National Security Elites (Yes, That's What They Are) Say Trump Team Needs to Talk to Them
It's a result of the Trump administration's 11th hour decision to pull nearly all of its speakers from the annual Aspen Security Forum, with the Pentagon alleging that the gathering 'promotes the evil of globalism.'
Many of the current and former officials I've spoken to here have wielded enough influence and dealt with enough criticism in their careers that at first, they responded to the administration's move with eye-rolls and words such as 'moronic.' Some questioned, in genuine frustration, what the administration means by 'globalism.' That America can ignore the world? Others suggested it is all a performative stunt by the administration, or at least Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, to gain favor with a MAGA base angry over issues like the Jeffrey Epstein case.
Still, attendees and organizers aren't completely dismissing the Trump attack, which could be just the first of more assaults on the event and those like it. The president has gone after a range of U.S. institutions at an impressive pace, and many are bending, not least because businesses and other factions that care what the U.S. president thinks can pull funding.
But the people here are making an argument in return: If President Donald Trump and his team are willing to snub an event like the Aspen forum, it means government officials are increasingly sealing themselves off from outside opinions. Doing so could hamper the administration's efforts to achieve its national security goals.
No matter how much the MAGA-heavy administration may dislike the Aspen conference, attendees argue, it is at least a place to stress-test ideas to make sure they're viable.
What Trump's team is doing is 'what autocrats do — they don't want to hear criticism,' one foreign lawmaker said.
'I think sometimes they are nervous about engaging in a real debate about their policies,' a former Biden administration official said. 'It's not healthy.'
On issues ranging from how Trump's tariffs will affect America's international alliances to the U.S. strategy on Taiwan, many in the national security space fear the president is not receiving the broad spectrum of advice he needs, and that increasingly neither are his underlings. It's especially foolish to reject ideas from the opposing political party, some said.
One example is Trump's refusal — until, apparently, recently — to appreciate Russian leader Vladimir Putin's unwillingness to give up his desire to subsume Ukraine.
The worries are reverberating in the top echelons of America's overseas allies. 'It's always better to engage, because real life is not binary,' a foreign minister told me.
I granted nearly everyone I spoke to anonymity so they could be candid and because many told me they feared the Trump administration would retaliate against them. Some need to engage with the administration professionally; others fear losing clients.
Aspen bills itself as America's 'premier national security and foreign policy conference,' and it increasingly is a destination for government officials from all over the world, as well as the D.C. set.
More than a dozen Trump administration members had been slated to appear on various panels; most represented the Defense Department in some capacity, including Navy Secretary John Phelan. But on Monday, the day before the four-day conference began, the Pentagon announced it was pulling all of its people. Aside from the globalism claim, the Pentagon accused the forum of showing 'disdain for our great country, and hatred for the president.'
Aspen organizers deny such allegations, noting their institution is nonpartisan, and they say their invitation to the Trump officials remains open. Trump aides might even win some converts to their America First views if they showed up, attendees and organizers hinted. The theme of the forum this year revolves around letting go of assumptions, an obvious nod to Trump's earth-shaking second term.
'A lot of what's happening in the world is making all of us who are experts in this field reassess our assumptions, and so actually engaging with people who think differently helps you do that, right?' Anja Manuel, the forum's executive director, told me.
Even after the, umm, military withdrawal, the forum could still point to two Trump officials on its agenda: Tom Barrack, the U.S. ambassador to Turkey who also is dealing with the Syria file; and Adam Boehler, the special envoy tasked with retrieving American hostages held abroad. But then Barrack pulled out, officially due to a need to respond to new violence in Syria. If Boehler shows up, I guess we should be relieved that there's still bipartisan agreement the U.S. should try to save its hostages.
The executive branch presence here is smaller than the norm across past administrations, including during Trump's first term. The secretary of State and the national security adviser tend to show up to Aspen. Not this time, and it's the same guy.
The forum in this Colorado ski town is designed to allow for an exchange of views in a relaxing setting. Many of the conversations happen off-stage, and the leafy, mountainous views are indeed calming.
The security forum, whose events are live-streamed, is also held right before a meeting of the Aspen Strategy Group where more unfiltered debate can happen. The latter is a private gathering, but it includes people from both political parties, including some Republicans who served in Trump's first term and who for the most part today are not seen as MAGA-worthy. Organizers told me they invited a slew of Trump administration officials to attend the strategy group as well as the forum, but for now, no current administration officials are expected to show up to the strategy group either.
Are the public forum and the private strategy group gatherings of elites? Well … yes. Do they skew more left than right? Yes, especially in the Trump era. Something about all that probably frustrates the populist strain that animates much of Trump's MAGA movement.
But it's getting harder in an increasingly polarized country to stage any events where top players in the national security field can exchange ideas across ideological lines, particularly in private settings where participants don't have to worry about nasty headlines about their proposals.
If Republicans, under pressure from Trump, decide they shouldn't show up to forums such as Aspen, 'where is the place where smart liberals and conservatives can have a debate?' the former Biden administration official asked.
Early in the first Trump administration, the Aspen forum drew several top officials, including then-CIA chief (and later Secretary of State) Mike Pompeo. As the years went by, the forum struggled to bring in Trump types, especially as the president's America First MAGA base grew more empowered over the traditional denizens. Pompeo, for instance, was staunchly loyal to Trump but is now viewed with suspicion by the MAGA faction. Republicans still involved in Aspen events, including those who worked for Trump in his first term, tend to be more the George W. Bush-era types who believe the U.S. should not retreat from the world.
Aspen organizers told me they tried hard to get as much Trump representation as they could this year. And while most of the Trump military types who'd signed up were likely to be cautious (those in uniform in particular almost never say anything startling), they would nonetheless have offered a window into the administration's thinking, the topic that most interests many in the audience here. The Aspen forum also tends to draw many tech, cyber and other business leaders whose views the Trump administration might find helpful.
Besides, had Hegseth's 'warfighters' been allowed to attend, they would have found that the Aspen forum is not exactly the Colosseum of such confabs. Its moderators press panelists, but they rarely go for the kill. I once published a piece suggesting some spicier questions for Aspen's moderators.
It's still something of a mystery exactly who in the administration decided to pull the plug on its Aspen line-up. I asked the White House, the Pentagon and the State Department that question. The only real answer I received was from a White House official, granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, who said, "We did not direct anyone to pull their speakers."
As conference attendees munched on paella and other treats this week, some wondered if the Pentagon, knowing the Trump team lacks a formal national security strategy, was worried that one of its representatives might say something that could irk the president.
Others theorized that the Trump administration is trying to send a warning to all such conferences in an effort to reshape their programs more in the MAGA mold. When I asked Aspen organizers if they would change their program in response to a potential such demand, they declined to answer.
Either way, the Trump administration's voice is nearly silent at a major gathering of national security thinkers, some of whom might even be useful allies on some issues.
It is, a former senior U.S. intelligence official told me, a missed opportunity.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
These key US allies are set to recognize Palestinian state
About three-quarters of countries in the United Nations (UN) recognize the Palestinian state, which holds a 'Permanent Observer State' status within the intergovernmental body — allowing it to be part of the proceedings, but unable to vote on resolutions. Three more countries — close U.S. allies — have joined the tally in the last week. Last week, France said that it would recognize Palestinian statehood, with President Emmanuel Macron stating the move is part of a commitment to a 'just and lasting peace' in the Middle East. France became the first nation within the Group of Seven (G7) to do so. The announcement came shortly after negotiations over a ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian militant group Hamas broke down, with the Jewish State and the U.S. pulling their negotiators from Qatar. President Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff pinned the blame on Hamas and argued that the officials will consider 'alternative options to bring the hostages home and try to create a more stable environment for the people of Gaza.' Israel's ambassador to the U.N., Danny Danon, said last week that 'neither international conferences disconnected from reality nor unilateral statements at the UN will lead to peace.' Then this week, as the international outrage over the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip has continued, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the United Kingdom was ready to recognize Palestine's statehood if Israel does not manage to take action of ending the war with Hamas, a conflict that has been ongoing since the Palestinian militant group's terrorist attack on the Jewish State on Oct. 7, 2023. Starmer set the deadline for the UN's General Assembly in September, calling for an uptick in aid being delivered into the war-torn enclave and for Hamas to release the remaining hostages. 'I've always said that we will recognize a Palestinian state as a contribution to a proper peace process at the moment of maximum impact for the two-state solution, with that solution now under threat, this is the moment to act,' Starmer said. Canada became the third close U.S. ally this week to announce it would recognize the Palestinian state. Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney said Ottawa would provide recognition of the state in September at the UN's General Assembly, a decision that would entail the Palestinian Authority 'holding general elections in 2026 in which Hamas can play no part, and to demilitarize the Palestinian state.' Trump said on Truth Social that Canada's decision would make it hard for the U.S. to reach a trade agreement with Ottawa. On Monday, the president said that the U.S. would set up 'food centers' in Gaza as food distribution in the enclave has come under intense scrutiny and deaths of Gazans from starvation. Trump also acknowledged that there is starvation among the roughly 2.1 million population in Gaza, sharing a different view from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said that no one is starving in the enclave. The White House said on Thursday that Witkoff and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee would be in Gaza on Friday to 'inspect the current distribution sites and secure a plan to deliver more food and meet with local Gazans to hear first-hand about this dire situation on the ground.'


Boston Globe
24 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
‘Shameful': Students, alumni say Brown deal with Trump administration disrespects trans students
Get Rhode Map A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State. Enter Email Sign Up 'To have made an agreement on the backs of our queer and trans friends is really shameful,' said Talia Reiss, co-president of Planned Parenthood Advocates at Brown, a student club that advocates for reproductive rights and gender-affirming care. Advertisement 'Students want to feel like their identities are supported by the university,' Reiss said. Related : Reiss and co-president Cara Hutton, who are both studying public health, said the group was not 'immediately concerned' about Brown's promise, as part of the agreement, to not provide gender-affirming surgery or puberty blockers to minors, since few students at the university are under 18. Advertisement Brown has never performed such surgeries, and said it would refer those students to outside medical care; the agreement does not affect 'I'm not naive to the fact that Brown is a business and they need that money,' Hutton said. 'It just seems like some really hard trade-offs for that money.' Peter Swope, a 2024 graduate, said he saw the concession on gender as likely 'symbolic,' but concerning nonetheless. 'While the practical impacts may be fairly limited, I'm disappointed in Brown equivocating at all on trans rights,' Swope said. He questioned how the adoption of Trump's definition of biological sex would apply to housing, for example, noting that a friend who identifies as a transgender woman had lived in single-gender housing on campus. 'Single-gender under the Trump administration's definition means exclusively cis people, and not trans people,' Swope said. According to President Christina Paxson was not available for an interview Thursday. But in a letter to students and faculty Wednesday Paxson wrote that Brown 'agreed to abide by Title IX and NCAA eligibility rules regarding the participation of transgender athletes in intercollegiate sports,' and said the university will 'continue to provide housing and restroom access in a way that allows for gender-inclusive, women-only and men-only options." Advertisement It is not clear if there are currently any transgender student athletes at the university. James Kraemer, a 2008 Brown graduate who studied biophysics, said he was 'shocked and upset' when he read the agreement. He and other alumni to help the university defend itself against Trump's demands. 'I think they're really doing a disservice to marginalized members of the community,' Kraemer said. 'It's really throwing non-cis-gender people to the wolves.' He said that when he attended the university, Brown was at the forefront of progressive gender studies. 'For the university, which has championed the study of this for decades to then say, 'OK, we're going to agree to that,' is truly shameful and hurtful,' Kraemer said. 'It pains me to see the university ceding moral ground to this administration in exchange for research funding,' said Dylan Spaulding, a senior scientist in the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists who graduated from Brown in 2004. 'Brown is throwing people under the bus in exchange for staying out of the cross-hairs, which is a cowardly betrayal of its principles.' A Brown spokesperson, Brian Clark, said housing assignments for first-year students 'will continue to be based on sex assigned at birth, with the ability for students to opt into gender-inclusive housing as they wish.' 'We remain fully committed to serving the health needs of all Brown students in a manner consistent with our long-established policy of nondiscrimination, which includes sex, gender identity and gender expression,' Clark said. Advertisement Christina Paxson, the president of Brown University, struck a deal with the Trump administration on Wednesday to restore federal funding. Jonathan Wiggs/Globe Staff While the gender-related concessions drew the loudest reaction, Brown also agreed to provide data to the federal government to prove race is not a factor in admissions. The university also agreed not to have any programs with 'race-based outcomes' or 'diversity targets,' nor will the university 'promote unlawful DEI goals.' The agreement says Brown will maintain its academic freedom and the federal government will not interfere with what its professors teach. The Ivy League university agreed to provide $50 million to state workforce development efforts, and will not pay anything to the federal government, unlike Columbia University, which It is unclear whether Brown's agreement will influence those Education Secretary Linda McMahon celebrated the reversal of what she called the 'decades-long woke-capture' of higher education. 'Aspiring students will be judged solely on their merits, not their race or sex,' McMahon said. A pro-Palestinian encampment at Brown University in Providence on April 24, 2024. PHILIP KEITH/NYT Rhode Island political and civic leaders offered split views on the settlement. Providence Mayor Brett Smiley's office said he was 'glad' Brown was able to preserve its 'critical funding,' while Attorney General Peter Neronha expressed disappointment the school made a deal of any kind with Trump. 'I think he's a blackmailer, frankly,' Neronha said. 'My overall view is to fight, not give in, even if it requires sacrifice.' Advertisement Meanwhile, Adam Greenman, president of the Jewish Alliance of Rhode Island, praised the agreement, saying it 'reaffirms the commitment that we have seen from President Paxson to ensure a thriving Jewish life on Brown's campus.' But Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg, who 'I think this agreement will engender profound resentment towards Jewish students, and will draw a greater wedge between Jews and other communities with whom we have been in solidarity,' Ruttenberg said. Steph Machado can be reached at


New York Post
24 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump struck huge trade deals — but tariffs are about to go up on a huge swath of imports as Liberation Day tariffs hit
WASHINGTON — Countries around the world rushed Thursday to negotiate last-minute trade deals with the US before sweeping new tariffs take effect Friday — after President Trump already locked up major agreements accounting for about one-third of American trade. As of Thursday evening, the US had secured framework agreements calling for a 15% tariff on the European Union, a 10% duty on the United Kingdom, a 20% rate for Vietnam, a 19% levy for the Philippines and Indonesia, and a 15% levy on Japan and South Korea — while securing $2.25 trillion in promised investments and purchases of US goods. Trump also allowed extensions for China and Mexico — two of America's top economic partners responsible for 27% of US trade, as he irons out the details and tries to open their markets to more American goods. Countries who account for 40% of US trade were due to receive letters by midnight Eastern Time, informing them of new rates as high as 50%. Sectoral tariffs, including a 50% rate on foreign copper, aluminum and steel and a 20% on overseas pharmaceuticals, will also go into effect. Notably, Canada — America's second largest trading partner and a particular target of Trump's ire — looks set for a new 35% duty. But rates for more than 100 countries were still being negotiated with Trump's trade team Thursday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told The Post in her regular briefing. 3 White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said tariffs will be imposed at midnight Eastern Time on Aug. 1, upon an executive order from Trump. REUTERS 'Upwards of 200 countries around the world have reached out to their trade and tariff team,' Leavitt told reporters of the conversations had throughout negotiations, noting that the White House will continue to 'prioritize' key trading partners on the last stretch. Leavitt wouldn't reveal the exact rates countries will be charged — but said Trump's team 'has been working around the clock to try to be in correspondence with as many countries as possible.' It looked unlikely a deal with Canada — which bought $350 billion in American goods last year while exporting $412 billion to the US — could be struck before the tariffs kicked. 'They have to pay a fair rate,' Trump told reporters of the holdup Thursday. 'They have been charging very, very high tariffs to our farmers.' Trump has also been leveraging America's economic power in the trade war by invoking other geopolitical grievances. India was threatened with a 25% tariff, plus an additional penalty for importing Russian weapons and energy. And even though the US has a trade surplus with Brazil, South America's biggest economy will be hit with an astronomical 50% rate due to their treatment of Trump ally and former president Jair Bolsonaro. 3 Trump has threatened countries with tariffs as high as 50%. AP Trump first announced tariff hikes as a part of his 'Liberation Deal' announcement on April 2, threatening to impose high rates at a 'reciprocal' level to account for trade discrepancies and levies charged by trading partners. He then paused his high tariffs a week later and set most rates at 10%, with the expectation that '90 deals' would be done in '90 days.' Since then, Trump has made a number of key deals with major trading partners, and the administration has predicted the Aug. 1 deadline will push others to follow suit in the coming weeks and months. Trump first made a deal with the UK in May, locking in a 10% tariff and securing the promise that the country will 'open up' their market to US goods, notably agricultural products like beef. 3 Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has said he won't accept a 'bad deal' from Trump, so the 35% rate may go forth. REUTERS The president then struck a 20% tariff deal with Vietnam, a 19% rate with the Philippines and Indonesia, a 15% rate with Japan and South Korea — and then announced a 15% rate on the European Union Sunday. The EU deal was particularly impressive, as it significantly raised rates from their previous levels and includes pledges for the EU to buy $750 billion in American energy, invest $600 billion in new money in the US and purchase additional military equipment. China, America's no. 3 trading partner, has separate ongoing negotiations and has a deadline of Aug. 12 to come to a final deal. Mexico received a 90-day extension in a last minute phone call with Trump on Thursday, pushing their talks to a later date while keeping the 25% tariff as punishment for fentanyl crossing the border, a 25% tariff on cars and a 50% rate on the country's aluminum, copper and steel. Other world leaders were calling Thursday asking for possible extensions, Leavitt said, but the ultimate decision rests with Trump, who has indicated that the deadline is firm. 'I think he's done really good work here to expand export opportunities for the US and our producers,' said Richard Stern, acting director of the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at the conservative Heritage Foundation. Stern said the preliminary frameworks for some of the deals will also ensure Americans' intellectual property isn't being stolen — and force a quicker decoupling from China critical for national security. 'We view tariffs as a good tool for statecraft negotiation,' he added. 'The EU is really on this knife's edge of moving closer to China or moving closer to us.' 'As of tomorrow, US tariffs will be higher than they have been in a century — and hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes will be paid for by American companies and consumers,' warned Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the libertarian Cato Institute. Other unknown variables that could affect the tariffs were upcoming rulings by federal courts on Trump's powers to tax imports without congressional approval. 'The way I've been trying to describe it is there's a lot we still don't know and a few things we know,' Lincicome said. 'The US tariffs system has gone from, almost overnight, simple and transparent to a labyrinth of new requirements.' Mark DiPlacido, a policy adviser at the trade protectionist think tank American Compass disagreed, saying: 'The Trump administration's trade strategy is working.' 'The trade deals struck in recent weeks will help reduce US trade deficits, reshore industry, and generate quality American jobs,' added DiPlacido, who worked in the Office of the US Trade Representative during the first Trump administration. 'While many predicted the worst when higher rates were announced in April, the administration has shown that tariffs can be used effectively to increase market access, revenue, and investment without major price increases, job losses, or economic instability.'