BERLIN — German Defense Minister Boris Pistorus will spend next week touring the Indo-Pacific with a passel of corporate chiefs in tow to make deals across the region. It’s part of an effort to mark a greater impact in an area where Berlin’s presence has been minor, but whose importance is growing as Germany looks to build up access to natural resources, technology and allies in a fracturing world. “If you look at the Indo-Pacific, Germany is essentially starting from scratch,” said Bastian Ernst, a defense lawmaker from Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democrats. “We don’t have an established role yet, we’re only just beginning to figure out what that should be.” Pistorius leaves Friday on an eight-day tour to Japan, Singapore and Australia where he’ll be aiming to build relations with other like-minded middle powers — mirroring countries from France to Canada as they scramble to figure out new relationships in a world destabilized by Russia, China and a United States led by Donald Trump. “Germany recognizes this principle of interconnected theaters,” said Elli-Katharina Pohlkamp, visiting fellow of the Asia Programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Berlin, she said, “increasingly sees Europe’s focus on Russia and Asia’s focus on China and North Korea as security issues that are linked.” The military and defense emphasis of next week’s trip marks a departure from Berlin’s 2020 Indo-Pacific guidelines, which laid a much heavier focus on trade and diplomacy. Pistorius’ outreach will be especially important as Germany rapidly ramps up military spending at home. Berlin is on track to boost its defense budget to around €150 billion a year by the end of the decade and is preparing tens of billions in new procurement contracts. But not everything Germany needs can be sourced in Europe. Australia is one of the few alternatives to China in critical minerals essential to the defense industry. It’s a leading supplier of lithium and one of the only significant producers of separated rare earth materials outside China. Australia also looms over a key German defense contract. Berlin is considering whether to stick with a naval laser weapon being developed by homegrown firms Rheinmetall and MBDA, or team up with Australia’s EOS instead. That has become a more sensitive political question in Berlin. WELT, owned by POLITICO’s parent company Axel Springer, reported that lawmakers had stopped the planned contract for the German option, reflecting wider concern over whether Berlin should back a domestic system or move faster with a foreign one. That means what Pistorius sees in Australia could end up shaping a decision back in Germany. TALKING TO TOKYO Japan offers something different — not raw materials but military integration, logistics and technology.  Pohlkamp said the military side of the relationship with Japan is now “very much about interoperability and compatibility, built through joint exercises, mutual visits, closer staff work, expanded information exchange and mutual learning.” She described Japan as “a kind of yardstick for Germany,” a country that lives with “an enormous threat perception” not only militarily but also economically, because it is surrounded by pressure from China, North Korea and Russia.  The Japan-Germany Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement took effect in July 2024, giving the two militaries a framework for reciprocal supplies and services and making future port calls for naval vessels, exercises and recurring cooperation easier to sustain.  Pohlkamp said what matters most to Tokyo are not headline-grabbing deployments but “plannable, recurring contributions, which are more valuable than big, one-off shows of force.” But that ambition only goes so far if Germany’s presence remains sporadic. Bundeswehr recruits march on the market square to take their ceremonial oath in Altenburg on March 19, 2026. | Bodo Schackow/picture alliance via Getty Images Berlin has sent military assets to the region for training exercises in recent years — a frigate in 2021, combat aircraft in 2022, army participation in 2023, and a larger naval mission in 2024. But as pressure grows on Germany to beef up its military to hold off Russia, along with its growing presence in Lithuania and its effort to keep supplying Ukraine with weapons, the attention given to Asia is shrinking. The government told parliament last year it sent no frigate in 2025, plans none in 2026 and has not yet decided on 2027. Germany’s current military engagement in the Indo-Pacific consists of a single P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, sent to India in February as part of the Indo-Pacific Deployment 2026 exercises.  Germany, according to Ernst, is still “relatively blank” in the region. What it can contribute militarily remains narrow: “A bit of maritime patrol, a frigate, mine clearance.” Pohlkamp said Germany’s role in Asia is still being built “in small doses” and is largely symbolic. But what matters is whether Berlin can turn occasional visits and deployments into something steadier and more predictable. The defense ministry insists that is the point of Pistorius’s trip. Ministry spokesperson Mitko Müller said Wednesday that Europe and the Indo-Pacific are “inseparably linked,” citing the rules-based order, sea lanes, international law and the role of the two regions in global supply and value chains.  The new P-8A Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft stands in front of a technical hangar at Nordholz airbase on Nov. 20, 2025. | Christian Butt/picture alliance via Getty Images The trip is meant to focus on the regional security situation, expanding strategic dialogue, current and possible military cooperation, joint exercises including future Indo-Pacific deployments, and industrial cooperation. That explains why industry is traveling with Pistorius.  Müller said executives from Airbus, TKMS, MBDA, Quantum Systems, Diehl and Rohde & Schwarz are coming along, suggesting Berlin sees the trip as a chance to widen defense ties on the ground. But any larger German role in Asia would have to careful calibrated to avoid angering China — a key trading partner that is very wary of European powers expanding their regional presence. “That leaves Germany trying to do two things at once,” Pohlkamp said. “First, show up often enough to matter, but not so forcefully that it gets dragged into a confrontation it is neither politically nor militarily prepared to sustain.”

BRUSSELS — EU leaders were supposed to spend Thursday mapping out how to boost Europe’s economy. Instead, they were left scrambling to deal with two wars, a deepening transatlantic rift and a standoff over Ukraine. Twelve hours of talks, a few showdowns and many, many coffees later, here’s POLITICO’s rapid round-up of what we learned at the European Council. 1) Viktor Orbán’s not a man for moving … The most pressing question ahead of this summit was whether Hungary’s prime minister could be convinced to drop his veto to the EU’s €90 billion loan for Ukraine. He wasn’t. The European Commission had attempted to appease Orbán in the days running up to the summit by sending a mission of experts to Ukraine to inspect the damaged Druzhba pipeline, which supplies Russian oil to Hungary and Slovakia. Orbán has argued that Ukraine is deliberately not addressing the issue, and tied that to his blocking of the cash. Asked whether he saw any chance for progress on the loan going into the summit, Orbán’s response was simple: “No.” Twelve hours later, that answer was much the same. 2) … But he does like to stretch his legs. In one of the most striking images to have come out of Thursday’s summit, the Hungarian prime minister stands on the sidelines of the outer circle of the room while the rest of the leaders are in their usual spots listening to a virtual address from Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (on screen) speaks to EU leaders via video at the European Council summit in Brussels, March 19, 2026. | Pool photo by Geert Vanden Wijngaert/OL / AFP via Getty Images The relationship between the two has descended into outright acrimony after the Hungarian leader refused to back the EU loan and the Ukrainian leader made veiled threats — which even drew the (rare) rebuke of the Commission. Faced with Zelenskyy’s address, the Hungarian decided to vote with his feet. 3) The new kid on the block is happy to be a part of this European family, dysfunctional as it may be. This was the first leaders’ summit for Rob Jetten, the Netherland’s newly-installed prime minister. Ahead of the meeting, he said he was “very much looking forward to being part of this family.” His verdict after the talks? That leaders differ greatly in their speaking style, with some quite efficient while others take longer to get to the point — but he welcomed the jokes of Belgian’s Bart De Wever, “especially when the meeting has been going on for hours.” 5) Though not everyone was so charitable. Broadly speaking, Orbán digging in his heels did not go down well. Sweden’s prime minister told reporters after the summit that leaders’ criticism of the Hungarian in the room was “very, very harsh,” and like nothing he’d ever heard at an EU summit. Jetten said the vibe in the room with EU leaders was “icy” at points, with “awkward silences.”  6) The EU’s not giving up on the loan. Despite murmurs ahead of the talks of a plan B in the works, multiple EU leaders as well as Costa and Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen were adamant that the loan was the only way to go — and that it will happen, eventually. “We will deliver one way or the other … Today, we have strengthened our resolve,” von der Leyen. Costa added: “Nobody can blackmail the European Council, no one can blackmail the European Union.” Top EU diplomat Kaja Kallas arrives at the European Council summit on March 19, 2026. | Pier Marco Tacca/Getty Images 7) Kaja Kallas wants to avoid a messy entanglement. In her address to the bloc’s leaders, Kallas, the EU’s top diplomat, stressed the importance of not getting caught up in the conflict in the Middle East. “Starting war is like a love affair — it’s easy to get in and difficult to get out,” she said, according to two diplomats briefed by leaders on the closed-door talks. At the same time, Kallas reiterated the importance of the EU’s defending its interests in the region but said there was little appetite for expanding the remit of its Aspides naval mission, currently operating in the Red Sea. 8) But it was all roses with the U.N. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres joined the Council for lunch, thanking them for their “strong support for multilateralism and international law.” In an an exclusive interview with POLITICO on the sidelines of the summit, Guterres applauded the restraint shown by the Europeans, despite Donald Trump’s anger at their refusal to actively support the war or help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime artery that Iran has largely sealed off, driving up global energy prices. 9) Kinda. One senior EU official told POLITICO that the lunch meeting was “unnecessary.” “With all appreciation for multilateralism and its importance … considering the role the U.N. is not playing in international crises right now, it is unnecessary,” said the official, granted anonymity to speak freely. 10) Celery is a very versatile vegetable. Also on the table while they picked over the future of the multilateral world order was a pâté en croûte with spring vegetables and fillet of veal with celery three ways. Three ways! And for dessert? A mandarin tartlet with cinnamon. 11) Cyprus and Greece want the EU to get serious about mutual defense. Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis asked the EU to think about a roadmap for acting on the bloc’s mutual defense clause, according to two EU diplomats and one senior European government official. The clause, Article 42.7, is the EU’s equivalent of NATO’s Article 5. Its existence and potential use has recently come into focus since British bases in Cyprus were attacked by drones. 12) And the Commission hopes it’s already got serious enough about migration. Von der Leyen said that while the EU has not yet experienced an increase in migrants as a result of the conflict in Iran, the bloc should be prepared. “There is absolutely no appetite … to repeat the situation of 2015 in the event of large migration flows resulting from the conflict in the Middle East,” said one national official. The Commission chief emphasized that the mistakes of the 2015 refugee crisis won’t happen again. 13) Von der Leyen likes to cross her Ts.   Speaking of emphasis — “temporary, tailored and targeted” was how von der Leyen described the EU’s short-term actions to minimize the impact on Europe of the recent energy price spikes after the U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran. The moves will impact four components that affect energy prices: energy costs, grid charges, taxes and levies and carbon pricing, she said. 14) The ETS is here to stay — with some modifications. While EU leaders agreed to make some adjustments to the Emissions Trading System — the bloc’s carbon market — most forcefully backed the continuation of the system itself. “This ETS is a great success. It has been in place for 20 years and is a market-based and technology-neutral system. So we are not calling the ETS into question,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told reporters after the talks had concluded. While the Commission will propose some adjustments to the ETS by July, these are merely adjustments, not fundamental changes, the German leader said. In the run-up to the summit, some EU countries, including Italy, floated the idea of weakening the ETS to help weather soaring energy prices. 15) No matter what, EU leaders want to get home — ASAP. While Costa has so far ensured every European Council under his watch lasts only one day instead of the once-customary two, this time around, that goal was looking optimistic. However, at the end of the day, leaders’ dogged determination to get out of there prevailed (even if that meant kicking a discussion on the long-term budget to April). À bientôt!

BRUSSELS — French President Emmanuel Macron said France was looking into ways of unblocking the Strait of Hormuz by acting at the United Nations level. “We have begun an exploratory process, and we will see in the coming days if it has a chance of succeeding,” Macron announced on Friday in response to a question from POLITICO after a meeting of EU leaders in Brussels. The French president said that he “explained to the U.N. Secretary-General [António Guterres] this afternoon that France intends to sound out its main partners, and in particular the members of the Security Council, on whether it would be appropriate to establish a U.N. framework for what we want to do in the Strait of Hormuz.” Macron said that he discussed that idea with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a call on Thursday morning and with Guterres, who on Thursday joined the European Council for lunch. Macron then informed other EU leaders. Guterres told leaders it was important for the Global South that any initiative on clearing the Strait of Hormuz go through the United Nations, according to one EU diplomat. Earlier in the day, a second diplomat told POLITICO that such an initiative could consist of a resolution that might win support from Gulf and European countries, creating a basis for a broader coalition to secure the vital waterway. Iran has largely sealed off the critical maritime artery that carries roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil supply, driving up global energy prices. Macron said he would test the chances of success of the U.N. initiative, without giving further details on the plan. “I think this is something that could help. I am prudent because it doesn’t only depend on us,” he said.

BRUSSELS — United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said Thursday there are “reasonable grounds” to believe both sides in the U.S.-Israel conflict with Iran may have committed war crimes, as attacks and retaliatory strikes on energy facilities intensify. Speaking exclusively to POLITICO on a visit to Brussels before Thursday’s European Council summit, Guterres said: “If there are attacks either on Iran or from Iran on energy infrastructure, I think that there are reasonable grounds to think that they might constitute a war crime.”  Israel attacked Iran’s South Pars natural gas field on Wednesday, then Tehran launched a retaliatory strike on a major energy complex in Qatar. Beyond that, Guterres said the growing civilian casualties left both sides in the conflict open to possible war crimes charges. “I don’t see any difference. It doesn’t matter who targets civilians. It is totally unacceptable,” he said. Representatives for the U.S. and Israeli governments did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Guterres’ remarks. America and Israel began a bombing campaign on Feb. 28, killing Iran’s supreme leader and sparking ongoing retaliatory missile-and-drone attacks from Tehran on sites across the Middle East. Having called for deescalation in the region, Guterres appeared to blame Israel for driving the conflict forward, and called on U.S. President Donald Trump to persuade Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu to bring it to an end. “The war needs to stop … and I believe that it is in the hands of the U.S. to make it stop. It is possible [to end the war], but it depends on the political will to do it,” Guterres told host Anne McElvoy for an episode of the EU Confidential podcast publishing Friday morning. “I am convinced that Israel, as a strategy, wants to achieve a total destruction of the military capacity of Iran and regime change. And I believe Iran has a strategy, which is to resist for as much time as possible and to cause as much harm as possible. So the key to solve the problem is that the U.S. decides to claim that they have done their job. “President Trump will be able to convince … those that need to be convinced that the work is done. That the work can end,” Guterres added. The secretary-general also attributed America’s decision to launch strikes on Iran to Israel. “I have no doubt that this was something that corresponds to Israel’s strategy … to draw the United States into a war. That objective was achieved. But this is creating dramatic suffering in Iran, [and] in the region, even in Israel. And it is creating a devastating impact in the global economy and whose consequences are still too early to foresee. So, we absolutely must end this conflict,” he said. But finding an off-ramp might prove difficult, and relations between the U.N. and the Trump administration remain frosty.   Asked if he had spoken with Trump since the conflict began three weeks ago, Guterres responded emphatically: “No, no, no … I speak with those I need to speak to. But this is not a soap opera.” He claimed, however, to have been “in contact with all sides,” including with the Trump administration, since hostilities spread across the Gulf.  “It’s vital for the world at large that this war ends quickly,” Guterres said. “This is indeed spiraling out of control and the recent attacks represent an escalation that is extremely dangerous.” Trump said on his Truth Social site that the U.S. had not authorized the attack by Israel on the South Pars site, and that Israel had “violently lashed out,” raising questions about how much influence the U.S. has over its ally. “My hope is that the United States will be able to understand that this has gone too far,” Guterres said. The conflict was primarily benefitting Russia, Guterres added, with Moscow welcoming the distraction from its own war on Ukraine. “Russia is the biggest beneficiary of the Iran crisis,” Guterres said. “Russia is the country that is gaining more with what’s happening in this horrible disaster. Russia is already the winner.” Meanwhile, European leaders, including U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, have said they won’t be sending ships to the Persian Gulf in response to Trump’s appeal for help to open the Strait of Hormuz. France has said it will only contribute support vessels “when the situation is calmer.” Guterres applauded the restraint shown by the Europeans, despite Trump’s anger at their refusal to actively support the war or help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime artery that Iran has largely sealed off, driving up global energy prices. “I think these countries made their own reading of the situation, and I believe they took a decision not to get too much involved, knowing that the most important objective is the deescalation,” he said. Listen to the full episode of EU Confidential on Friday morning.

BRUSSELS — The EU’s 27 member countries are set to back a push to send more naval ships to the Middle East as conflict paralyzes shipping routes, but will insist on them operating strictly within the parameters of missions that predate the war in Iran. Presidents and prime ministers from across the bloc will meet in Brussels Thursday to discuss their response to the Iran crisis. In a draft statement being negotiated by ambassadors in advance of the talks — seen by POLITICO — the leaders show support for an increased naval presence in the region. “The European Council highlights the role of the EU maritime defensive operations EUNAVFOR ASPIDES and EUNAVFOR ATALANTA, and calls for their reinforcement with more assets,” reads the latest version of the text, dated March 17. However, the text introduces new language demanding that the vessels take part in the missions only “in line with their respective mandates.” The EU-led Aspides is confined to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, and was launched in 2024 in response to Houthi militant attacks on naval traffic travelling to and from Europe via the Suez Canal. Atalanta, meanwhile, patrols the east coast of Africa and the Indian Ocean to combat piracy. The Trump administration has urged European allies to send frigates to escort naval traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Energy prices have skyrocketed as a result of tankers being unable to cross the narrow waterway, which links oil- and gas-rich exporters like Saudi Arabia and Qatar to the global market. “I wonder what would happen if we ‘finished off’ what’s left of the Iranian Terror State, and let the Countries that use it, we don’t, be responsible for the so called ‘Strait?’ That would get some of our non-responsive ‘Allies’ in gear, and fast!!!,” U.S. President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on Wednesday. Ahead of the EU summit, a group of countries — Italy, Spain, Greece, Malta and Cyprus — have written to the bloc’s leadership warning of another potential maritime crisis caused by the Russian liquefied natural gas carrier Arctic Metagaz, which has been adrift in the Mediterranean since March 3. “The precarious condition of the vessel, combined with the nature of its specialised cargo, gives rise to an imminent and serious risk of a major ecological disaster in the heart of the Union’s maritime space,” the leaders of the coastal nations warned. “In this context, we look to the European Commission to facilitate the mobilisation and coordination of Member States and existing EU-level mechanisms, with the goal of ensuring their more efficient, better coordinated and faster response.”

BERLIN — Germany’s government rejected U.S. President Donald Trump’s demand that NATO allies help secure the Strait of Hormuz, declaring that the alliance had no place in the war. “This war has nothing to do with NATO. It’s not NATO’s war,” Stefan Kornelius, a spokesperson for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, told reporters in Berlin on Monday. “NATO is a defensive alliance, an alliance for the defense of its territory,” he added. Trump had warned NATO allies on Sunday they face a “very bad future” if they refuse to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, pressing Europe to support an American effort to reopen the key maritime corridor. The German government said it would not assist in that effort as long as the war rages on. “As long as this war continues, there will be no involvement, not even in an option to keep the Strait of Hormuz open by military means,” Kornelius said, adding that he was not aware of an official request by the U.S. government to Germany to take part in such a mission. “I would also like to remind you that the U.S. and Israel did not consult us before the war, and that Washington explicitly stated at the start of the war that European assistance was neither necessary nor desired,” Kornelius said.

U.S. President Donald Trump warned NATO allies they face a “very bad future” if they refuse to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, pressing Europe to support an American effort to reopen the key maritime corridor. In an interview with the Financial Times published Sunday, Trump said countries benefiting from oil shipments through the Gulf should help safeguard the waterway. The U.S. and Israel launched a war on Iran late last month, triggered regional retaliation from Tehran. The Iranian regime has moved to close the Strait of Hormuz in response, driving up oil prices around the world and aiming to create massive economic pressure on Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to fold. “It’s only appropriate that people who are the beneficiaries of the strait will help to make sure that nothing bad happens there,” Trump said. “If there’s no response or if it’s a negative response I think it will be very bad for the future of NATO.” Trump said allies could contribute naval assets such as minesweepers — vessels Europe has far more of than the U.S. “Whatever it takes,” he said when asked what help Washington expects. In recent days, he has namechecked China, France, Japan, South Korea and the U.K. as countries he expects to assist in the Gulf. The remarks revive Trump’s long-running criticism of NATO. “We’ve been very sweet,” he said, arguing the U.S. had helped European allies over Ukraine and now expects support in return. European governments have reacted cautiously to Trump’s persistent pressure to help him reopen the strait. Germany’s Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said he was “very skeptical” that expanding the EU’s naval mission would improve security. EU foreign ministers are meeting Monday in Brussels to discuss a push by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas to deploy additional ships to the bloc’s maritime mission. Trump also pressed China to help unblock the strait before a planned summit with President Xi Jinping later this month, warning his trip to Beijing could be delayed. The Strait of Hormuz carries roughly a fifth of global oil shipments, raising the stakes for European allies as Trump presses NATO to take a larger role in keeping the strait open.

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.”

The White House is considering waiving a century-old law that promotes the use of American vessels in maritime commerce, as the Trump administration faces rising fuel prices amid the ongoing war in Iran. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement that the administration may waive the Jones Act, a 1920 statute that requires cargo being moved by water between U.S. ports to be shipped on vessels that are built, owned and registered in the U.S. “In the interest of national defense, the White House is considering waiving the Jones Act for a limited period of time to ensure vital energy products and agricultural necessities are flowing freely to U.S. ports,” Leavitt said. “This action has not been finalized.” The development, which was first reported by Bloomberg News, comes as the White House faces growing political pressure over rising gas and oil prices, with Iran moving to choke off traffic in the critical Strait of Hormuz amid the U.S. and Israel’s ongoing war with the country. It also comes a day after the Trump administration announced it would release 172 million barrels of crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, joining more than two dozen member countries in the International Energy Agency’s biggest emergency oil release in history. The war has triggered the largest supply disruption in global oil market history, according to a Thursday report from the IEA, sending crude oil prices soaring to over $100 a barrel before later retreating. The Homeland Security secretary and the Defense secretary can request a waiver in specific circumstances that are in the “interest of national defense.” The federal government has in the past chosen to freeze the law in extreme circumstances that led to substantial supply disruptions, including Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Maria. Trump administration officials have repeatedly said the rise in fuel prices is a small price to pay for the success of the war, with Leavitt saying Sunday the spike is “a short-term disruption for a long-term gain” during an interview on Fox News. The administration believes it can withstand the political pressure from a surge in prices for as long as a month, POLITICO previously reported. Suspending the Jones Act, however, could anger American-based shipbuilding and shipping interests. Since the White House is signaling the waiver will be temporary, the move, however, would likely not have a significant impact on the U.S.’s relatively small shipbuilding industry, but a waiver “would probably have a small but useful impact on prices,” said Peter Harrell, who served as the White House’s senior director for international economics under the Biden administration. Iran has warned that the war could send oil prices as high as $200 a barrel if the war rages on, but Energy Secretary Chris Wright said that was “unlikely” in a Thursday interview on CNN. Ari Hawkins contributed to this report.

Governments and lobby groups in Italy, Ireland and Hungary are raising concerns over the continuing near-standstill in maritime freight transport in the Strait of Hormuz as the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran escalates. The strait, a major international waterway for oil, gas and fertilizers, has been a no-go zone for a week now, after Iran retaliated against a joint U.S.-Israeli strike and the conflict spilled into the surrounding region. The narrow stretch of water lies partly in Iranian territorial waters. Tehran has said the waterway technically remains open but warned that U.S. and Israeli vessels would be targeted, adding it “cannot guarantee the safety of ships from all countries.” “The attack on Iran has opened a Pandora’s box,” Irish Agriculture Minister Martin Heydon told the Irish Independent, warning that the surge in the price of fertilizers could hit at the worst time of the year, during planting season. The Middle East is also an important market for Irish food and drink exports. Heydon did not rule out government support packages for farms and food producers, but said it is too soon to talk about it. The disruption is also raising concerns in Italy, where the largest farmers’ lobby Coldiretti on Tuesday warned that “the disruption of trade routes linked to the war involving Iran is already causing serious damage to exports.” “The main concern is the markets of the Middle East, where the total value of Italian agri-food exports exceeds €2 billion,” Coldiretti wrote in a press release, adding that particular concern surrounds perishable products like fruits, vegetables or flowers. “The halt in maritime traffic in the Gulf comes at the peak of the flower export season,” added Coldiretti. Meanwhile, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, whose country goes to the polls next month, announced Monday that Hungary will renew fuel price caps “to protect Hungarian families, Hungarian entrepreneurs and Hungarian farmers” following what he described as an “international oil price explosion.”