European Far Right Faces Division Amid Trump’s Iran War
The conflict ignited by US and Israeli strikes targeting Iran’s leadership has thrown European far-right factions into disarray. As the war unfolds, nationalist parties across the continent are struggling to align their rhetoric with the realities of the situation, leading to fractured positions and uncertain stances.
For many far-right groups, the challenge lies in reconciling their support for Donald Trump with the potential fallout of the war. While some enthusiastically back Trump’s pro-Israel policies and anti-Islamic views, they now face pressure to address the consequences of the strikes, such as rising energy costs and displacement of migrants.
Hungary’s Fidesz Treads Carefully
Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party has been notably quiet on the Iran strikes. Orbán, who previously praised Trump as a “peacemaker” for his actions in Gaza, refrained from either condemning or endorsing the attacks. In a recent interview with Hungary’s ATV, he framed the strikes as the “final elimination and closure of a previous, unresolved focal point,” suggesting they are not a new war but a conclusion to an ongoing issue.
“Bombing Iran is not a fresh war, but rather the final elimination and closure of a previous, unresolved focal point.”
This approach reflects Orbán’s broader strategy to position himself as a mediator between East and West, while also criticizing the EU’s role in the Ukraine conflict. His silence has sparked debate within his party, with some members wary of aligning too closely with US and Israeli objectives.
Italy and Germany Weigh Diplomacy Over War
Italy’s League party, led by Matteo Salvini, has long championed Trump’s foreign policy. Yet, the Iran strikes have forced them to acknowledge the delicate balance between supporting Trump and addressing the war’s domestic implications. Paolo Borchia, the League’s delegation head in the European Parliament, told Euronews, “We always prefer the diplomatic way,” highlighting the tension in their stance.
“We always prefer the diplomatic way.”
Germany’s AfD party, meanwhile, has openly warned of the war’s risks. AfD leaders Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla stated that the “renewed destabilisation of the Middle East is not in Germany’s interest and must be brought to an end.” Their MEP, Tomasz Fröhlich, added, “A further collapse of Iran would be catastrophic, unleashing massive migration waves, severe energy price shocks, and a cascade of other collateral damage that would inevitably burden our own population.”
“A further collapse of Iran would be catastrophic, unleashing massive migration waves, severe energy price shocks, and a cascade of other collateral damage that would inevitably burden our own population.”
Fröhlich called for pragmatic measures, such as recommitting to coal and nuclear energy, and opposing the deployment of German troops in the region. This reflects a growing concern among some far-right groups about the economic and social ramifications of the war.
Belgium and the Czech Republic Question US Influence
Similarly, Belgium’s Flemish Interest party highlighted the energy and migration consequences of the conflict during a parliamentary debate. They drew parallels to the unintended effects of Western interventions in Libya and Syria, urging caution in backing US-led actions. Czechia’s ANO party also showed hesitation, balancing their admiration for Trump with fears that the war could exacerbate energy costs—a key issue in the country.
France and Others Remain Critical
The French National Rally (RN) has been more vocal in its skepticism. Having previously questioned US strikes on Venezuela, the RN now agrees with President Macron that the Iran attacks were conducted “outside the framework of international law.” Pierre-Romain Thionnet, an RN MEP, argued, “It should be up to the Iranian people to change the government, take power, and ensure a transition. A change imposed from the outside—especially through air bombings alone—has no historical example of success.”
“It should be up to the Iranian people to change the government, take power, and ensure a transition. A change imposed from the outside—especially through air bombings alone—has no historical example of success.”
Meanwhile, parties like Spain’s Vox, the Netherlands’ Freedom Party, and Nigel Farage’s Reform UK have embraced Trump more openly, tailoring their messages to domestic audiences. This divergence has made it increasingly difficult for far-right groups in the European Parliament to agree on a unified position, despite claims by Patriots for Europe (PfE) and Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN) that they allow national delegations autonomy on the issue.
Internal discussions reveal that the topic remains sensitive, with some factions still grappling with how to reconcile their support for Trump with the potential consequences of the war. The conflict over Iran could signal a pivotal shift in the relationship between Trump and European far-right movements, testing their ability to maintain cohesion in the face of ideological divides.
