Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been in Europe this weekend for the Munich Security Conference and to meet with officials in Slovakia and Hungary. To be honest, when I saw his schedule, I thought, this will be a boring trip. I doubt I'll even write anything about it. Europe bores me these days.
Well, here I am on my second article about it in less than 30 hours. Rubio may as well add another job to his lengthy resume: superstar. Because that's exactly how he's represented our country on the world stage this weekend.
In case you missed it, the secretary gave European leaders a speech filled with tough love on Saturday, basically telling them that the United States still has the continent's back but we "have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West’s managed decline." He pointed out that after the Cold War was over, many countries fell into a delusional "euphoria" that ignores "both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history."
He concluded that we've entered a new era of geopolitics and that we must defend Western civilization before it disappears. Europe can join us, or they can kick back and do nothing, but it sure would be nice if they'd join us.
You can read more about that and watch the entire speech here: "Rubio on Fire! We Won't Be 'Polite and Orderly Caretakers of the West's Managed Decline'."
On Sunday, Rubio traveled to Slovakia to meet with President Peter Pellegrini and Prime Minister Robert Fico. He and Fico took questions from the press after their meeting, and one Washington Post reporter tried to play games with some little gotcha questions about Venezuela — Rubio wasn't having it.
After asking Rubio a question about Iran, the WaPo reporter then turned to Fico and asked, "On Venezuela, you strongly opposed America’s removal of Maduro by force, saying it demonstrates a deepening breakdown of the international order. Do you still feel that way given where we’re at now? And also, you’ve denied saying that you were worried about President Trump’s psychological state following your meeting with him in Mar-a-Lago. Can you explain how this was potentially misinterpreted?"
(For context, Fico has been one of the more vocal European critics of our capture of Nicolás Maduro, saying it went against international law and calling it an "American adventure," something about oil, yada yada. As for the talk about Trump's "psychological state," Politico did a story last month claiming Fico said he was worried about Trump's "dangerous" mental state, but Fico has denied ever saying that.)
Anyway, Rubio answered the question about Iran, but before Fico could answer the one about Venezuela, Rubio continued Saturday's display of unapologetic U.S. swagger. He not only called the reporter out for asking such a question, but he defended the Maduro move and even bragged about it a little.
And let me just make one more point, because I think you asked him a question in order to, like, see if you can get him against us with something about, oh, you criticized – a lot of countries didn’t like what we did in Venezuela. That’s okay. That was in our national interest. I’m sure there’s something he’ll do one day that we don’t like, and we’ll say, hey, we didn’t like you did this. So what? That doesn’t mean we’re not going to be friends, we’re not going to be partners, we’re not going to be able to cooperate with one another. Countries express their opinion all the time. We have very close allies that didn’t like what we did in that regard.
He went on to point out what a success it has been so far:
I can tell you what, it was successful. We’re proud of it. It was necessary because the guy was a narco-terrorist, and we made him a bunch of offers, and he chose to throw them under. And look what’s happened in Venezuela in the six weeks since he’s been gone, okay? It is a – now, it’s got a long way to go. There’s still much work that needs to be done. But I can tell you Venezuela is much better off today than it was six weeks ago, so we’re very proud of that project. And I know some will disagree and didn’t like, but irrespective, I think everyone can now agree that Venezuela has an opportunity at a new future that wasn’t there six weeks ago.
You can watch some of that here:
🚨 HOLY SMOKES. Marco Rubio just PUMMELED a Fake News reporter trying to strike division between the Slovakian PM and Rubio while they're both at the podium. Masterclass.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 15, 2026
"You asked him a question to see if you can get HIM against US!"
"A lot of countries didn't like what we… pic.twitter.com/VUkTX6igxE
Side note: If you're curious about how Venezuela better off than it was six weeks ago, I've been documenting the wins here:
The Only Thing Missing Was a MAGA Hat: Venezuela’s Red Carpet Moment
Happy One-Month-Without-Maduro Anniversary!
The New Monroe Doctrine: The Avengers Have Been Summoned)
For what it's worth, Fico said a lot of things, but concluded with this: "But I totally recognize, because we see this after long period of time, the common-sense pragmatism in foreign policy. That’s what has been missing. And I think that is the most valuable thing that the American president brought to the foreign and world policy: common-sense pragmatism and not looking at interests of others. Everyone has to consider their own interests, national interests, but of course, considering that it will lead to peaceful cooperation for countries and nations."
He said nothing of the president's mental state.
At some point between all of these bada** moments, Rubio sat down with Bloomberg News for an interview. The interviewer, John Micklethwait, asked Rubio how long he thinks the Cuban regime can hold out with no oil. As we know, a couple of weeks ago, Trump threatened secondary tariffs on any country that offered the now isolated nation any oil, and Cuba has pretty much run out of it to the point that planes are grounded, ground transportation isn't happening, people are gathering wood so they can cook, and everything from school days to surgeries have been canceled.
Rubio's didn't hesitate to call the situation what it is. "The revolution in Cuba ended a long time ago," he said.
He continued.
Cuba’s fundamental problem is that it has no economy and its economic model is one that has never been tried and has never worked anywhere else in the world, okay? It just doesn’t have a real economic policy. It doesn’t have a real economy.
Now, put aside for a moment the fact that it has no freedom of expression, no democracy, no respect for human rights. The fundamental problem Cuba has it is has no economy, and the people who are in charge of that country, in control of that country, they don’t know how to improve the everyday life of their people without giving up power over sectors that they control. They want to control everything. They don’t want the people of Cuba to control anything.
So they don’t know how to get themselves out of this. And to the extent that they have been offered opportunities to do it, they don’t seem to be able to comprehend it or accept it in any ways. They would much rather be in charge of the country than allow it to prosper.
While he wouldn't give the details of what he and President Trump are planning for the future of the island nation, he did say quite confidently that now that it's not receiving handouts, it won't survive because it's never been able to survive without help before.
But I will say this, that that is that it is important for the people of Cuba to have more freedom, not just political freedom but economic freedom. The people of Cuba – and that’s what this regime has not been willing to give them because they’re afraid that if the people of Cuba can provide for themselves, they lose control over them, they lose power over them.
So I think there has to be that opening and it has to happen, and I think now Cuba is faced with such a dire situation. Remember this is a regime that has survived almost entirely on subsidies – first from the Soviet Union, then from Hugo Chavez, and how for the first time it has no subsidies coming in from anyone, and the model has been laid bare.
And it’s not just – look, multiple countries have gone in and helped, but the problem is that you lose money in Cuba. They never pay their bills. They never end up paying. It never ends up working out. There were European countries that went to Cuba and made what they thought were investments in certain sectors, only to have them – the contracts canceled and get themselves kicked out because the Cuban regime has no fundamental understanding of what business and industry looks like, and the people are suffering as a result of it.
So I think certainly their willingness to begin to make openings in this regard is one potential way forward. I would also say – and this has not been really talked about a lot, but the United States has been providing humanitarian assistance directly to the Cuban people via the Catholic Church. We did it after the hurricane. We actually just recently announced an increase in the amount we’re willing to give. And that’s something we’re willing to continue to explore, but obviously that’s not a long-term solution to the problems on the island.
Every idiot who claims Cuba is a paradise or would be except for the U.S. embargo needs to read that... not that they'd understand it.
You can watch that entire interview here:
Want to support conservative media? You can do so by becoming a PJ Media VIP member. It's less than $20 for the entire year, and you get some cool perks too. We'll see you in the comments section!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member