So Secretary Rubio wants to restore/rebuild Western civilization and hopes Europe will join this American vision or the US will go it alone - words to that effect. It was at least not as offensive as Vance’s blistering critique last year. Yet.
Rubio’s pitch is utterly preposterous. I’m sure the Europeans in their rebirth of strength and common purpose will politely decline this outrageous opportunity.
I'm still digesting all of this, been watching reams on-line, much from EU and region sources, and still hoping against all logic that Carney will show tomorrow with a closing speech.
The deftly treading whisperer for me is still Alexander Stubb. He's become the de-facto albeit unofficial axle of EU North.
Edit to Add:
Politico describes Stubb as:
[...]
[A former prime minister and veteran of Brussels politics, Stubb blends Eurocratic polish with Nordic pragmatism — and he knows that, for Finland, keeping Trump engaged in Europe’s defense is a matter of survival. Stubb has an existential stake in keeping the American president engaged: Finland shares a 1,300-kilometer border with Russia. He’s also played advocate for Trump in Europe, reassuring skeptical leaders that the U.S. president is prepared to wield the “stick” against Putin. ]
[...]
W/o having reference at hand at this moment, my most recent take is that he's shifting his 'neutral' position away from Washington, esp Trump. The centres of power within Europe as manifest in the EU appear to be coalescing away from where they were.
Apologies, that sounds nebulous. More later as events form focus.
To add more 'focus' to my description of Stubb above, I should have included the next paragraph from Politico's bio:
[His interactions with Trump are lower on theatrics and higher on substance than those of the U.S. president’s other European “friends” who have often failed to secure anything of tangible value. Stubb’s mediation hasn’t spared Kyiv from disappointment: Ukraine still hasn’t secured Tomahawk cruise missiles, and Trump’s new promises to swiftly end the war have again proven hollow. And yet there’s no denying that Stubb has secured an outsized influence for his country in Washington and Europe, even getting a deal to supply the U.S. government with 11 Finnish-built icebreaker ships. ]
In the time since that was posted by Politico, the 'furniture' has been moved, radically in the case of the "Tomahawks".
Ukraine has developed her own tactical missiles: (Pardon the length, but this is crucial detail)
Truncated Brave AI search result for "Ukraine missiles better than tomahawks"
[Ukraine’s FP-5 Flamingo missile is widely reported to surpass the U.S. Tomahawk in key performance areas. The Flamingo has a range of up to 1,865 miles (3,000 km)—nearly double that of the Tomahawk—and carries a 2,540-pound (1.27-ton) warhead, more than twice the explosive power of a Tomahawk’s 1,000-pound payload. Despite a less sophisticated guidance system, it achieves 46 feet of accuracy and is powered by repurposed Soviet-era turbofan engines, reducing production costs to an estimated $500,000–$1 million per unit—significantly cheaper than the $1.3 million Tomahawk.
Unlike Tomahawks, which require U.S.-provided launch platforms and are subject to Western rules of engagement, the Flamingo is entirely under Ukrainian control, enabling strikes on any target without foreign restrictions. It has already been used in combat nine times, including attacks on Russian FSB facilities in occupied Crimea and critical infrastructure. ] [query result continues at length]
Scott's observations and my earlier hints tie into this point: The 'field' has changed significantly, if not radically. And that's integral to Stubb's altered indicators in his Munich dialog.
Edit to Add:
[11 Finnish-built icebreaker ships]
This also involves Canada, and the US CG and Navy are still tripping over themselves in moving foward. Suffice to say at this point in time, for all the banter as per 'how defenceless Canada is' we're far ahead of the US in terms of heavy ice breakers, a discussion in itself.
One of many references:
Recruiting Friends for the Polar Icebreaker Express: Viewing the ICE Pact through Broader Defense Industrial Cooperation
The grateful applause by attendees does sound as though they missed the point. Just happy not to be excoriated to their faces as Vance did in 2025, I suppose.
My searching online flagged this link, as I'd entered "Stubb" in my query. It's very germane to this string, not just for Stubb's comments, but also the others on the panel. Merz' Vice Chancellor Lars Klingbeil paraphrases Merz' commentary in English.
From Foreign Policy coverage of the Munich Conference:
[...as traditional allies such as Europe and Canada strike free trade agreements in the global south, can the rest of the world do business without the world’s biggest economy?]
So Secretary Rubio wants to restore/rebuild Western civilization and hopes Europe will join this American vision or the US will go it alone - words to that effect. It was at least not as offensive as Vance’s blistering critique last year. Yet.
Rubio’s pitch is utterly preposterous. I’m sure the Europeans in their rebirth of strength and common purpose will politely decline this outrageous opportunity.
I'm still digesting all of this, been watching reams on-line, much from EU and region sources, and still hoping against all logic that Carney will show tomorrow with a closing speech.
The deftly treading whisperer for me is still Alexander Stubb. He's become the de-facto albeit unofficial axle of EU North.
Edit to Add:
Politico describes Stubb as:
[...]
[A former prime minister and veteran of Brussels politics, Stubb blends Eurocratic polish with Nordic pragmatism — and he knows that, for Finland, keeping Trump engaged in Europe’s defense is a matter of survival. Stubb has an existential stake in keeping the American president engaged: Finland shares a 1,300-kilometer border with Russia. He’s also played advocate for Trump in Europe, reassuring skeptical leaders that the U.S. president is prepared to wield the “stick” against Putin. ]
[...]
W/o having reference at hand at this moment, my most recent take is that he's shifting his 'neutral' position away from Washington, esp Trump. The centres of power within Europe as manifest in the EU appear to be coalescing away from where they were.
Apologies, that sounds nebulous. More later as events form focus.
To add more 'focus' to my description of Stubb above, I should have included the next paragraph from Politico's bio:
[His interactions with Trump are lower on theatrics and higher on substance than those of the U.S. president’s other European “friends” who have often failed to secure anything of tangible value. Stubb’s mediation hasn’t spared Kyiv from disappointment: Ukraine still hasn’t secured Tomahawk cruise missiles, and Trump’s new promises to swiftly end the war have again proven hollow. And yet there’s no denying that Stubb has secured an outsized influence for his country in Washington and Europe, even getting a deal to supply the U.S. government with 11 Finnish-built icebreaker ships. ]
In the time since that was posted by Politico, the 'furniture' has been moved, radically in the case of the "Tomahawks".
Ukraine has developed her own tactical missiles: (Pardon the length, but this is crucial detail)
Truncated Brave AI search result for "Ukraine missiles better than tomahawks"
[Ukraine’s FP-5 Flamingo missile is widely reported to surpass the U.S. Tomahawk in key performance areas. The Flamingo has a range of up to 1,865 miles (3,000 km)—nearly double that of the Tomahawk—and carries a 2,540-pound (1.27-ton) warhead, more than twice the explosive power of a Tomahawk’s 1,000-pound payload. Despite a less sophisticated guidance system, it achieves 46 feet of accuracy and is powered by repurposed Soviet-era turbofan engines, reducing production costs to an estimated $500,000–$1 million per unit—significantly cheaper than the $1.3 million Tomahawk.
Unlike Tomahawks, which require U.S.-provided launch platforms and are subject to Western rules of engagement, the Flamingo is entirely under Ukrainian control, enabling strikes on any target without foreign restrictions. It has already been used in combat nine times, including attacks on Russian FSB facilities in occupied Crimea and critical infrastructure. ] [query result continues at length]
Scott's observations and my earlier hints tie into this point: The 'field' has changed significantly, if not radically. And that's integral to Stubb's altered indicators in his Munich dialog.
Edit to Add:
[11 Finnish-built icebreaker ships]
This also involves Canada, and the US CG and Navy are still tripping over themselves in moving foward. Suffice to say at this point in time, for all the banter as per 'how defenceless Canada is' we're far ahead of the US in terms of heavy ice breakers, a discussion in itself.
One of many references:
Recruiting Friends for the Polar Icebreaker Express: Viewing the ICE Pact through Broader Defense Industrial Cooperation
https://www.csis.org/analysis/recruiting-friends-polar-icebreaker-express-viewing-ice-pact-through-broader-defense
The grateful applause by attendees does sound as though they missed the point. Just happy not to be excoriated to their faces as Vance did in 2025, I suppose.
Thank you for this excellent summary. The people who stood up to applaud at the end of Rubio’s speech clearly weren’t paying attention!
My searching online flagged this link, as I'd entered "Stubb" in my query. It's very germane to this string, not just for Stubb's comments, but also the others on the panel. Merz' Vice Chancellor Lars Klingbeil paraphrases Merz' commentary in English.
From Foreign Policy coverage of the Munich Conference:
[...as traditional allies such as Europe and Canada strike free trade agreements in the global south, can the rest of the world do business without the world’s biggest economy?]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w2Z8oXSrCI
Full interview linked at site.