Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1411892693

The strange detention of EU diplomats returning from Tehran

What happened to the men coming back from JCPOA renewal talks is embarrassing and troubling for its implications.

Analysis | Europe

On the morning of May 13, Enrique Mora, the political director of the European External Action Service (EEAS), was briefly detained in the Frankfurt airport by the German police upon his return from Tehran, where he traveled in an effort to salvage the faltering nuclear agreement with Iran, known as JCPOA. 

The head of the EEAS Iran Task Force Bruno Scholl, who accompanied Mora, was similarly retained, as was EU Ambassador to the UN in Vienna Stephan Klement. Noting that he was carrying a Spanish diplomatic passport, Mora pointed to a possible violation by the German authorities of the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations. According to the diplomat, no explanation was given for their detentions, and his phones and passport were taken for examination by the police.

Reports say the three men were held separately for 40 minutes before they were sent on their way back to Brussels.

For their part, the police said the detention was due to “IT-based indications, not related to the individuals.” According to this Politico account, “one explanation circulating among EU officials was that the travel patterns of the diplomats, who had to rebook their flights back to Europe several times due to a fluid schedule in Tehran, triggered an automatic alert with the border police, who failed to take into account the identity of the travelers.”

While Mora's boss, the EU high representative for foreign policy Josep Borrell, sought to downplay the incident and emphasize that he is “in contact” with the German authorities, Mora decided to take it public.

“Retained by the German police at the Francfort (sic) airport on my way to Brussels, back from Teheran. Not a single explanation,” Mora tweeted on Friday morning. “An EU official on an official mission holding a Spanish diplomatic passport. Took out my passport and my phones.”

Indeed, what happened in Frankfurt is highly unusual and embarrassing for the EU and its efforts to play a serious role in international affairs.

It is possible, although improbable, that Mora's retention was simply due to a mistake by the border police in the airport. But he is a well-known individual, a top EU diplomat traveling with a diplomatic passport of a EU member state. It is inconceivable that the police in Frankfurt — a major international transport hub — might be unaware of the conventions guiding diplomatic immunity. 

That raises a number of troubling questions. Why would German authorities act in this way, given that Germany is a member of the European trio (along with Britain and France) of parties to the JCPOA that pledged their commitment to save the agreement, precisely the mission with which Mora is tasked?  

When a member state treats a top EU official in such a derogatory way, it inevitably raises questions about the unity within the EU — an asset that the EU officials are willing to emphasize as they deal with external threats, such as the Russian aggression in Ukraine, for example.

Such incidents also greatly undermine the EU's relations with third party countries. Events in Frankfurt obviously did not go unnoticed in Tehran. The fact that Mora's phone was temporarily confiscated no doubt raised concerns that it might have been compromised. This further damages the bloc's credibility — particularly given the sensitivity of Mora's mission in Tehran.

What happened in Frankfurt early on May 13, on the face of it, bears the hallmarks of potential diplomatic sabotage at a particularly sensitive time of negotiations with Iran. German government owes a thorough explanation to its own citizens and its partners in the EU.

This article reflects the personal views of the author and not necessarily the opinions of the S&D Group or the European Parliament.   


Hadrian/Shutterstock
Analysis | Europe
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.