Washington’s Signal chat leak sends
a strong message

Through carelessness and a lack of caution, a reporter from The Atlantic was inadvertently granted access to a Signal chat for high-level American officials by United States President Donald Trump’s national security advisor, Michael Waltz. Among the select participants were Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Mr. Waltz himself. The message chain focused on a potential strike against the Houthi rebels in Yemen, who threaten the Red Sea-Suez Canal shipping lane. The Houthis are backed by Iran’s regime and play a key role in Tehran’s terrorist regional strategy.

Two points warrant attention. First is the security fiasco. It is alarmingly easy to add someone to a chat with a single click or accidentally send a sensitive document to the wrong address. Security protocols must be tightened, yet it would not be surprising if similar incidents were to happen again. While caution and robust procedures are essential, there is little reason for the more malicious commentary in some European media outlets – such mishaps occur on both sides of the Atlantic.

Second and more important is what the chat reveals about Washington’s outlook. It sends clear signals to Europe and offers insight into top-level discussions in the U.S. administration. In short, the Trump administration continues to defend the free world but is increasingly frustrated with Europe’s perceived inaction and indecisiveness. Between the lines, one senses irritation and contempt, yet there is also a desire for a stronger, more capable European partner. The messages were not hateful, but did contain a call for Europe to step up.

A normal policy debate

All participants agreed on the necessity of a strike. The debate centered on timing, internal acceptance and messaging to Europe, as well as deterring Iran. The vice president opened by noting that only 3 percent of the endangered cargo is bound for the U.S., while about 40 percent concerns European trade – underscoring the mismatch between America’s global engagement and the proportion of its direct economic interests at stake. He worried that the move could be misunderstood by Europe and might trigger an oil price spike. Although he ultimately supported the strike, he was skeptical of the timing.

Others favored immediate action, arguing that the U.S. is the only power capable of keeping sea lanes open. Mr. Waltz added that reopening shipping routes would again fall to the U.S., but costs would be levied on Europe, given how much of Europe’s trade transits that area. There was also talk of intensifying pressure on Europe to increase its defense efforts.

Secretary Hegseth warned of two risks in delaying: leaks that would erode U.S. credibility by making it appear indecisive, and the possibility of Israel acting first, robbing Washington of its strategic lead. He stressed that this is not just about the Houthis but about restoring freedom of navigation – a core national interest – and reestablishing deterrence in the region.

Despite the vice president’s reservation that “I just hate bailing out Europe again,” the group still agreed on the strike.

Europe: Time to take responsibility

Now is neither the time nor the place to belittle the administration over the security slip – rather, the revelations from this conversation are highly relevant and must be taken seriously. One positive takeaway is the assurance that the U.S. will continue defending maritime routes worldwide. Another is Washington’s impatience with Europe’s slow response in defense matters – there is a strong push for Europe to bear greater responsibility and costs. Iran, meanwhile, receives the message that the Trump administration is committed to deterrence in the Middle East and remains a decisive player there.

Transatlantic trade is also important to Washington, but Europe bears much of the responsibility for bolstering these relations. And its defense preparedness is lacking – Europe needs not only to address the potential threat of Russia in the east, but also the security of its southern border and its global supply lines. Given Europe’s underperformance in security, foreign policy and productivity, it has little basis for complaint. Tough talk and measures from Washington can be an opportunity for Europe to break out of its paralysis and become a more effective partner.

This comment was originally published here: https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/signal-leak/