For decades, the Iranian regime has waged a shadow war against the United States and its allies.
NATO countries have not been spared.
From Beirut to Baghdad, from terror plots in Europe to deadly drone strikes in the Mideast, Iran, and its proxies have spilled Western blood with alarming consistency.
President Donald Trump understood that reality – and he acted.
While previous administrations often hesitated, President Trump made clear that American strength, not appeasement, is the only language regimes like Iran understand.
His willingness to confront threats head-on, including decisive military action alongside Israel, sent a message the world could not ignore: the United States will defend its people and its interests.
But when that moment came, NATO largely chose to sit on the sidelines.
The historical record is undeniable.
In 1983, Iran-backed Hezbollah bombed the Beirut barracks, killing 241 American service members and 58 French paratroopers.
During the Iraq War, Iranian-backed militias were responsible for at least 603 U.S. troop deaths, with coalition allies like the British also suffering losses tied to Tehran’s influence.
This was not isolated. It was a decades-long pattern of aggression.
Iran mastered proxy warfare – arming terrorist groups while avoiding direct accountability. NATO troops in Iraq and Afghanistan faced weapons supplied by Tehran. European nations dealt with assassination plots and terror networks on their own soil.
Then came the 2026 escalation.
Iranian drones and missiles struck bases hosting NATO personnel.
American troops were killed in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
A French officer was killed in Iraq. British and Italian facilities were targeted.
NATO-linked sites across the region came under fire.
This was direct aggression, a direct attack on the West.
President Trump recognized the stakes.
His leadership, alongside Israel, aimed not just to respond – but to dismantle the regime’s capacity to threaten the world and to give the Iranian people a chance at freedom.
Yet NATO refused to act.
Despite allied casualties, despite clear evidence of Iranian aggression, NATO leadership declined to engage beyond limited defensive support.
Secretary General Mark Rutte praised the strikes – but emphasized there were "no plans" for NATO involvement.
Article 5 was never even seriously considered.
Why? Because too many European leaders decided this was "not their war."
Germany dismissed it as unrelated to NATO.
France raised procedural objections.
Others pointed to domestic politics, legal concerns, or fear of escalation.
But this is the hard truth: when NATO members are attacked and the alliance does nothing, what is the alliance worth?
President Trump has long raised this question – and events have proven him right.
For years, he warned that NATO was becoming a one-way street, with the United States carrying the burden while others hesitate when it matters most.
The response to Iran only reinforces that concern.
Moving forward, President Trump – and any America First leader – must take a hard look at our relationship with NATO.
Alliances should be built on mutual defense, not selective participation.
If NATO cannot act when its own members are attacked, then the United States must reconsider how much it invests – financially, militarily, and strategically – in that alliance.
The goal is not to abandon allies, but to demand accountability.
Peace is preserved through strength and unity.
President Trump showed that strength. NATO showed hesitation.
Now is the time to decide which path will define the future of the free world.
From 2007-2010, Mark Vargas served as a civilian in the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense, traveling to Baghdad, Iraq, 14 times. Follow Mark on Twitter: @markavargas. Read more Mark Vargas Insider articles — Click Here Now.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.