VP JD Vance Remarks at the Munich Security Conference Full Transcript of Speech

Introduction and Acknowledgments

VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: Well, thank you, and thanks to all the gathered delegates and luminaries and media professionals, and thanks especially to the host of the Munich Security Conference for being able to put on such an incredible event. We’re, of course, thrilled to be here, we’re happy to be here, and one of the things that I wanted to talk about today is, of course, our shared values, and, you know, it’s great to be back in Germany, as you heard earlier.

I was here last year as a United States Senator, I saw Foreign Secretary David Lammy and joked that both of us last year had different jobs than we have now, but now it’s time for all of our countries, for all of us who have been fortunate enough to be given political power by our respective peoples to use it wisely to improve their lives, and I want to say that I was fortunate in my time here to spend some time outside the walls of this conference over the last 24 hours, and I’ve been so impressed by the hospitality of the people, even, of course, as they’re reeling from yesterday’s horrendous attack.

And the first time I was ever in Munich was with my wife, actually, who’s here with me today on a personal trip, and I’ve always loved the city of Munich, and I’ve always loved its people, and I just want to say that we’re very moved, and our thoughts and prayers are with Munich and everybody affected by the evil inflicted on this beautiful community. We’re thinking about you, we’re praying for you, and we will certainly be rooting for you in the days and weeks to come.

Security Concerns and European Values

I hope that’s not the last bit of applause that I get, but we gather at this conference, of course, to discuss security, and normally we mean threats to our external security. I see many great military leaders gathered here today, but while the Trump administration is very concerned with European security and believes that we can come to a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine, and we also believe that it’s important in the coming years for Europe to step up in a big way to provide for its own defense, the threat that I worry the most about vis-a-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor.

And what I worry about is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America.

Now I was struck that a former European commissioner went on television recently and sounded delighted that the Romanian government had just annulled an entire election. He warned that if things don’t go to plan, the very same thing could happen in Germany, too.

Now these cavalier statements are shocking to American ears. For years, we’ve been told that everything we fund and support is in the name of our shared democratic values. Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy.

But when we see European courts canceling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard. And I say ourselves because I fundamentally believe that we are on the same team. We must do more than talk about democratic values, we must live them.

Lessons from the Cold War

Now within living memory of many of you in this room, the Cold War positioned defenders of democracy against much more tyrannical forces on this continent. And consider the side in that fight that censored dissidents, that closed churches, that canceled elections. Were they the good guys? Certainly not.

But thank God they lost the Cold War. They lost because they neither valued nor respected all of the extraordinary blessings of liberty. The freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, to invent, to build. As it turns out, you can’t mandate innovation or creativity just as you can’t force people what to think, what to feel, or what to believe.

And we believe those things are certainly connected. And unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it’s sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the Cold War’s winners. I look to Brussels, where EU commissars warn citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest the moment they spot what they’ve judged to be, quote, “hateful content.” I look to my own country, where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online as part of, quote, “combating misogyny on the internet, a day of action.”

ALSO READ:  TRANSCRIPT: Trump Speaks At Oct. 7 Remembrance Event in Florida 

I look to Sweden, where two weeks ago the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Koran burnings that resulted in his friend’s murder. As the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden’s laws to supposedly protect free expression do not, in fact, grant, and I’m quoting, “a free pass to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief.”

Concerns About Religious Freedom in the UK

And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends in the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons in particular in the crosshairs. A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith-Connor, a 51-year-old physiotherapist and an army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50 meters from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes.

Not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own. After British law enforcement spotted him and demanded to know what he was praying for, Adam replied simply it was on behalf of the unborn son he and his former girlfriend had aborted years before.

Now the officers were not moved. Adam was found guilty of breaking the government’s new buffer zones law, which criminalizes silent prayer and other actions that could influence a person’s decision within 200 meters of an abortion facility. He was sentenced to pay thousands of pounds in legal costs to the prosecution.

Now I wish I could say that this was a fluke, a one-off crazy example of a badly written law being enacted against a single person.

But no, this last October, just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called safe access zones, warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law. Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thought crime. In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat.

Censorship in the United States

And in the interest of comedy, my friends, but also in the interest of truth, I will admit that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not from within Europe, but from within my own country, where the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so-called misinformation. Misinformation, like, for example, the idea that coronavirus had likely leaked from a laboratory in China, our own government encouraged private companies to silence people who dared to utter what turned out to be an obvious truth.

So I come here today not just with an observation, but with an offer. Just as the Biden administration seemed desperate to silence people for speaking their minds, so the Trump administration will do precisely the opposite, and I hope that we can work together on that. In Washington, there is a new sheriff in town, and under Donald Trump’s leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square, agree or disagree.

Election Cancellation in Romania

Now we’re at the point, of course, that the situation has gotten so bad that this December, Romania straight-up canceled the results of a presidential election, based on the flimsy suspicions of an intelligence agency and enormous pressure from its continental neighbors.

Now, as I understand it, the argument was that Russian disinformation had infected the Romanian elections.

But I’d ask my European friends to have some perspective. You can believe it’s wrong for Russia to buy social media advertisements to influence your elections. We certainly do. You can condemn it on the world stage, even.

But if your democracy can be destroyed with a few hundred thousand dollars of digital advertising from a foreign country, then it wasn’t very strong to begin with.

Now the good news is that I happen to think your democracies are substantially less brittle than many people apparently fear, and I really do believe that allowing our citizens to speak their mind will make them stronger still. Which of course brings us back to Munich, where the organizers of this very conference have banned lawmakers representing parties on both the left and the right from participating in these conversations.

Now again, we don’t have to agree with everything or anything that people say, but when people represent, when political leaders represent an important constituency, it is incumbent upon us to at least participate in dialogue with them.

Now to many of us on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old entrenched interests hiding behind ugly Soviet-era words like misinformation and disinformation who simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion or, God forbid, vote a different way or even worse, win an election.

Defense Spending and European Security

Now this is a security conference and I’m sure you all came here prepared to talk about how exactly you intend to increase defense spending over the next few years in line with some new target. And that’s great, because as President Trump has made abundantly clear, he believes that our European friends must play a bigger role in the future of this continent. We don’t think, you hear this term, burden sharing, but we think it’s an important part of being in a shared alliance together that the Europeans step up while America focuses on areas of the world that are in great danger.

But let me also ask you, how will you even begin to think through the kinds of budgeting questions if we don’t know what it is that we’re defending in the first place? I’ve heard a lot already in my conversations, and I’ve had many, many great conversations with many people gathered here in this room. I’ve heard a lot about what you need to defend yourselves from, and of course that’s important.

But what has seemed a little bit less clear to me, and certainly I think to many of the citizens of Europe, is what exactly it is that you’re defending yourselves for.

What is the positive vision that animates this shared security compact that we all believe is so important? And I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your very own people. Europe faces many challenges, but the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis I believe we all face together, is one of our own making. If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you, nor for that matter is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump.

You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years.

Have we learned nothing that thin mandates produce unstable results?

The Importance of Democratic Mandates

But there is so much of value that can be accomplished with the kind of democratic mandate that I think will come from being more responsive to the voices of your citizens. If you’re going to enjoy competitive economies, if you’re going to enjoy affordable energy and secure supply chains, then you need mandates to govern, because you have to make difficult choices to enjoy all of these things, and of course we know that very well in America.

You cannot win a democratic mandate by censoring your opponents or putting them in jail, whether that’s the leader of the opposition, a humble Christian praying in her own home, or a journalist trying to report the news. Nor can you win one by disregarding your basic electorate on questions like who gets to be a part of our shared society.

The Challenge of Mass Migration

And of all the pressing challenges that the nations represented here face, I believe there is nothing more urgent than mass migration. Today, almost one in five people living in this country moved here from abroad. That is, of course, an all-time high. It’s a similar number, by the way, in the United States, also an all-time high. The number of immigrants who entered the EU from non-EU countries doubled between 2021 and 2022 alone, and of course it’s gotten much higher since.

And we know the situation, it didn’t materialize in a vacuum. It’s the result of a series of conscious decisions made by politicians all over the continent and others across the world over the span of a decade. We saw the horrors wrought by these decisions yesterday in this very city.

And of course, I can’t bring it up again without thinking about the terrible victims who had a beautiful winter day in Munich ruined. Our thoughts and prayers are with them and will remain with them.

But why did this happen in the first place? It’s a terrible story, but it’s one we’ve heard way too many times in Europe and unfortunately too many times in the United States as well. An asylum seeker, often a young man in his mid-twenties, already known to police, rams a car into a crowd and shatters a community.

How many times must we suffer these appalling setbacks before we change course and take our shared civilization in a new direction? No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants.

But you know what they did vote for? In England, they voted for Brexit, and agree or disagree, they voted for it. And more and more all over Europe, they’re voting for political leaders who promise to put an end to out-of-control migration.

Now I happen to agree with a lot of these concerns, but you don’t have to agree with me. I just think that people care about their homes, they care about their dreams, they care about their safety and their capacity to provide for themselves and their children.

And they’re smart. I think this is one of the most important things I’ve learned in my brief time in politics. Contrary to what you might hear a couple of mountains over in Davos, the citizens of all of our nations don’t generally think of themselves as educated animals or as interchangeable cogs of a global economy.

And it’s hardly surprising that they don’t want to be shuffled about or relentlessly ignored by their leaders. It is the business of democracy to adjudicate these big questions at the ballot box. I believe that dismissing people, dismissing their concerns, or worse yet, shutting down media, shutting down elections, or shutting people out of the political process, protects nothing. In fact, it is the most sure-fire way to destroy democracy.

And speaking up and expressing opinions isn’t election interference, even when people express views outside your own country and even when those people are very influential. And trust me, I say this with all humor, if American Democracy can survive ten years of Greta Thunberg’s scolding, you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk.

The Importance of Listening to the People

But what no democracy, American, German, or European, will survive is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief are invalid or unworthy of even being considered. Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There’s no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don’t.

Europeans, the people, have a voice. European leaders have a choice. And my strong belief is that we do not need to be afraid of the future. You can embrace what your people tell you, even when it’s surprising, even when you don’t agree.

And if you do so, you can face the future with certainty and with confidence, knowing that the nation stands behind each of you. And that, to me, is the great magic of democracy. It’s not in these stone buildings or beautiful hotels. It’s not even in the great institutions that we have built together as a shared society. To believe in democracy is to understand that each of our citizens has wisdom and has a voice.

And if we refuse to listen to that voice, even our most successful fights will secure very little. As Pope John Paul II, in my view, one of the most extraordinary champions of democracy on this continent or any other, once said, “Do not be afraid.” We shouldn’t be afraid of our people, even when they express views that disagree with their leadership. Thank you all.

Good luck to all of you. God bless you.

TL;DR:

Vice President JD Vance delivered a powerful speech at the 2025 Munich Security Conference, emphasizing the importance of defending democratic values, especially in Europe. He voiced concerns over internal threats to democracy, such as election cancellations, censorship, and religious freedom restrictions. Vance called for European nations to strengthen their democratic mandates by listening to their citizens and addressing urgent issues like mass migration. He criticized the silencing of opposing voices and stressed that the strength of democracy lies in the active participation and concerns of the people. The speech concluded with a call for Europe to face the future with confidence and respect for the wisdom of its citizens.

Synopsis:

In his remarks, Vice President JD Vance addresses European leaders at the Munich Security Conference, focusing on the retreat of fundamental democratic values in Europe and the United States. He points to troubling instances such as the annulment of elections in Romania, censorship in Sweden, and restrictions on religious freedom in the UK. Vance argues that Europe's internal challenges, including mass migration and the erosion of democratic principles, pose a greater threat to security than external actors like Russia or China. He calls for a return to democratic mandates, where the voice of the people is heard and respected, and urges European leaders to act in the best interest of their citizens. He concludes by stressing that democracies cannot survive if they disregard the concerns and rights of their people.

Glossary of Terms:

• Democratic Mandates: The authority granted to a government by its citizens through free and fair elections. A strong democratic mandate comes from being responsive to the electorate's concerns.
• Election Cancellations: The annulment or invalidation of election results, often due to allegations of corruption, fraud, or external influence. Vance points to Romania’s election annulment as a concerning example.
• Censorship: The suppression or restriction of speech, media, or other forms of expression, often justified by governments as necessary for maintaining order or protecting citizens.
• Conscience Rights: The right to act according to one's personal beliefs, including the freedom to express one's views in public without fear of legal punishment.
• Mass Migration: The large-scale movement of people, often due to factors like conflict, economic hardship, or climate change. Vance highlights the growing challenges of migration in Europe and the United States.
• Burden Sharing: A term often used in international relations referring to the distribution of responsibilities, especially in defense and security matters, among allied nations.

FAQ:

1. What are the key concerns raised by Vice President JD Vance at the Munich Security Conference?

   • Vance highlights the erosion of democratic values in Europe, including election cancellations, censorship, and religious freedom restrictions. He also addresses the challenges of mass migration and urges Europe to strengthen its democratic mandates.

2. Why does JD Vance believe that Europe’s internal issues are a greater threat than external actors like Russia or China?

   • Vance argues that Europe’s retreat from core democratic values, such as free speech and the rule of law, undermines its security and stability more than any external threat. He believes that without addressing these internal challenges, Europe cannot effectively defend itself.

3. What is Vance’s stance on the issue of mass migration in Europe?

   • Vance views mass migration as a significant challenge, particularly the influx of unvetted immigrants. He calls for stronger control over migration policies and emphasizes the importance of listening to the concerns of citizens who worry about their safety and cultural identity.

4. How does JD Vance view censorship and its impact on democracy?

   • Vance criticizes censorship in both Europe and the United States, arguing that it threatens the very foundations of democracy. He believes that suppressing dissenting voices stifles innovation, freedom, and the ability to engage in meaningful democratic debate.

5. What does Vance mean by “democratic mandates,” and why does he emphasize their importance?

   • A democratic mandate refers to the legitimacy and authority granted to a government by its citizens through elections. Vance stresses that strong mandates are essential for effective governance and the ability to make tough decisions on issues like defense, migration, and national security.

6. How does Vance suggest Europe should approach its security strategy?

   • Vance advocates for a security strategy rooted in democratic principles, where European leaders listen to their citizens’ concerns. He stresses that Europe must be willing to defend its values, not just against external threats, but also against internal challenges to democracy.

7. What is Vance’s view on the relationship between the U.S. and Europe?

   • Vance believes that the U.S. and Europe share common values and should collaborate on global security, but he urges Europe to take on a more significant role in defending its own interests and stepping up defense spending.

Historical Context and Remediation:

• The Cold War: Vance refers to the Cold War as a historical period when Europe, particularly Eastern Europe, faced tyrannical forces that censored dissent, closed churches, and canceled elections. The Cold War's outcome, with the defeat of authoritarian regimes, reaffirmed the importance of democratic values, which Vance believes are now under threat in Europe.

• Romania’s Election Cancellation: Vance references the controversial annulment of Romania's presidential election, which was allegedly influenced by Russian disinformation. He questions whether European democracies are strong enough to withstand external interference, arguing that if a democracy can be so easily undermined, it was already fragile.

• UK’s Buffer Zones Law: Vance cites the case of Adam Smith-Connor, a British man charged for silently praying near an abortion clinic, as an example of how conscience rights are being eroded in Europe. This, along with other cases, signals a retreat from fundamental freedoms, according to Vance.

• Mass Migration and Migration Policies: Vance contextualizes the rise in mass migration as a result of political decisions made over decades. He connects the growing migration crisis to incidents of violence, such as the attack in Munich, which he attributes to unvetted immigration policies.

• Brexit and Voter Concerns: Vance highlights the British vote for Brexit as an example of how citizens are demanding more control over their borders and political decisions. This reflects broader European dissatisfaction with unchecked migration and globalization.

• The Importance of Listening to Citizens: Vance’s speech underscores the importance of political leaders respecting the voices of their citizens. He references the idea that democracy requires listening to the concerns and aspirations of the people, even when those views are uncomfortable or unexpected.

Vance’s message is clear: Europe faces existential challenges that can only be addressed by returning to its democratic roots and responding to the legitimate concerns of its people. He calls on European leaders to embrace these values, rather than retreating into bureaucratic and authoritarian practices.