europe on the sidelines. On Thursday, the Kremlin said that the U.S.-mediated Ukraine peace talks were “on hold.” Russia has made various proposals about Iran to the U.S., which has rejected them all, another person familiar with the discussions said. This person said the U.S. also rejected a proposal to move Iran’s enriched uranium to Russia, which was first reported by Axios. Russia has expanded ‌intelligence-sharing and military cooperation with Iran since the war started, a person briefed on the intelligence said. The Wall Street Journal first reported the increase and wrote that Moscow is providing satellite ⁠imagery and drone technology to help Tehran target U.S. forces in the region. The Kremlin called that report  “fake news.” Trump hinted at a link between the intelligence-sharing with Iran and Ukraine during a recent interview with Fox News, saying that Russian President Vladimir Putin “might be helping them [Iran] a little bit, yeah, I guess, and he probably thinks we’re helping Ukraine, right?” The U.S. continues to share intelligence with Ukraine, even as it has reduced other support. Washington briefly paused the exchanges last year after a disastrous Oval Office meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. That abrupt halt to U.S. intelligence sharing triggered a chaotic scramble among allies and exposed deep tensions in the partnership with Kyiv. One European diplomat sought to downplay the risk of the Russian proposal, noting that French President Emmanuel Macron had said in January that “two-thirds” of military intelligence for Ukraine is now provided by France. Still, intelligence-sharing remains a last crucial pillar of American support for Ukraine after the Trump administration stopped most of its financial and military aid for Kyiv last year. Washington is still delivering weapons to Ukraine but under a NATO-led program where allies pay the U.S. for arms. Deliveries of critical air defense munitions, however, are under strain amid the U.S.-Israel war with Iran.  Most recently, the Trump administration decided to ease sanctions on Russian oil to alleviate pressure on oil markets, causing strong concern and criticism from  European leaders like German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Hans von der Burchard reported from Berlin, Felicia Schwartz and Diana Nerozzi from Washington and Jacopo Barigazzi from Brussels.

BRUSSELS — Mark Rutte’s tried-and-tested approach to dealing with Donald Trump is coming under strain as the U.S. president’s war in Iran opens up fresh fault lines inside NATO. On Tuesday, Trump branded NATO allies “very foolish” for snubbing his demands for military support in securing the critical Strait of Hormuz trade artery. As a result, reconsidering the U.S. role in the alliance was “certainly something we should think about,” he warned. In response, NATO’s secretary-general is reaching for his usual Trump playbook: Avoid criticizing the president in public and work behind the scenes for a solution. “He’s calculating there’s little to gain by now speaking up,” said one NATO diplomat, who like others in this story was granted anonymity to speak freely. “I don’t see how he could please [Trump’s] desire. So better to lay low — publicly at least.” But the war is putting Rutte in a bind. Despite Trump’s demands, NATO has few powers to act in Iran, while allies’ distaste for the war makes it hard to find needed consensus for any alliance involvement. Yet the longer the conflict drags on, the more it saps resources from the alliance’s core tasks of supporting Ukraine and preparing for a potential war with Russia. “It’s very clear that whatever is being used in the Middle East right now, in particular air defense systems, will most likely have to be replaced,” said Pieter Wezeman, a senior arms researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute think tank. “All that comes on top of the already very high demand for arms in Europe.” NATO declined to comment on the record. MAKING A MARK Until now, Rutte has succeeded in keeping Trump from blowing up the alliance by handing the U.S. president wins in key areas like getting allies to boost defense spending and finding an off ramp that allowed Trump to drop his campaign to annex Greenland. “When there are debates between allies, I always try to stay a bit muted, and therefore being able, if necessary, to help a bit,” Rutte said last week, referencing feuding between Trump and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez over Madrid’s refusal to allow U.S. planes to use its airfield to attack Iran, and Trump’s wrath at low Spanish defense spending. While the alliance hasn’t collapsed, Rutte has come under fire for being obsequious toward Trump and for siding with him against other allies. “In the European Parliament … we have openly questioned whether we were hearing the representative of NATO or the representative of the United States,” said Lucia Yar, a liberal Slovak lawmaker on the Parliament’s defense committee. “I hope that Mr Rutte will continue to engage regularly with both sides of the Atlantic.” Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who has sparked a feud with President Donald Trump over his refusal to allow U.S. planes to attack Iran from his country, with Rutte during the NATO Summit in The Hague on June 25, 2025. | Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images He’s trying the same play during the Iran crisis. In one of his first comments, Rutte claimed there was “widespread support” among the alliance’s members for the U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran — a claim that drew a fierce rebuke from Spain. After days of lying low, Rutte was faced with a direct question on Wednesday about Trump’s threat of a “very bad future” for NATO over the reluctance of allies to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The former Dutch prime minister didn’t take the bait, instead pointing to talks happening behind the scenes. “What I know is that allies are working together discussing how to [reopen the strait],” he said. “Rutte’s job is to keep NATO together, and it’s hard to see how a rhetorical battle with Trump can help him do that,” said Oana Lungescu, a former NATO spokesperson who now works as a senior research fellow at London’s Royal United Services Institute think tank. OUT OF AREA Yet there are limits to how much Rutte can do to assuage Trump over Iran. That’s partly down to a lack of consensus among allies on the war — with many having slammed the conflict that was initiated without consulting them. While NATO has shot down Iranian missiles directed at Turkey, the U.S. cannot convince allies to join on the basis that its own territory is under threat, said a second alliance diplomat. The alliance’s mutual defense clause, “Article 5, applies in the case of an armed attack against an ally, so it’s not directly relevant to situations like this,” the diplomat said. The Middle East lies outside the alliance’s military “area of responsibility,” according to two other alliance diplomats, further complicating a collective response. Finally, Washington has not made any formal demands of NATO. At a closed-door meeting of ambassadors on Tuesday, the U.S. repeated its pleas for allies to help, but did not make any specific requests to the alliance, the two diplomats said. Yet with the war already in its third week, doing nothing comes with its own risks for NATO. Washington has already withdrawn equipment, including F-35 fighter jets, from a NATO exercise in Norway, while the U.K. has diverted its HMS Dragon destroyer away from activities linked to the alliance’s new Arctic mission to the eastern Mediterranean. HMS Dragon, which the U.K. diverted from an Arctic mission, sets sail from Portsmouth Harbour on March 10, 2026 for its deployment to Cyprus. | Leon Neal/Getty Images Defending against Iranian drone and missile counter-attacks has also forced European countries to burn through air defense missiles, depleting stockpiles and hampering NATO’s aim to bolster air defenses, said Wezeman, the analyst. France has already warned its stockpile of air-to-air MICA missiles is running low. It may be only a “matter of weeks” until European countries are forced to decide whether to earmark future deliveries of air defense systems for their Gulf allies or Ukraine, he said.  “Over a longer period of time, it will put a dent in the planning for how to build up the European defences,” he said. “And it has an immediate effect on the capacity of Ukraine to defend itself.” “We’re not starting from a place of surplus … we’re going to get stretched even more thin,” the third NATO diplomat acknowledged.

LONDON — Donald Trump loves to make deals, and one of his closest confidants in Europe believes a pact might be within reach that could help solve both the Gulf oil crisis and the war in Ukraine in one go.  Finland’s President Alexander Stubb says he can see real potential in offering Trump what he wants: European military support to secure the Strait of Hormuz, the crucial oil shipping route that Iran has effectively blockaded in response to American and Israeli bombing.  Europe’s condition for providing such assistance? That the U.S. president delivers all the help Ukraine needs to reach an acceptable peace deal with Russia.  The idea of bargaining with Trump was put to Stubb during a question-and-answer session at London’s Chatham House think tank on Tuesday. The Finnish leader seemed surprised — and impressed. “I think it’s a really good idea,” he said, adding after a pause: “No, I think it’s actually a really good idea.” Stubb said he’d consider it further and discuss options with his team.  Finland itself doesn’t have any assets to contribute to securing the Strait of Hormuz, and it’s still far from clear what role European forces could play there. But the question of how to bolster Ukraine — and get Trump on board — is an urgent one for Europe.  Officials — including Stubb — fear the longer Trump’s war against Iran continues, the more it could constrain Ukraine’s fight against invading Russian forces. Soaring global energy prices — and Washington’s decision to loosen sanctions on Russia’s oil industry — will significantly boost Vladimir Putin’s income from Russian fossil fuel sales. At the same time, American forces are using hundreds of interceptor missiles to shoot down Iranian rockets and drones, leaving fewer available for Ukraine. Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities rely on air defenses for protection against an ongoing barrage of ballistic missiles from Russia.  And Trump has again recently pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to agree a deal with Putin, without clarifying what — if any — security guarantees America would provide to keep the peace. Stubb told his audience he feared that peace talks in Ukraine are fast approaching a moment of truth, which could force Kyiv to accept a a bad settlement that involves ceding territory to Putin. The negotiations could even collapse, leaving Europe on the hook — without American help — obliging European powers to step in to help Ukraine with more intelligence, weapons and other support, he said.  Stubb said he takes a realistic view of how much he is able to influence Trump, after the two bonded over a seven-hour golf and lunch meeting last year. Finland has just bought 64 F-35 fighter jets from the U.S. and hosts thousands of American troops training in Arctic conditions. “I have no illusions about who can convince President Trump on anything,” Stubb said. “If I get one idea out of 10 in on Ukraine, I think it’s good.” The implications of the war in Iran are “negative” for Ukraine, mainly because the price of oil favors Russia’s war machinery, Stubb said. “The Russian economy was actually doing extremely badly a couple of weeks back, now it’s bouncing back.” It’s also taking air defense systems away from where they are needed in Ukraine.  Finally, it has shifted the focus from the peace talks on Ukraine. “I hope the peace negotiations on Ukraine don’t collapse like the negotiations between Iran and the U.S. did,” Stubb said. “But time will tell.” 

LONDON — U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has stressed since the start of the U.S. and Israeli-led war in Iran that Britain will only contribute to defensive operations, including limiting the U.S. use of British airbases, saying: “We have learned the lessons of Iraq.” The problem as the war continues into its third week is that Starmer is now getting low marks from key allies in the Gulf for how he’s applied those lessons, according to senior military figures and diplomats who spoke to POLITICO. That has left London scrambling to deploy sufficient resources and show that it can provide adequate defensive support in the region as well as protect British assets, including its sovereign bases in Cyprus.  Three people familiar with operational and planning strategies, granted anonymity to speak frankly about sensitive matters, said the U.K. had bungled defensive decision-making and failed to send the necessary resources to the area at the time of the first U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran.   Chief of the Defense Staff Richard Knighton has taken flak over delays in deploying HMS Dragon, a guided missile destroyer, to the Mediterranean for more than a week after the war started. But one former military commander familiar with conversations in government about the U.K. response said the greater fault lay in a risk-averse stance from Starmer as well as his National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell and Defense Secretary John Healey, whose fears over a domestic backlash to being embroiled in a conflict in the Middle East hobbled the U.K.’s thinking about how to support allies in the Gulf. “No. 10 was determined to downplay any risk or perception of us getting involved and now the government is playing catch-up,” the former commander said. “And that means we are showing up late.” Others POLITICO spoke with said the failure to deploy maritime assets — especially in minesweeper expertise and air defense — has shaken states ranging from Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates with longstanding close defense ties to the U.K. This perceived lapse has left Britain on the back foot both in its deployment of assets and in diplomatic relations with partners, visible in the U.K.’s concerted effort last week to demonstrate support for Gulf countries facing retaliatory strikes from Iran, as Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper travelled to Saudi Arabia. The prime minister and defense secretary have highlighted extra resources deployed to the region since widespread unrest erupted in Iran at the start of the year, including fighter jets, air defense missiles and radar systems.  The prime minister and defense secretary have highlighted extra resources deployed to the region since widespread unrest erupted in Iran at the start of the year, including fighter jets, air defense missiles and radar systems. And there are mounting signs that Starmer and Healey have understood the extent of sore feelings among allies and are seeking to assuage any tensions with Gulf allies as well as with the U.S.  In a social post on Sunday, the Ministry of Defense highlighted U.K. Typhoon and F-35 jets flying over Bahrain for the first time in “defense of British interests” and Britain’s role in air protection over the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Cyprus. Christian Turner, Britain’s ambassador to Washington, also issued a video over the weekend noting that British pilots have spent “over 300 hours in the skies above the Middle East shooting down Iranian drones and missiles” as well as drawing attention to the U.S. use of U.K. bases and sharing of intelligence.  “We acted early to protect British people and British interests and to support our allies across the region,” a Ministry of Defense spokesperson said, specifically noting defense patrols with extra Typhoons in Qatar to support that country as well as Bahrain and the UAE. “Those preparations made a real difference, enabling our troops to conduct defensive operations from Day One.” “We acted early to protect British people and British interests and to support our allies across the region,” a Ministry of Defense spokesperson said, specifically noting defense patrols with extra Typhoons in Qatar to support that country as well as Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. “Those preparations made a real difference, enabling our troops to conduct defensive operations from Day One.” A Downing Street spokesperson declined to comment further, referring inquiries to the Ministry of Defense.  But a government official, granted anonymity as they were not authorized to speak on the record, insisted Starmer and Healey had “followed all military recommendations presented to them throughout the build-up” and hit out at “armchair generals who aren’t seeing the intelligence and information that our military see every day.” Yet a person with knowledge of deployment decisions said that close allies of the U.K. were “deeply disappointed” by the lack of preparation. “There had been knowledge of the preparations for U.S. action on Iran on a large scale from around Christmas and the U.K. had visibility on that,” this person said. “But the response was wholly inadequate.” If a full array of options had been considered, according to this person, a submarine presence from the Royal Navy might have been sent to the region as a deterrent under the terms of Operation Kipion, a long-standing umbrella for British security, intelligence gathering and deterrence to the Gulf. One area of concern has been the decommissioning of ships, some of which were moved for servicing and routine upgrades in recent weeks.  HMS Middleton, which was based in Bahrain, arrived back in Britain on March 1 — the day after the U.S. and Israel opened their attack — for maintenance and a technological upgrade. The vessel, ⁠which is more than 40 years old, was no longer certified to sail, according to the MOD. The U.K.’s only mine-hunting ship was brought back to Britain to save money just as strikes began, according to The Times.  Healey told reporters this week he was still considering “additional options” for protecting the Strait of Hormuz.  The former commander was frustrated by a gap between the prime minister and Healey’s robust language about Britain’s need for war-readiness and the reality of its actions.  “We have the prime minister and defense secretary talking about ‘preparing the nation for war’ on a running basis, which is ironic, as we and our allies ended up not deploying deterrent force and taking a week to deploy a major warship to defend Cyprus in good time to show our strong  defensive intentions,” this person said. A senior Gulf diplomat said the U.K.’s early response to the conflict fell short of what Gulf partners expected given Britain’s longstanding military ties in the region. There were “a lot of phone calls,” the diplomat said, but not much in the way of “serious support.” John Foreman, a former deputy head of the Combined Maritime Forces in Bahrain, said Starmer’s cautious approach was bound to cause continued problems as the conflict continues, particularly amid rising focus on protecting the Strait of Hormuz. “Wiser, less cautious heads would have got ahead of the game,” Foreman said. “It comes from Starmer ultimately and the tone of his government. It’s too late for Powell to be asking for options on the eve of war — and for Healey to still be pondering options now.”

Russia and China are aiding Iran in a number of ways, including by providing “military cooperation,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said. Araghchi called Russia and China strategic partners for Tehran during its war with the U.S. and Israel, in an interview with broadcaster MS NOW on Saturday. “We have had close cooperation in the past, which still continues, and that includes military cooperation as well,” said the foreign minister. Iran has had “good cooperation with these countries: politically, economically, even militarily,” he added. On Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump speculated that Russian President Vladimir Putin might be helping Iran “a bit.” “I guess, and he probably thinks we’re helping Ukraine, right?” said Trump, in reference to aid to Kyiv to defend against Moscow’s all-out invasion. Iran and Russia have strengthened ties over the past decade in response to U.S. opposition. Iran has been supplying Russia with its domestically designed Shahed drones, which Moscow uses to wage its war in Ukraine, going so far as to set up factories in Russia. The two countries also threw their support behind the now-defunct regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria. In 2021, Iran signed a 25-year economic cooperation agreement with Beijing, centering on the sale Iran’s rich oil reserves to supply China. Araghchi in Saturday’s interview also addressed the turmoil in the key waterway of the Strait of Hormuz, which passes by the coasts of Iran and Oman, and which is a passage for one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas. Tensions in the Strait have propelled the cost of oil to above $100 a barrel and are threatening economic dislocation worldwide. Araghchi said that the Strait was closed to tankers and ships belonging to “our enemies, to those who are attacking us and their allies.” Iran has been lobbing missiles at Persian Gulf countries, which are major suppliers on global hydrocarbon markets. But, he added: “The Strait is not closed. It is only closed to American, Israeli ships and tankers, and not to to others.”

U.S. President Donald Trump did not commit to a definitive timeline for the war in Iran, saying in a Friday interview that the fighting would end when he feels it “in my bones.” Trump told Fox News Radio that he didn’t think the war “would be long.” But he suggested that only he will know when it will be over, saying the conflict will end “when I feel it, feel it in my bones.” The Trump administration has sent mixed signals on the length of the war, with senior administration officials suggesting at times that the war could last anywhere from days to months. Trump on Friday said he expected the conflict to end soon but added that it could also continue indefinitely if necessary. The president dismissed reports that the U.S. was facing a munitions shortage. “Nobody has the technology or the weapons that we have,” Trump told Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade. “We’re way ahead of schedule. Way ahead.” He later said the U.S. had “virtually unlimited ammunition. We’re using it, we’re using it. We can go forever.” While the president suggested the decision to end the war will ultimately be based on his personal judgment, he said he was consulting with senior advisers, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance. “Operation Epic Fury will continue until President Trump, as Commander-in-Chief, determines that the goals of Operation Epic Fury, including for Iran to no longer pose a military threat, have been fully realized,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement when asked for comment. Earlier on Friday, Hegseth suggested victory was a certainty and attacked the press for what he viewed as unfriendly media coverage about the war. Trump also sought to downplay any economic ramifications of the conflict, saying the U.S. economy was the greatest in the world and would “bounce right back, so fast.” The Trump administration has sought to quell concerns over rising oil and gas prices after U.S.-Israeli military action against Iran began in February. The war triggered the largest oil supply disruption in history and cost $11 billion in its first week, according to the Pentagon. The president’s messaging around the run-up in crude prices has caused a potential public relations nightmare for the oil industry. “The United States is the largest Oil Producer in the World, by far, so when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money,” Trump wrote Wednesday on Truth Social.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney joined the leaders of Germany and Norway on Friday in criticizing the Trump administration’s decision to temporarily lift sanctions on Russian oil, exposing a public split between Washington and key NATO allies. At a joint press conference in Bardufoss, Norway, where the three leaders were attending the 14-nation NATO exercise Cold Response, Carney, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz argued that sanctions relief would weaken efforts to force Russia to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. The three NATO leaders were publicly breaking with Washington over the Trump administration’s decision to ease some sanctions on Russian oil. The split came as the U.S. took part in NATO wargaming in Norway’s Arctic region meant to demonstrate allied resolve against Russia as the war in Ukraine enters its fifth year. Merz said he was surprised to wake up Friday to the U.S. decision, “which was obviously taken in D.C. last night.” Echoing Støre, the German leader added: “We should put more pressure on Russia.” Carney aligned Canada with that position. “Entirely agree. Canada’s position is to maintain sanctions on Russia … including on the shadow fleet, which is moving this oil,” the prime minister said, as the three leaders spoke against a backdrop of heavy military armament. “There’s been very tight cooperation between Russia and Iran, at great cost to the people of Ukraine and a great threat to peace and security in Europe. And this group, under the leadership of the two gentlemen to my right, and a broader coalition — Coalition of the Willing — has stood up to that,” Carney added. The U.S. temporarily lifted some of its Russia sanctions late Thursday in an effort to bring down energy prices as the conflict in the Middle East drags on. It would allow the delivery and sale of Russian oil stranded at sea. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy criticized the decision on Friday as “not very logical.” “The lifting of sanctions means that [Russia] will receive more money and there will be more drone attacks” in the Middle East, Zelenskyy said, standing alongside French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris. “Russia will get money for its war machine, and there are a lot of drones that are built on Russian soil to destabilize the Middle East,” he added. In northern Norway, the three leaders were asked whether the U.S. could be “trusted” as a partner on northern security. “Yes,” replied Støre, without hesitation, followed by Carney. Carney went on to describe the close and historic military cooperation between Canada and the U.S. through NORAD, the joint North American air defense command. Støre said security cooperation in the Arctic was in the U.S’ domestic self-interest, calling it a “net positive for the security of the United States.” But when pressed on whether the decision by the U.S. to ease Russian oil sanctions changes that, the Norwegian leader gave a blunt reply. “We have made it clear that we disagree with that decision. And, you know, disagreements appear among countries. Let’s be honest about that,” Støre said.