On his way to the Munich Security Conference, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s jet had to make a quick U-turn one hour into the journey due to a shattered windscreen.
On Thursday evening, the nation’s top diplomat, his top staff, and the traveling press made their way back to Andrews Air Force Base, which is located close to Washington, DC.
However, the news was already well out of the air despite the mid-flight fear. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shocked America’s allies in Europe with a speech outlining what many perceived as a number of compromises Ukraine would need to make in order to sign any peace agreement mediated by President Trump with Russia.
Hegseth stated that it was “unrealistic” to believe that Ukraine could regain its sovereign territory that Russia had taken, as well as its demand to join NATO, and that European troops, not American ones, should maintain the peace.
The speech was criticized by critics, including some Republicans in Washington, who said that it offered Ukraine no leverage before any talks could begin. They said that the US was giving in to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt, who co-chairs the think tank European Council on Foreign Relations, stated, “It’s definitely an innovative approach to a negotiation to make very major concessions even before they have started.”
- Ukraine end game: What each side wants from a peace deal
- Ukraine in maps: Tracking the war with Russia
Hegseth retracted some of his remarks the next day. He explained that Trump still had every option available to him as leverage between Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky, the president of Ukraine.
“What he decides to allow or not allow is at the purview of the leader of the free world, President Trump,” Hegseth stated. He did, however, add that he had been “simply pointing out realism” and denied that he had made any excessive concessions to Moscow.
Rubio’s officials were briefing him on his personal priorities for the trip in Munich, but the plane’s breakdown delayed his arrival.
The goal of the United States would be a “just and lasting peace” where European nations would lead in creating a “durable security framework”, they said.
In order to guarantee their nations’ full participation in any peace talks pertaining to Ukraine, European leaders are scheduled to convene in Paris on Monday for urgent discussions.
There was no indication that the US secretary of state had set boundaries for Ukraine, unlike the defense secretary. Vice-President JD Vance then appeared to contradict Hegseth, who had stated that no US troops would be sent to Ukraine, by stating that the US may use “military tools of leverage” to pressure Russia into making a settlement in the German city.
The consequences of Hegseth’s speech were presented to President Trump later in the White House, along with the analysis of a Republican senator who called it a “rookie mistake” that could have been written by a pro-Putin commentator.
Did Trump know Hegseth was about to say something? “Generally speaking, yeah, generally speaking I was,” the president stated. He said, “I’ll talk to Pete, I’ll find out.”
Some of the first significant insights into Trump’s changing stance on one of the most important issues facing him—Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and his promise to end the war—as well as how his administration is developing and communicating its foreign policy were provided by the three days of back and forth.
Despite Hegseth’s efforts to retract his remarks, Trump’s extensive statement about an apparently cordial phone conversation with Putin to begin talks with Ukraine and Hegseth’s speech sent shockwaves across European capitals.
“Any quick fix is a dirty deal,” stated Kaja Kallas, the head of European Union foreign policy, in reference to the possibility of a US-led agreement with Russia that may marginalize Ukraine’s voice.
Then there is the issue of how Trump’s administration conveyed US foreign policy. His senior officials appeared to have attempted to interpret and convey Trump’s opinions in Munich, but their efforts produced occasionally explosive and inconsistent pronouncements, some of which were later partially mitigated or overturned.
- JD Vance’s blast at Europe ignores Ukraine and defence agenda
- Trump wants peace. Ukrainians fear what that might look like
It is unclear at this time how much of this is due to a new but disorganized administration still defining its positions for internal use, rather than a purposeful aspect of a presidency less concerned with officials using rhetoric freely, even if it causes some confusion, as long as they stick to his final word.
During his first term, Trump fired or resigned a number of high-profile officials who disagreed with him, including a secretary of state, two defense secretaries, and three national security advisers.
His willingness to demonstrate devotion has been a defining feature of his appointments more often this time. Pete Hegseth, a former National Guard major and Fox News weekend host who has no prior experience leading a government, military, or agency, fully supports Trump’s philosophy and goals.
Three Republican senators voted against his appointment, which was hotly debated and ultimately scraped through the confirmation process. The outcome was tied 50/50, with JD Vance giving the decisive vote.
Trump stated this week that he was “okay” with the concept of excluding Ukraine from NATO negotiations, stating that it was “not practical.”
Hegseth’s remarks hardly contradicted the president’s stance; rather, they amplified it for a crowd eager to support rather than undermine Ukraine’s negotiation stance.
For those impacted, the difficulty is in determining the exact stance of US foreign policy. Uncertainty is one of its characteristics. Donald Trump’s use of the “madman” philosophy of foreign policy, which is sometimes ascribed to former Republican President Richard Nixon, may be intentional.
This implies that one approach to keep allies close while exerting pressure on enemies is to be strong but unpredictable. It would also explain why some of his own staffers seem to be acting outside of Trump’s widely accepted views.
However, in a world that is already violent and unpredictable, this theory also bears a significant chance of errors or miscalculations, as its name implies.
Confusion and contradiction were also present in Trump’s recent plans for Gaza, which called for removing the Palestinian population in order to establish the “Riviera of the Middle East” under US control.
Trump then reaffirmed that it would be “permanent” with no right of return, even though his officials seemed to want to correct some of his initial statements, such as that it would only be a “temporary relocation.”
Regarding Rubio, who believes that the State Department should have the largest say in Trump’s decisions, his remarks at Munich were already overshadowed by those of his colleagues.
While the majority of the headlines were heading elsewhere, his smaller, replacement plane eventually touched down in Europe with its windscreen intact but without the press pool.
