Podcast Summary: Rational Security — “Sects, Lies, and Twin Peaks” Edition
Host: Scott R. Anderson (Lawfare Senior Editor)
Guests: Dan Byman (Georgetown/CSIS), Ariane Tabatabai (Lawfare Public Service Fellow), Michael Feinberg (Lawfare Senior Editor)
Date: February 19, 2026

Overview

This episode centers on major shifts in global security, with a particular focus on the evolving US-European relationship post-Munich Security Conference, the troubled state of US-Iran nuclear negotiations, and the surprisingly softer Trump administration posture toward China. Anderson and his guests also bring moments of levity and pop culture, discussing everything from Twin Peaks to poetry for children.

Main Topics & Key Insights

1. U.S.-European Relations: Munich Security Conference Reckoning

Timestamps: [05:55] – [26:46]

Shifts at Munich: U.S. and Europe Drifting Apart

• Context: The 2026 Munich Security Conference saw the US send a softer message (via Sec. of State Rubio) than last year's open antagonism (V.P. Vance).

• European Reaction: European leaders, in contrast to the past, appeared to genuinely accelerate efforts to become self-reliant across defense, economics, intelligence, and technology—shaking old assumptions about dependence on Washington.

  • Ari Tabatabai [07:46]:

    “The conversation in Europe is fundamentally shifting... European allies ... are increasingly putting out public assessments about the United States as a threat, not as an ally, not as a partner, not even as just unreliable—as a threat.”

• Tone Gap: U.S. press painted Rubio’s speech as "conciliatory," but both American and European panelists stress substance remains unchanged: Washington still signals Europe must assume more burden sharing and possibly move towards independence.

  • Dan Byman [11:15]:

    “The bar is so much lower in terms of what is expected of the United States... we’re in a place, really, kind of an abyss when it comes to the transatlantic relationship.”

• Rubio's Missteps:

  • Michael Feinberg [12:57]:

    “This [Rubio’s] read like a really bad syllabus from a Hillsdale dropout... By not focusing on any of the liberal tradition, Rubio actually alienated the Europeans.”

• Congressional Counter-Messaging: Presence of other American officials (Gov. Newsom, AOC, Congressional delegations) sending different, at times conflicting, signals to Europeans. This “fractured” message further undermines ally trust in long-term U.S. constancy.

  • Dan Byman [17:33]:

    "It was one thing to do this in 2017 or 2018 that America had a kind of spasm and can come back to its senses. But this is the second time [with Trump]."

• Domestic Roots of the Rift:

  • Anderson and Feinberg discuss that the transatlantic alliance’s domestic legitimacy in the U.S. was always fragile—seen as an elitist project, and now, with shifting "elite" views, its future is doubly uncertain.
  • AOC’s counter-messaging mirrored some populist angles, emphasizing working-class perspectives and noting overlaps in skepticism between right and left about the U.S.'s international commitments.

• European Takeaways:

  • Even during the Biden years, Europeans doubted post-Trump stability.
  • Now, many accept that “something in at least some part of the United States has fundamentally changed” ([20:08]).

2. The U.S.–Iran Nuclear Mess: Negotiation, Leverage, and Dangers

Timestamps: [26:46] – [51:36]

Fragile Talks in Geneva—A Moment of Leverage

• Backdrop:

  • Iran’s regime is reeling: mass protests brutally suppressed, economic and strategic failures, compromised by U.S. and Israeli intelligence operations, and a humiliating military defeat last year.

• Current Negotiations:

  • Dan Byman [28:26]:

    “Iran is in an exceptionally difficult spot right now... There is a broader, I’m going to call it a security crisis… a rather one-sided, humiliating defeat.”

  • US Build-up: United States continues to deploy extensive military assets to the region. Possibility of military action remains “quite real” ([32:22]).

• The Debate on Talks:

  • Feinberg and Tabatabai both skeptical about negotiation timing and efficacy:
    • Ari Tabatabai [32:38]:

      “I am not sure that I’m seeing a lot of seriousness in the negotiations right now… to actually negotiate… you need the two sides to actually sit down and talk to one another… there is not a seriousness on behalf of regime decision makers…”

    • Negotiating now risks legitimizing the regime just after mass violence against protests.
    • US Approach Critiqued: Flipping abruptly between force and diplomacy, not using the wider “spectrum of tools” (sanctions architecture, covert actions) that could build leverage and pressure over time.

• Feinberg [40:17]:

  “It’s also not the time to carry out a military strike or to threaten one if we know we’re not going to put boots on the ground… this may be one of those cases where you’re best off not doing anything except entirely behind the scenes.”

• Dissenting View (Byman):

  • Use of leverage/negotiation now could work if U.S. is clear about its actual goals (nuclear/weapons containment vs. regime support/democratic outcomes).

  “If the goal… is we just want Iran that behaves in a non-aggressive way and if it’s brutal at home, we will criticize that, but that’s not going to be a priority—this is a moment of leverage to try to push.” ([42:32])

• Deal on the Horizon?

  • Anderson sees the elements of a possible (imperfect) deal forming, driven by mutual exhaustion and desire for a “win.” Tabatabai, however, worries this could produce an even weaker deal than in past episodes.

  “One thing I did not say, I did not say it was going to be a good deal. I just said I’m not sure the pieces aren’t lining up for some sort of deal.” — Anderson [51:36]

3. The U.S.–China Relationship: Hawkish Rhetoric, Dovish Policy

Timestamps: [51:36] – [73:43]

Rhetoric vs. Reality: Trump’s Surprising Pivot

• Observation: Despite a traditionally hawkish platform, the Trump administration is markedly less aggressive — arguably less engaged — on China than expected.

• Events:

  • Reports of Xi Jinping purging his military of non-loyalists, nuclear modernization, and submarine capacity growth.
  • US responses remain muted; focus remains on trade, not strategic posture in Asia.

• Feinberg [55:09]:

  “They [China] are always taking steps that strategically disadvantage the United States, but never do so in so confrontational a way as to push the moment to its crisis... I think we have one of the least hawkish administrations when it comes to China in the past two and a half decades.” “The best indicia of this was that a US President explicitly said to Xi Jinping, Taiwan is in your backyard. That’s really your own problem to solve.”

• Legacies and Internal Disarray:

  • Despite having prominent China hawks in the administration, actual policy has turned highly transactional, focused on short-term economic wins over longer-term strategic equilibrium.
  • Rubio and Colby, once vocal on the China threat, seem sidelined or ineffective.
    • Feinberg [68:18]:
      “Marco Rubio has always possessed... a protean political nature... I don’t recall Rubio raising a peep about [the ZTE settlement].” “As for Bridge Colby... I don’t know if he’s a seasoned enough government operator...”

• Broader Consequences:

  • Ari Tabatabai [62:55]:

    “We are really missing a strategic opportunity to be focusing on this [China]. And instead seemingly going back to the same challenges... of a decade, decade and a half ago.... we’re essentially ceding the ground to China at this point.”

• Anderson [66:43]:

  “It is a sign of the mercurial nature of our president… the internal traffic terrain of the decision making apparatus seems to be driving half the policy decisions... and half of it is Trump himself, who does personally like—his comments as Xi Jinping really does suggest to me that he’s actually bought into this spheres of influence sort of worldview…”

Notable Quotes & Highlights

• On Europe-U.S. Rift:

  • “European allies ... are increasingly putting out public assessments about the United States as a threat, not as an ally...” — Tabatabai [07:46]
  • “The bar is so much lower ... we’re in a place really kind of an abyss when it comes to the transatlantic relationship.” — Byman [11:15]

• On Iran Negotiations:

  • “There is a disjuncture between events on the ground and the threatened use of military power.” — Byman [32:26]
  • “I’m not sure that the negotiations are going anywhere anytime soon. That might be part of the reason why the buildup... is occurring.” — Tabatabai [37:21]

• On China Policy:

  • “I think we have one of the least hawkish administrations when it comes to China in the past two and a half decades.” — Feinberg [55:09]
  • “We are really missing a strategic opportunity... we’re essentially ceding the ground to China at this point.” — Tabatabai [62:55]

• On Administration Internal Contradictions:

  • “Color me a little bit skeptical. I think it is... Marco Rubio has always possessed, let us say, a protean political nature..." — Feinberg [68:18]

Memorable Moments

• Opening Icebreaker: Panelists reminisce about Twin Peaks, leading to gentle banter over early-’90s TV crushes.
• Stereotype Acknowledgement: After a spirited policy debate, Feinberg jokes: "Do not come to Rational Security to see professional stereotypes shattered" ([49:02]), referencing how their recommendations align with their government backgrounds.
• Object Lessons: The episode concludes with quick “object lessons”—recommendations and warnings:
  • Dan Byman: Recommends "John Company," a game about the British East India Company [74:00].
  • Ari Tabatabai: Celebrates the Broadway show "Death Becomes Her" [75:14].
  • Anderson: Recommends "Jess and Quinn" for absurdist Instagram humor [76:10].
  • Feinberg: Warns against some “Poetry for Kids” volumes for dark content [77:26].

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [05:55] — Start of Munich Security Conference/transatlantic discussion.
• [26:46] — Turn to Iran nuclear negotiations and regional military buildup.
• [51:36] — China policy: military modernization, administration priorities, and hawkish vs. dovish tension.
• [74:00 - 78:53] — Object Lessons (personal recommendations, lighter fare).

Language & Tone

• The discussion is incisively analytical but conversational, with flashes of dry humor and self-awareness about the experts’ own biases and institutional backgrounds.

For New Listeners

This episode is a must-hear for anyone seeking to understand the current crossroads in US foreign policy. It blends on-the-ground observations from former officials with honest skepticism about whether traditional alliances and adversarial relationships are being renegotiated or simply left to drift. Expect close reading of both events and rhetoric—and a sharp sense of just how much uncertainty now dominates the world order.