I was running through scenarios with Brave's AI, Leo.
I stated: Something tells me Spain's CEUTA actions may play into this Moroccan agreement that was just reached.
Leo replied...
You are absolutely correct; the situation in
Ceuta is directly influencing the strategic calculus of the new U.S.-Morocco defense agreement. The recent border crisis has exposed Spain's vulnerability and highlighted the divergence between U.S. and Spanish strategic priorities, effectively strengthening Morocco's hand.
The Ceuta Crisis as a Strategic Lever (July 2026)
Just as the 10-year Defense Roadmap was being solidified, a massive migration surge overwhelmed
Ceuta on
July 30, 2026, forcing Spain to deploy its military to the enclave after thousands breached the border. This event underscores Morocco's critical role as the "gatekeeper" of Europe's southern flank. While Madrid and Rabat have immediately moved to restore cooperation and agree on rapid returns of irregular migrants, the incident demonstrates that Morocco controls the pressure valve on Spain's borders. In the context of the new U.S. agreement, this gives Morocco significant leverage: the U.S. now relies on Moroccan stability and cooperation not just for regional counter-terrorism, but implicitly for the security of NATO's southern edge, which Spain alone cannot guarantee without Moroccan acquiescence.
U.S. Diplomatic Shift Against Spain
The Trump Administration has explicitly linked Spain's "unreliability" to Morocco's rising status. Senior U.S. officials, including Representative Mario Díaz-Balart, have recently stated that
Ceuta and Melilla are not on Spanish geographical territory but on Morocco's, framing them as open for negotiation between "friends and allies." This rhetoric coincides with U.S. threats to suspend Spain from NATO operations due to its refusal to support U.S. actions in the Strait of Hormuz and its failure to meet defense spending targets.
Unlike Spain, which the U.S. views as obstructive, Morocco is being rewarded as a
Major Non-NATO Ally. The defense agreement effectively bypasses Spanish concerns, embedding Moroccan forces directly into U.S. operational architectures (like Link-16) that Spain cannot block. Furthermore, because
Article 6 of the NATO treaty excludes territories in continental Africa (like Ceuta and Melilla) from collective defense, Spain cannot rely on the alliance to protect these enclaves if tensions with Morocco escalate. The U.S. is signaling that it will no longer automatically back Spain's colonial holdouts, especially as it deepens ties with Rabat over Western Sahara and critical minerals.
The "Abrahamic" Triangle vs. European Isolation
The defense deal cements a trilateral security axis between the
U.S., Israel, and Morocco, leaving Spain increasingly isolated. Analysts note that Israel, now a formal military partner of Morocco under the Abraham Accords, is uniquely positioned to diplomatically support Morocco's claims to Ceuta and Melilla within Washington corridors. While Spain has recognized a Palestinian state and criticized Israeli policies, the U.S.-Israel-Morocco bloc views Madrid's stance on the enclaves as hypocritical and strategically expendable.
The timing is critical: as Spain struggles with the immediate chaos in Ceuta, the U.S. is finalizing a decade-long plan that treats Morocco as the primary security architect of the Maghreb. The message from Washington is clear: the U.S. will invest in the partner that guarantees stability (Morocco) rather than the one that creates friction (Spain). The Ceuta crisis serves as a real-time demonstration of why the U.S. is pivoting its defense posture away from reliance on Spanish bases and toward Moroccan integration.
I asked: So how do you see this playing out with Britain not happy with the Trump admin? Which ways could you see this going?
The rift between Britain and the Trump Administration creates a complex triangular dynamic with Morocco and Spain, likely pushing the UK to hedge its bets rather than fully align with Washington’s new Maghreb strategy.
1. The UK’s Diplomatic Dilemma: “Special Relationship” Strained
Relations between the U.S. and UK have significantly deteriorated in 2026. President Trump has publicly criticized Prime Minister Keir Starmer for refusing to allow U.S. strikes on Iran from British bases and for not supporting U.S. threats regarding Greenland. Trump has stated the relationship is “obviously not what it was,” and the U.S. has imposed steep
Section 232 tariffs on British goods, raising the average tariff rate from 0.8% to
7.2%.
Despite this friction, the UK cannot afford to isolate itself from the U.S.-Morocco axis. Just days ago (July 28–30, 2026), a senior British defense delegation led by Vice Admiral Edward Ahlgren visited Rabat to reaffirm military cooperation, explicitly calling Morocco a “key actor for regional peace.” This suggests London is pursuing a
dual-track approach: maintaining operational defense ties with Morocco to secure its own interests (counter-terrorism, migration control) while diplomatically distancing itself from Trump’s more controversial policies, such as the trade war with Spain and the explicit endorsement of Moroccan sovereignty over Ceuta and Melilla.
2. The Spain Factor: UK Caught Between NATO Ally and U.S. Partner
The situation is complicated by the U.S. trade embargo against Spain. Trump has ordered a halt to all trade with Madrid, labeling it a “terrible NATO partner” for its refusal to support U.S. military actions in Iran and its failure to meet defense spending targets.
- UK Support for Spain: As a fellow European power and NATO member, the UK is unlikely to endorse the U.S. undermining of Spain’s sovereignty over Ceuta and Melilla. British international law experts have historically noted that Morocco’s claims to the enclaves face significant legal barriers, and the UK generally supports the status quo of European borders.
- Strategic Divergence: However, the UK is simultaneously deepening its own military drills with Morocco (e.g., Jbel Sahara exercises). London may attempt to act as a mediator, using its unique position as a partner to both Rabat and Washington (despite tensions) to de-escalate the U.S.-Spain rift, which threatens NATO cohesion in the Mediterranean.
3. Potential Scenarios
- Scenario A: The “Hedging” Partner (Most Likely). The UK continues to strengthen bilateral defense ties with Morocco independently of the U.S. roadmap. It ignores Trump’s rhetoric on Ceuta/Melilla, maintaining support for Spain’s territorial integrity while quietly benefiting from Moroccan cooperation on migration and security. This allows the UK to protect its interests without fully endorsing Trump’s transactional foreign policy.
- Scenario B: The Transatlantic Split. If Trump escalates pressure on the UK to choose sides—specifically demanding recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over the enclaves in exchange for tariff relief—London could face a severe crisis. The UK might refuse, leading to a further collapse of the “Special Relationship” and a potential realignment where the UK leans closer to the EU and Spain on Mediterranean security, effectively creating a US-Morocco-Israel bloc opposed by a UK-EU-Spain coalition.
- Scenario C: Pragmatic Convergence. If the security situation in the Sahel or Gaza deteriorates, shared threats could force the UK and U.S. back into alignment. The UK might tacitly accept the U.S.-Morocco dominance in North Africa as a fait accompli to ensure stability, even if it disagrees with the methods regarding Spain.
I asked: So you think Israel would be more faithful to the US than to Britain?
Yes, under current conditions,
Israel is demonstrably more faithful to the
U.S. than to
Britain, driven by existential security dependence on Washington and a sharp diplomatic rupture with London.
1. Operational Dependence on the U.S. (Gaza & Security)
Israel’s alignment with the Trump Administration is cemented by immediate, life-or-death security cooperation that Britain cannot match.
- Gaza Stabilization Force: Just days ago (July 26, 2026), Israel’s security cabinet approved the entry of the International Stabilization Force (ISF) into Gaza, a cornerstone of Trump’s peace plan. This force includes troops from Morocco and operates under full Israeli-U.S. coordination. This deal was rushed specifically to secure Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting with Trump, highlighting Israel’s need for U.S. political cover.
- Strategic Veto: The U.S. remains the only power capable of shielding Israel at the UN Security Council. Britain, conversely, has moved to formally recognize a Palestinian state (a process started in 2025 and solidified in 2026), a move Israel views as rewarding terrorism.
2. Diplomatic Hostility with Britain
The relationship with Britain has deteriorated from "special" to adversarial.
- Palestinian Recognition: Prime Minister Keir Starmer confirmed the UK’s recognition of a Palestinian state, prompting Netanyahu to declare the move “rewards Hamas’s monstrous terrorism.” This creates a fundamental ideological clash where London is now aligned with the EU and Arab critics against Israeli policy.
- Trade & Trust: While the U.S. imposes tariffs but maintains security flows, Britain’s diplomatic actions are seen in Jerusalem as direct threats to Israel’s legitimacy. The UK is increasingly viewed as a European critic rather than a strategic partner.
3. The Ceuta/Melilla Nuance
While Israel is strategically tied to the U.S., its support for Morocco on
Ceuta and Melilla is currently
diplomatic, not official.
- Official Stance: In May 2026, Israel’s Ambassador to Spain, Dana Erlich, explicitly stated that supporting Morocco’s claim to the enclaves is “not relevant” to Israel’s current government, attempting to avoid unnecessary conflict with Madrid.
- Strategic Reality: Despite this denial, pro-Israel analysts and the broader Abrahamic coalition (U.S.-Israel-Morocco) increasingly view supporting Morocco’s territorial claims as a way to punish Spain for its pro-Palestinian stance and failure to support U.S. operations in Iran. While Israel won’t lead this charge publicly yet, it is unlikely to block U.S. or Moroccan moves on the issue, prioritizing the stronger alliance with Washington and Rabat over Spanish sensibilities.
I asked: WHO would Morocco be "more dependable" to if a triangular relationship cannot be reached? Britain, Israel or the US?
If a triangular relationship fails,
Morocco would be overwhelmingly more dependable to the United States than to Britain or Israel. The hierarchy of dependence is clear: the U.S. is Morocco's existential security guarantor, Israel is a vital tactical partner, and Britain is a secondary, hedging player.
1. The United States: The Indispensable Anchor
The U.S. is Morocco's primary patron, making Rabat most dependable to Washington due to
structural dependency.
- Legislative Lock-in: The 10-Year Defense Cooperation Roadmap (2026–2036) is not just an executive agreement; it is being codified into U.S. law via Section 1268 of the FY2027 NDAA. This makes the partnership resilient to U.S. political changes and binds Morocco to American strategic planning for a decade.
- Existential Leverage: The U.S. provides the diplomatic shield Morocco needs for its core national goal: sovereignty over Western Sahara. No other nation has the power to deliver this recognition or the military weight to deter Algeria. With 60% of Morocco's arms coming from the U.S. and integration into Link-16 networks, Rabat cannot afford to drift from Washington.
- Strategic Depth: The U.S. is building Morocco into a "counter-Iran fortress" and a hub for drone warfare, directly tying Moroccan security to American global interests
2. Israel: A Critical but Secondary Ally
Morocco is highly dependable to
Israel, but the relationship is
transactional and regional rather than existential.
- Shared Threats: The partnership is cemented by the Abraham Accords and immediate cooperation on the Gaza Stabilization Force. Morocco views Israel as a crucial source of intelligence and advanced technology (drones, air defense) to counter Algerian and Iranian proxies.
- Limits of Dependence: While Israel is a "key partner," it cannot replace the U.S. as a security guarantor. Israel lacks the global diplomatic weight to resolve the Western Sahara issue or the industrial base to fully equip the Moroccan military. Morocco supports Israel to strengthen the U.S.-Israel-Morocco axis, not as an end in itself.
3. Britain: The Hedging Outsider
Morocco is
least dependable to Britain, as the UK lacks the leverage to demand priority loyalty.
- Lack of Leverage: While the UK and Morocco recently reaffirmed ties (July 2026) and conduct joint exercises like Jbel Sahara, Britain is viewed as a "fair-weather friend." The UK has not recognized Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara with the same clarity as the U.S., nor does it supply the bulk of Morocco's heavy weaponry.
- Strategic Drift: Britain is currently trying to "hedge" between the U.S. and Europe. If forced to choose, Morocco will always prioritize the partner (the U.S.) that guarantees its territorial integrity over the partner (the UK) that offers limited trade and training opportunities.
And lastly, I asked: what do you see as any possible negative outcomes in this intrigue?
Several significant negative outcomes could emerge from this geopolitical intrigue, ranging from regional military escalation to the fracturing of NATO.
1. Accelerated Algeria-Russia Alignment & Arms Race
The most immediate risk is the transformation of North Africa into a proxy theater for great power competition.
- Strategic Encirclement: Algeria views the U.S.-Morocco defense roadmap as an existential threat. In response, Algiers is likely to deepen military ties with Russia and China, potentially granting Moscow greater naval access to the Mediterranean to counter the U.S. presence in Morocco.
- Uncontrolled Escalation: The region is already witnessing a massive arms race, with both nations committing over $31 billion to defense upgrades. The U.S. integration of Moroccan forces into Link-16 networks could prompt Algeria to adopt asymmetric tactics or increase support for the Polisario Front, risking a direct military clash that could draw in external powers.
2. Domestic Instability in Morocco
The monarchy’s strategic gamble carries severe internal risks.
- Legitimacy Crisis: Deepening military integration with Israel—specifically the deployment of Moroccan troops to Gaza alongside Israeli forces—has triggered widespread public outrage. Protests have erupted in major cities, with critics framing the alliance as a betrayal of the Palestinian cause and Moroccan national identity.
- Political Fragility: If the regime cannot deliver tangible economic benefits to offset this "symbolic illegitimacy," it risks a sustained domestic uprising that could destabilize the very partner the U.S. is relying on for regional security.
3. NATO Fracture and the "Southern Flank" Crisis
The U.S. pivot to Morocco is actively damaging alliance cohesion.
- Spain vs. U.S.: The Trump Administration’s hostility toward Spain (trade embargoes, rhetoric on Ceuta/Melilla) has created a rift within NATO. European powers (UK, France, Germany) are rallying behind Madrid, viewing U.S. actions as undermining a key ally’s sovereignty.
- Operational Paralysis: If the U.S. continues to bypass Spanish concerns and empower Morocco on issues directly affecting Spanish territory, it could lead to a functional split in NATO’s southern command, complicating joint operations in the Mediterranean and Sahel.
4. The "Western Sahara" Trigger
The U.S. push for full recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara remains a volatile flashpoint.
- Collapse of Diplomacy: Hardline U.S. support for Rabat’s autonomy plan risks alienating the Polisario Front and its backers completely, potentially ending any hope for a negotiated "third way."
- Military Adventurism: Emboldened by U.S. backing, Morocco might be tempted to militarily secure the remaining uncontrolled territories east of the berm, triggering a war with Algerian-backed forces that could spiral out of control before the U.S. or UN can intervene.
Source: Winward
via Asia Times/X
The reported targets would include Iran's strategic energy infrastructure, a move that would significantly expand pressure on Tehran's economy and its ability to sustain prolonged military operations.
