What Conclusions to Draw About US-Europe Relations From Munich Conference

From Vedomosti, Feb. 15, 2026, https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2026/02/15/1176533-kakie-vivodi-mozhno-sdelat. Condensed text:

Despite their differences, Europe and the US remain part of the same Western civilization, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in his Feb. 14 speech at the 62nd Munich Security Conference (MSC). America’s top diplomat, who also serves as the president’s national security adviser, assured that Washington’s criticism is not aimed at destroying its alliance with Europe, but rather at strengthening and renewing it. “The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply.*** We want Europe to be strong,” Rubio said.

Rubio called abandoning national interests in favor of open border policies “a foolish idea that ignored both human nature, and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.” He generally criticized left-liberal and globalist practices. This “delusion,” as Rubio calls them, has led to unfavorable economic and political decisions in the US itself. He mentioned mass illegal immigration as one of the main threats.

In essence, Rubio, despite the relative mildness of his wording, largely repeated certain talking points from US Vice-President James [J.D.] Vance, who was the main newsmaker at the previous Munich Conference in February 2025 [see Vol. 77, No. 7, pp. 8-11]. At that time, he sharply criticized European allies for their approaches to both foreign and domestic policy.

Rubio has stated that the US and its European allies should work together to overcome the crisis, which requires European countries not only to increase defense spending but also to strengthen “cultural” security. “And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny,” Rubio said. . . .

The content of Rubio’s speech in Munich does not contrast greatly with Vance’s main narratives, but the secretary of state’s delivery was more politic, emphasized Vladimir Pavlov, a research fellow at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations’ Institute of International Studies. According to him, the [US President Donald] Trump administration needs to redirect trade flows (instead of large imports, it wants to increase American exports) and consolidate its dominance in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and information technology. Against this backdrop, calls for the European Union to return to democracy and Christian morality, as well as to pay for its own defense, are not only an attempt by Washington to save money, but also to shift the EU into being a more involved partner in foreign affairs. According to Pavlov, this is due to Washington’s recognition of the limits of its unilateral influence and ability to independently influence the surrounding world.

Rubio’s speech also proves that the US has no intention of abandoning Europe, says Vadim Kozlov, head of the domestic politics research department at the Russian Academy of Sciences’ US and Canada Institute. The expert believes that Rubio attempted to tone down the ideological vibe of US foreign policy that Vance emphasized during last year’s conference and focus on key priorities: less talk about the climate agenda, a rejection of globalist practices (as the White House sees them) and a revision of immigration policy. “The US is still not prepared to lose Europe strategically, considering it to be its sphere of influence. Rubio’s speech suggests there are no plans for a complete US withdrawal from Europe,” the expert emphasized.

Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Conference, said that after Rubio’s speech, a “sigh of relief” could be heard in the air. But it hardly came from the leaders of some European countries who participated in the Munich Conference. For example, the head of European diplomacy, [EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy] Kaja Kallas, attempted to refute Rubio’s words about the “civilizational erasure” of Europe, while at the same time smoothing over the criticism by agreeing with his other talking point (about the unity of allies). Kallas ultimately concluded that differences between the partners “will remain the case.”

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen struck a more conciliatory tone. “Some may say that the word ‘independence’ runs counter to our transatlantic bond. But the opposite is true. And we’ve just heard it from Secretary of State Rubio. An independent Europe is a strong Europe. And a strong Europe makes for a stronger transatlantic alliance,” she said.

As for other European leaders who had previously expressed dissatisfaction with Trump’s foreign policy approach, they spoke out the day before Rubio. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has announced the start of negotiations with France on the issue of nuclear deterrence in Europe. French President Emmanuel Macron confirmed the existence of such discussions for the first time. He also reiterated his long-standing talking point on the need to create a new security architecture in Europe. “This is the right time for audacity. This ⁠is the right time for a strong Europe.*** Europe has to learn to become a geopolitical power. It was not part of our DNA,” he said (quoted by France 24).

According to publicly available information, as of March 2023, American tactical nuclear weapons in Europe were deployed in four countries: Belgium, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands, as well as [the Asian part of] Turkey. Presumably, there are between 100 and 300 warheads [across Europe]. France’s entire nuclear arsenal consists of up to 290 warheads, of which up to 280 are deployed.

As for the question of an independent European nuclear deterrent system, this is largely a political rather than a military-technical issue, says Aleksandr Yermakov, a research fellow at the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Institute of World Economy and International Relations. He explained that discussions about expanding France’s nuclear umbrella have been going on in Europe for a long time. “In principle, the French have the necessary tools for this: The air component of their nuclear forces is well suited for demonstrative deployment between allies, and demonstrative actions are an essential part of extended deterrence,” says the expert. However, Yermakov says the main obstacle is a lack of decisiveness and consistency among contemporary European politicians, who for years have been unable to take even the most minimal steps in this area.