From JCPOA to Ukraine: Why Europe No Longer Holds a Determining Role

According to a New Vision report, Geneva has recently turned into a center for global developments. On one side, the Iran–US talks resumed, hosted at the Omani Embassy. On the other, the Swiss Foreign Ministry reported negotiations between Russia, the United States, and Ukraine. Regardless of the outcome of these talks, one reality is evident: Europe was not present in either of them.

While all participating parties had the opportunity to express their views and exert influence over the process, Europe was deprived of even the minimal role.

This absence was not accidental; rather, it reflects shifts in the balance of power and a redefinition of actors’ positions in an evolving world order.

Structural Misconduct and Distrust

Europe’s record in both the Iran and Russia files suggests a pattern of expecting maximum commitment from others without fully honoring its own obligations. In the case of the JCPOA, European parties not only failed to fulfill their economic commitments, but even their promises remained largely unmet. Faulty or halted implementation of certain provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, followed by political pressures, contributed to growing bilateral distrust.

In the case of Russia, from Moscow’s perspective, Europe’s extensive financial and military support for Ukraine, the blocking of Russian assets, and developments related to NATO expansion are viewed as violations of prior commitments.

As a result, Europe now faces a crisis of trust in both arenas — a crisis that manifests in its exclusion from decision-making processes. In diplomacy, where trust is the primary asset, a player accused of violating commitments is ultimately excluded from influence.

—

Security Dependence and the Decline of Strategic Independence

One of the root causes of the current situation lies in Europe’s historical dependence on the United States. Over the past eight decades, Europe’s security has largely relied on Washington’s support. This reliance gradually extended beyond security into political and economic dimensions.

Recent exchanges marked by economic pressure and dismissive rhetoric from the United States have demonstrated that, in sensitive moments, Europe’s independence in decision-making remains limited. Although European leaders have spoken about strengthening indigenous defense capabilities in forums such as Davos and the Munich Security Conference, the gap between rhetoric and structural reality remains visible.

Europe’s absence from the Geneva talks can be seen as a manifestation of this gap — the distance between claiming strategic autonomy and operating within a framework of continued dependence.

Continuing a Costly Path

Despite certain media efforts to portray a return to an independent role, evidence suggests that Europe continues along its previous trajectory — one characterized by political interventionism, costly alignments, and at times emotionally driven approaches. Unconditional support for certain regional actors, the adoption of unilateral positions, and diplomatic stances in international forums risk deepening polarization rather than restoring Europe’s influence.

In a new world order increasingly shaped by multipolarity and a more balanced distribution of power, success depends on the ability to build trust responsibly and reciprocally. If Europe intends to reclaim a central role in global equations, it must reassess its behavioral patterns. Otherwise, its exclusion from key decision-making arenas may become a lasting reality.