Rubio Heads To Munich Conference, Bratislava, And Budapest As Allies Look For Reassurance

WASHINGTON -- The top US diplomat, Marco Rubio, will travel to Germany later this week to lead a high-level delegation to the annual Munich Security Conference before heading on to Slovakia and Hungary, the State Department has announced.

The trip comes at a pivotal moment, as Washington and its European allies grapple with deepening mistrust over security, trade, and the fundamental future of the transatlantic alliance -- tensions that are expected to loom large over discussions in Munich.

Russia's war against Ukraine, which will soon enter its fifth year since the start of the full-scale invasion in 2022, is expected to be a major topic of discussion at the conference, as is the tension surrounding Iran.

Rubio’s attendance at the February 13–15 conference will be followed by a diplomatic swing through Bratislava and Budapest on February 15–16, underscoring the administration’s focus on Central Europe at a time of strategic uncertainty.

In Slovakia, he is expected to meet senior officials to advance regional security cooperation and nuclear energy projects, the State Department said; in Hungary, the focus shifts to bilateral ties and peace efforts aimed at resolving global conflicts.

The centerpiece of Rubio's trip may be his scheduled Munich address on February 14, which is expected to come under intense scrutiny -- particularly in the shadow of last year’s conference, where Vice President JD Vance's speech made waves.

At the time, Vance’s remarks -- which accused European leaders of suppressing free speech and failing to manage migration -- left a lingering sense of apprehension in Brussels and beyond.

That unease is reflected in the Munich Security Conference’s annual report, written by organizers of the forum and published this week, which warns that Europe faces a “prolonged era of confrontation” driven by Russian aggression.

Transatlantic Tensions

Crucially, the report argues that the greatest challenge to the liberal international order may now be “coming from within,” citing what it describes as a tectonic shift in US thinking about alliances.

Calling US President Donald Trump "the most powerful of those who take the axe to existing rules and institutions," its authors predict that "transactional deals may well replace principled cooperation...and regions may become dominated by great powers rather than governed by international rules and norms."

US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker has forcefully rejected that “internal threat” assessment, saying that Washington is seeking to rebalance, rather than dismantle, the postwar order.

Speaking to reporters on February 9, Whitaker pushed back against the notion that the United States is drifting away from its long-standing alliances.

“We’re trying to make NATO stronger,” he said, arguing that pressure on European allies to spend more on defense is about capability, not abandonment.

On trade, he cast the US position as a response to what he called unfair imbalances.

On Greenland, which Trump has said he wants the US to take over, Whitaker framed US interest as a security concern tied to Russia and China -- while distancing himself from the president's more incendiary rhetoric on the subject.

That distinction -- between rebalancing and retreat -- has become central to how many seasoned diplomats interpret the current moment. Still, some caution that the challenge for Rubio lies in bridging the gap between official rhetoric and the stark political intelligence being gathered by US allies across Europe.

'Don’t Throw Up Your Hands'

Daniel Fried, a former assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasia who served under seven US administrations, recently returned from a trip to Bucharest, Warsaw, and Prague.

In an interview with RFE/RL on February 9, Fried argued that while concern among transatlantic allies is understandable, European “hand-wringing” risks becoming a strategic dead end.

“I understand the concern, but you can’t throw up your hands and just recoil in horror,” Fried said. Instead, he contended, the path forward for Europe is not to complain, but to “work the problem.”

Fried pointed to the NATO summit in The Hague in June, where Europeans put forward a formula for increased military spending, as a success story -- effectively giving Washington the “win” it had sought.

At the heart of the current friction, he argued, is the definition of US engagement. While critics see signs of a fundamental withdrawal from the existing security architecture, Fried contended there is a “complete difference” between rebalancing and disengagement.

“US presidents since Eisenhower have pushed Europe to do more for their own defense,” Fried said, citing former Defense Secretary Bob Gates as a prominent advocate of this approach.

The objective, he said, has long been a stronger transatlantic relationship built on greater European capability -- and, by extension, a louder European voice.