Is the EU doing enough in the Red Sea?

BRUSSELS – Trump officials have lashed out at European allies for not pulling their fair share in protecting shipping in the Red Sea. Are they right?

When the US conducted strikes against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen a week ago in retaliation for attacks on shipping in the Red Sea, the Trump administration presented it as a key strategic goal.

According to the transcripts of a group chat on Signal featuring Trump administration officials, published by The Atlantic, however, a key concern of the officials was whether America’s European allies "deserved" help to keep the vital global trade route free.

They accused Europe of "free-loading" and questioned whether it should be the US "bailing Europe out again".

Why the Red Sea is key

Since November 2023, Houthi rebel attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea have dramatically disrupted global trade along the shortest marine trade route between Europe and Asia.

The attacks, the Houthi rebels have said, were conducted in solidarity with Palestinians over Israel’s war with Hamas militants in Gaza.

As they control Yemen’s Red Sea coastline, a key maritime choke point, the narrow passage of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait - which connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea - has been the most vulnerable to disruption.

Commercial ships and oil tankers have largely avoided the Red Sea, forced instead to take costly alternative routes around Africa.

Tensions have since caused a significant fall in goods passing through the Suez Canal (by around 53%) and Bab el-Mandeb Straits (by around 60%), according to global trade data, with ships forced to take the long way around the southern tip of Africa (up by 65%).

According to a recent report by the US Defense Intelligence Agency, the attacks have affected at least 85 countries and at least 29 major energy and shipping companies.

‘European freeloading’

An account attributed to US Vice President JD Vance stated that “3% of US trade runs through the Suez” while “40% of European trade does,” implying that keeping the route open would benefit others more than the American side.

"I just hate bailing Europe out again," Vance reportedly stated in the chat, discussing Trump administration plans to bomb Houthi rebels. Vance also reported added such strikes would mainly benefit Europe, which should take care of them itself.

“Unfortunately, those comments, purely on the substance, are not wrong - it's a vital interest of Europe, much more than of the United States,” Sven Biscop, Director of the Egmont Institute, told Euractiv.

What Washington is right about is a history of European non-participation in US strikes against Yemen’s Houthis.

Early last year, when the US, together with Britain, carried out strikes against Yemen's Houthi forces after the Biden administration vowed to protect shipping in the Red Sea, not all European allies chose to back the strikes.

Italy, Spain and France refrained from participation, citing fear of a broader regional escalation.

The Netherlands provided logistical and intelligence support, while several European countries, including Germany and Denmark, signed a joint statement defending the attacks but warned of further action.

In the sea, the picture is more nuanced.

After the Houthis started their attacks, Washington, under Biden, established a coalition of the willing, known as Operation Prosperity Guardian, with ships, personnel, and intelligence from more than twenty countries – including European countries Britain, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, and Spain - to help secure the Red Sea.

Contrary to the US-led coalition, the EU launched in February last year a separate, "purely defensive" Red Sea naval mission (Aspides) to provide escort to commercial ships and defend them against strikes and captures.

A range of EU countries – including France - had stressed they were unwilling to come under U.S. command, but would see the protection of shipping lanes as complimentary to US-UK strikes.

Many EU governments at the time had feared that their involvement in any military action in the Red Sea would contribute to a regional escalation with Iran.

EU ships on the ground

Asked about The Atlantic's revelations on how Trump's team thinks, several EU officials acknowledged that the heavy lifting is left to the US. but emphasised not to dismiss EU efforts.

According to data provided to Euractiv by its headquarters, the EU's Aspides naval mission said it had ensured the safe transit of more than 700 merchant vessels, of which 410 ships have received close protection, including active escort services and surveillance.

“The core task of protecting merchant ships remains strictly defensive in nature, based on international law, any response will always come as a consequence of an attack and will be necessary, proportionate, and limited to international sea or airspace,” a spokesperson for the EU's Aspides told Euractiv.

Asked whether there had been any US requests for direct cooperation, the spokesperson said,“ Aspides is not conducting and won’t plan to conduct any strike on land - our actions are de-escalatory.”

Since the Aspides' mandate had been renewed only last month for another year, there were no discussions to change its mandate, according to two EU officials.

“We have many times highlighted to Brussels that in order to protect the original number of ships using this passage, we definitely need more ships (…), but it is up to member states to decide the future,” the spokesperson said.

“That the mission is purely defensive is not necessarily bad in itself,” Biscop said, arguing it was a legitimate choice whether to defend ships or offensively attack the Houthis.

“But for its defensive role, it is still far too small, because with those few ships in hand, it is not enough to secure the shipping,” he added.

Quid pro quo?

An account attributed to US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz in the leaked chats noted that while it would definitely “have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes,” Trump had requested “to determine how to compile the cost associated and levy them on the Europeans.”

It remains unclear what compensation Washington might have sought from its European allies for the strikes in Yemen.

Asked whether US officials had been in touch regarding the issue, an EU spokesperson told Euractiv that there have been "no requests for direct cooperation to our knowledge".

However, the EU spokesperson said Aspides "regularly exchanges information with the US-led Operation Prosperity Guardian and other maritime actors in the region."

Biscop said that while he believes US officials did not have a specific addressee in mind, it would fit the overall narrative of Europeans not pulling their fair share and "having to pay up."

“Strictly speaking, no European country requested them, it serves our interest, but to whom are they going to send the invoice?,” Biscop said.

[AW]