Spain's Sanchez doubles down on stance against US-Israeli attack on Iran despite Trump's threats

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez on Wednesday doubled down on his opposition to the attack on Iran by the United States and Israel, warning that the conflict risked triggering a major global disaster.

Sanchez was responding after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to cut trade with Madrid over its position on the conflict and its refusal to allow U.S. aircraft to use jointly operated naval and air bases in southern Spain for the offensive against Tehran.

"We're not going to be complicit in something that's bad for the world, nor contrary to our values and interests simply to avoid reprisals from someone," Sanchez said in a televised address to the nation.

Sanchez, among the most outspoken critics of both Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said governments existed to improve people's lives and lashed out at leaders who "use the fog of war to hide their failure" at home.

"This is how humanity's great disasters start ... You cannot play Russian roulette with the destiny of millions," he said.

'NO TO THE WAR'

Tensions between the two NATO allies increased after Sanchez denounced the U.S. and Israeli bombings of Iran as reckless and illegal, while most other European nations have withheld direct critique of the attacks.

Israel has also criticised Sanchez, accusing him of "standing with tyrants" in Iran and Palestine.

The country has also refrained so far from involving itself in defensive operations, even as Britain, France, and Greece have sent armaments to Cyprus, which was struck by a drone on Monday, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer authorised use of UK bases for defensive strikes on Tehran.

Sanchez said the world could not solve its problems with conflicts and bombs.

"The position of the Spanish government can be summarised in four words: 'No to the war,'" he said, adding the stance was not naive but coherent.

Sanchez highlighted the negative knock-on effects of the Iraq war, from a rise in jihadist terrorism to soaring energy prices, to argue that the consequences of this attack on Iran were just as nebulous and that it would not lead to a more just international order.