Iran's nuclear ambitions pose growing threat to Europe

Global Watch | 2026-03-12

As US and Israeli forces systematically dismantle Iranian nuclear sites and regime command structures in ongoing strikes that began on 28 February, the world has witnessed the high-stakes race to prevent Tehran from crossing the nuclear threshold.

A fully nuclear-armed Iran would have rendered such intervention far riskier, entrenching a regime that has already destabilized the Middle East through proxies and ballistic missiles.

The consequences for global security — and especially for the European Union — would have been catastrophic, extending far beyond the battlefield into energy markets, terrorist networks and mass population movements.

Nuclear shadow over Europe

Had Iran achieved breakout capability with weapons-grade uranium and delivery systems, the regime could have operated under a nuclear umbrella, emboldening its "Axis of Resistance" proxies to escalate attacks across the region with impunity.

Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and Egypt would almost certainly have accelerated their own nuclear programs, triggering the most dangerous proliferation cascade since the end of the Cold War.

The regime's deepening desperation, demonstrated by its record 2025 execution surge of over 2,000 people, makes Tehran more unpredictable and far less likely to exercise restraint in foreign policy or nuclear ambitions, directly amplifying these proliferation risks for Europe and the wider region.

Experts at the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and the Critical Threats Project have documented Iran's rapid reconstitution efforts after the 2025 strikes, including hidden enrichment activities at Natanz and Fordow that IAEA inspectors could no longer verify.

A nuclear Iran would have transformed these facilities from targets into protected assets, fundamentally altering the balance of power and raising the specter of nuclear blackmail against European energy routes through the Strait of Hormuz.

Brookings Institution senior fellow Constanze Stelzenmüller captured the long-term danger with stark clarity: "The Iranian regime has played a nefarious role in European security for a long time: it has supported terrorist networks, fed wars and civil strife in the Middle East that swept streams of refugees to Europe, and helped Russia pursue its brutal invasion of Ukraine with Shahed drones."

A nuclear shield would have multiplied these threats, making Tehran far harder to deter or contain.

Migration deluge for EU

The second-order effects on Europe's borders would have been equally severe.

A nuclear-armed regime confident enough to withstand external pressure could have prolonged proxy conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen, generating refugee flows on a scale dwarfing the 2015 crisis.

Security analysts warn that even partial regime collapse or sustained internal unrest following failed nuclear ambitions could send millions of Iranians — and secondary migrants from surrounding states — surging toward Turkey and then the EU's southern and eastern frontiers.

This danger is compounded by the regime's post-2025 crackdown: following the June "12-Day War", authorities arrested more than 21,000 people and carried out over 2,000 executions in 2025 alone, the highest rate since the 1980s, exposing profound internal fractures and a strategy of terror to maintain control.

An EU diplomat briefing on sensitive intelligence told Politico there is "concern that Iran can mount terrorist attacks in the EU", a risk that would only intensify if Tehran felt protected by nuclear weapons.

Cato Institute senior vice-president Alex Nowrasteh drew the Syria parallel: the "chaotic repercussions of such a massive refugee population disrupted the Middle East and Europe".

With Iran's population of 90 million, even a 25 percent exodus would increase the global refugee total by 75 percent, according to United Nations modelling cited in recent assessments.

Turkey, already a transit route for 1.5 million Iranians in past decades, would face overwhelming pressure, forcing secondary movements into Greece, Bulgaria and beyond.

European Commission officials are already preparing for spiking energy prices, supply-chain disruptions and the evacuation of EU citizens from Gulf states amid the current strikes.

A nuclear Iran would have locked these vulnerabilities in place, turning migration into a permanent pressure tool and straining the EU's already fragile political consensus on asylum and border security.

The joint US-Israeli campaign has bought critical time by degrading Natanz, missile bases and leadership structures that were accelerating toward weaponization.

Yet the underlying threat remains: without sustained pressure and robust non-proliferation diplomacy, the next attempt at nuclear breakout could succeed.

European capitals must now confront the uncomfortable truth that preventing an Iranian bomb is not merely an American or Israeli interest, it is a direct imperative for the EU's national security and social cohesion.