WRFH/Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM - National Security Matters: Marco in Munich

Episode Date: March 9, 2026

When Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, spoke at the 2026 Munich Security Conference, he received a standing ovation.  Malia Thibado compares this year's speech to Vice President J.D. Vance's from last year and how the differing approaches emphasized the differing circumstances. 

Hello and welcome to National Security Matters, the show where we discuss anything and everything related to U.S. international relations and defense policy. I'm your host, Malia Tibido. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke at the 26 Munich Security Council on Valentine's Day, delivering a message perceived broadly as an olive branch to European countries who are uncertain of American commitments. His speech was met with a standing ovation from Americans and European leaders, in contrast to last year's reaction to Vice President J.D. Vance's speech at the same conference. The difference this year's speech seemed nice. As the chief diplomat of the United States, Marco Rubio took a very diplomatic approach. He was conciliatory, appealing to the shared history, values, and cultures between Europe and America.

whereas last year, France was confrontational. It makes sense. This year, we're on the tail end of major tensions initiated by the U.S. in the form of tariffs imposed pertaining to Greenland. So we're the ones who alienated Europe, and we're the ones reaching out to reconcile. And it was needed, apparently, because the speeches preceding Rubios were quite divisive

against the U.S. and its current administration, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz opened the conference with a dire warning that the rules-based international order has been abandoned with the implication that the U.S. in its competition with China is at fault. He said, quote, and they, meaning the U.S., are drawing radical consequences in their national security strategy. They do that in their own way that does not slow down this trend of negatively impacting and manipulating dependent countries like those in Europe, but rather accelerates it.

The title of the conference's report that was released and distributed to attendees was also labeled under destruction. Rubio's speech came at just the right time and it was delivered at just the right place. Fans' speech last year came a day after a suspected terrorist attack where a 24-year-old Afghani asylumist seeker rammed his car into a crowd and killed two people and injured 39 more. The assumption is that Vance's speech was an attempt to call Europeans to account. It placed Europe in opposition to the U.S. in terms of institutions fighting for real democracy. Vance said, quote, The Cold War positioned defenders of democracy against much more tyrannical forces on this continent.

And consider the sides in that fight that censors. dissidents that closed churches that canceled elections. Were they the good guys? Vance's speech tore into Europe for its abandonment of supposedly shared ideals. He pointed specifically to examples of censorship in Germany and Britain as well as the canceled election in Romania. One thing I do want to note is Mertz's commentary this year about weathering the storm and having to accept the reality of today, but not as an inevitable face. points tentatively to a European belief that once Trump is out of office in 29, they can return to the rules-based global order without change. It's not true. That's just inaction with pretty

words. Like Rubio said, what would this international order be able to do without U.S. leadership? It didn't intervene in Iran at the threat of a new nuclear state. It didn't materially intervene to end the war in Gaza, that action was all under U.S. leadership. Rubio's speech did focus on broad goals, principled American and European unity, reindustrialization and immigration policy, talking points that conservatives in America are probably tired of. The big deal of this is saying this diplomatically, but explicitly, to European leaders, and again, reassuring our allies of our continued commitments to NATO and other alliances.

Going forward, let's see if the U.S. actually does reindustrialize, does enforce its own rhetoric on immigration, and does keep to its commitments. Thank you for listening. This has been National Security Matters with Malia Tippito on WRFH Radio Free Hillsdale 101.1.7 FM.