U.S. President Donald Trump on the 3rd (local time) took the hard-line step of threatening to cut off trade with Spain after it refused to allow the use of military bases essential to strikes on Iran. It was a warning that he would sever trade networks between countries for failing to cooperate with U.S. military objectives.
According to major outlets, Trump sat down at the White House with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and unleashed a barrage of crude insults at Spain's leadership. He even publicly ordered Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who was present, to "immediately cut off every trade transaction tied to Spain." He openly voiced resentment, saying, "Spain is the only North Atlantic Treaty Organization member that refuses to follow my directive to raise defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product."
He also shouted that "the president has powerful authority to do anything against Spain, including an embargo." It was classic Trump-style diplomacy, seeking to use trade tariffs as leverage to punish an ally that would not align with U.S. security policy. Merz backed Trump, telling Spain, which also rejects the goal of increasing defense spending, that it "must meet the standard for allied security."
The United States and Israel launched large-scale military attacks on Iran starting on the 28th of last month. To conduct the operation, the United States asked to use Naval Station Rota and Morón Air Base in southern Spain. But Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez flatly rejected the request, calling the two countries' use of force a perilous intervention that clearly violates international law.
The Spanish government has made clear that control over U.S. bases lies with Spain and is holding to its pacifist principles. Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares appeared on local television and said, "Military bases in Spain do not comply with the U.N. Charter," adding, "Spain cannot cede a single inch of its territory for operations that go beyond existing agreements with the United States." Defense Minister Margarita Robles added, "U.S. operations must take place within the bounds of widely recognized international law." In the end, the United States, pressed for time, hastily pulled out 15 military aircraft, including aerial tankers prepositioned in Spain, and moved them to bases such as Ramstein Air Base in Germany. Spain's left-leaning government also irritated Washington in 2024 by imposing a blanket ban on ships carrying weapons to Israel from docking at Spanish ports.
If trade ties actually snap, the side that would take a hit is the United States, which runs a trade surplus with Spain. Data show that as of last year, bilateral trade totaled about $47 billion, with the United States running a surplus of roughly $4.8 billion. The United States exports large volumes of energy resources such as crude oil and liquefied natural gas to Spain. If an embargo is imposed, Spain would have to urgently shift import routes to Africa or the Middle East, which could drive up short-term energy procurement costs.
Spain supplies the U.S. market with world-class olive oil and fine wine, along with agricultural foods, pharmaceuticals and specialized machine parts. If those import channels are blocked, U.S. consumers will have to open their wallets wider at supermarkets without perfect substitutes. U.S. corporations would also be left to shoulder higher procurement expenses for chemical and electronic components. After Trump's remarks, the Spanish government said it "has secured sufficient funding and systems to buffer potential internal shocks and support affected industries."
Experts said that, contrary to Trump's thinking, there are clear legal limits to making a trade cutoff with Spain a reality. Spain is part of the European Union's single market, in which 27 member states freely exchange goods and set joint trade policy. Even if the United States tries to erect a tariff wall targeting Spain alone, corporations could reroute exports through neighboring countries, leaving no effective way to stop it. Even if the United States were to unilaterally carry out trade retaliation, the impact could go beyond temporary gyrations in the trade balance and ultimately inflict structural, catastrophic damage by shattering its own traditional values-based alliance system with Europe.
Peter Shane, a New York University School of Law professor, told Reuters, "It is hard to see how being denied permission to use an air base to attack Iran constitutes an abnormal and extraordinary threat to U.S. national security or foreign policy."