Dispatch From a Den of Evil Globalism

ASPEN, Colorado — The national security elites gathered in this mountain retreat this week are finding themselves playing defense about their beliefs, motivations and patriotism — and whether they even deserve attention from the people in power.

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.