US–Iran war exposes NATO: Calls grow for public vote as alliance faces confidence crisis

A deepening rift within the NATO alliance has been thrust into public view following the U.S.–Iran war, intensifying calls across member states for a Brexit-style vote on whether to remain in the bloc. Mounting divisions between allies, coupled with declining public trust across Europe and North America, are fuelling demands for historic referendums that could redefine the future of the alliance.

The renewed scrutiny follows a tense White House meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, described by Rutte as “very frank” and “very open.” Behind closed doors, however, the message appeared far more divisive.

In a fiery post following the meeting, Trump declared that NATO had failed the United States during the recent Iran conflict, stating the alliance “wasn’t there when we needed them.” The remarks echo broader frustrations within his administration, which argues that American taxpayers shoulder a disproportionate share of the alliance’s defense burden.

The criticism has reignited long-standing tensions. During his first presidency, Trump repeatedly described NATO as “obsolete” and unfair to the United States, arguing that other member states underfund their military commitments while relying heavily on American support.

Criticism of NATO is not confined to the United States. A range of political figures across member states have expressed skepticism or outright opposition to the alliance:

• Ron Paul has long argued NATO is unnecessary in the post-Cold War world.
• In France, Marine Le Pen has proposed withdrawing from NATO’s integrated military command, while Jean-Luc Mélenchon has called for a full exit.
• German politician Sahra Wagenknecht has criticised NATO for escalating tensions, particularly with Russia.
• Italy’s former prime minister Giuseppe Conte has raised concerns about militarisation and defense spending.
• Hungarian leader Viktor Orbán has frequently clashed with NATO positions, especially regarding Russia.
• Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has similarly diverged from alliance consensus on several geopolitical issues.
• Former Greek prime minister Alexis Tsipras has criticised NATO’s role in regional conflicts.
• These voices reflect a broader unease about NATO’s direction, purpose, and costs in a changing geopolitical landscape.

Across NATO member states, citizens are increasingly questioning the alliance’s value. Polling trends suggest declining confidence in countries such as Turkey, Greece, and Spain, with rising skepticism in Germany, France, Canada, Sweden, and Slovakia.

Younger voters, in particular, appear more reluctant to support overseas military commitments and rising defense expenditures funded by taxpayers. As a result, political movements in France, Italy, Spain, Greece, and Germany are beginning to propose national referendums on NATO membership—mirroring the 2016 Brexit, when the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union.

Proponents of a public vote argue that NATO contributes to the escalation of global conflicts, places pressure on domestic budgets through defense spending, and no longer reflects modern geopolitical realities. They also contend that citizens—who ultimately fund the alliance—should have a direct say in whether their countries remain members.

Recent tensions, including disagreements over U.S and Israel led military attacks against Iran and the subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz, have intensified these debates as several NATO countries resisted US calls for deeper military intervention in Iran.

Comparisons to Brexit are increasingly unavoidable. While there is no formal mechanism for a NATO-wide referendum, it is obvious that any such decisions while at national level will potentially trigger a domino effect across member states.