There was little more than the window dressing of a farewell tour in President Bush's trip to Europe earlier this month. Most significantly, he failed to come away with a clear idea of where Europe stands on Iran. It is a pity, but it is not surprising. At the end of his second mandate an American president progressively loses his political influence, becoming a semi irrelevant actor on the political scene of his country. This element coupled with the entrenched European indecision in facing the Iranian issue undermined the results of a trip that otherwise could have had a very positive effect on the transatlantic alliance.

The president had a full agenda. The visit, which began on June 9, was meant to strengthen the transatlantic alliance, build a united front to face the threat of a nuclear Iran and encourage a stronger European commitment in Afghanistan. Bush participated in the annual EU-US summit in Brdo, Slovenia, and met with the leaders of Germany, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom. He also briefly visited Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican.

It all felt like Bush's grand farewell to America's best allies in Europe. The concerns and disagreements over the invasion of Iraq in 2003 seemed finally behind us. We heard statements on the importance of the transatlantic alliance. The economic relationship between the United States and Europe was wholly acknowledged. There were pronouncements over the need for better cooperation on climate change, Iraq and Afghanistan. The allies even managed to find common ground on stricter sanctions for Iran to stop its nuclear enrichment program. But something was missing. As noted by the European and American press alike, President Bush's visit did not spark much interest among the European public. In stark contrast with his previous trips to Europe, this trip was largely ignored by the European left, even in Germany--were nobody is denied a good rally. The lame duck doesn't have much more to offer: the European allies are now focused on the future.

Bush lost his credibility with the war in Iraq, an enterprise that was poorly explained and badly executed. As a result, he has not been able to stand up to Iran with the resolution that he would have liked. Europe stood aside, hoping to dodge the issue, or if necessary tackle it later on with the cooperation of a less unilateral American president. However, Europeans who believe a change in the White House will bring about a radical change in American foreign policy is bound to be disappointed. The 9/11 terrorist attacks have changed America's perception of its role in the international system and vis a vis its European allies. The conviction that America is a benevolent hegemon which should defend its position of supremacy doesn't belong only to the Bush administration. It is shared across the American political spectrum. Over the next half century, the United States will be able to take and implement decisions without the consent of the international community and outside the multilateral system that Europe would like to build. An administration less influenced by the neoconservatives will pay more attention to public diplomacy and cultivate better its allies. But after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, American security will be the first priority of any American president even by use of a preemptive strike. Indeed, Barack Obama and John McCain both accept the possibility to militarily attack Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons, no matter what the international community would say about it.

Thus the Iranian issue hangs over the transatlantic alliance. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently rejected the EU's offer to suspend Iran's nuclear enrichment program in exchange for better economic and political relations. The offer was supported by the United States, Russia and China. It's likely that more UN sanctions will follow. However the question that remains unanswered is the same that since 2003 rings in Washington: if Iran were about to develop nuclear weapons and America would decide to attack where would the Europeans stand?

Hopefully the next American president will push Europe to take a clearer stand on Iran, including European willingness to commit to military action. Otherwise, when the crisis with Iran breaks out, the stability of the transatlantic relationship will come under pressure never experienced before, not even under President Bush. And this time we won't even be able to blame the neocons.

Ida Garibaldi is a visiting research fellow at AEI.