The sight of Mr. Rubio and the American delegation seated across the table from Mr. Lavrov may have been jarring to some observers. It’s been dizzying to see how fast the negotiations have materialized, but Trump administration officials say that no one should be surprised. The president has long believed, officials say, that he is the only one who can end the Russia-Ukraine war.

“President Trump wants to stop the killing. The United States wants peace and is using its strength in the world to bring countries together,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a statement after the U.S.-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia. “President Trump is the only leader in the world who can get Ukraine and Russia to agree to that.”

The two sides agreed to appoint high-level diplomatic teams to begin working on a path to end the war. They also discussed resuming full staffing levels at each nation’s respective embassies. Mr. Lavrov described the talks as “very useful,” and he said that the two sides “did not just listen to each other, but heard each other.”

The talks have sparked widespread concern in Kyiv and capitals of Ukrainian allies across Europe, with some contending the Trump administration has already made unilateral concessions to the Kremlin even before real negotiations have begun. And Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has made clear he won’t accept a deal without Ukraine at the table. Kyiv and the rest of Europe seem to be on their own parallel but distinctly separate track from the U.S.-Russia talks.

Far from the battlefield, at the IDEX 2025 conference, defense contractors from Russia and Ukraine are each displaying some of the weaponry they’re using to fight each other. Russian defense contractor UralVagonZavod showed new improvements to Moscow’s T-90 tank this week at IDEX. The Russians hope that upgrades to the tank —  including large webbing above the turret that is designed to protect against top-attack weapons — will help it survive attacks from Ukrainian drones.

The Ukrainians’ booth at the defense expo focused on the nation’s drone warfare capabilities, underscoring Kyiv’s goal of using drones — not human beings — as its front-line force against the Russians.

One more from the IDEX 2025 conference: Mr. Taylor’s interview with Mr. Tseng of ShieldAI delivers an exclusive look at some of the most cutting-edge AI technology on display at the event.  

The company’s V-BAT drone, whose hardware can be broken down into parcels small enough to fit on the back of a pickup truck or small boat, is also packed with artificial intelligence software that enables it to operate on long missions without having to rely on GPS for navigation.

“It’s a lot like a self-driving car, but for aviation,” Mr. Tseng told Threat Status. “It’s mapping out its world around it and then it’s using that map to reference itself in the world. …There’s no GPS.”

The technology is part of Shield AI’s “Hivemind,” which the company claims is the “world’s best AI pilot.” 

The U.S. Agency for International Development has become a prime target for Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, as well as for conservative Republicans who say the aid agency lost its way as it bankrolled transgender operas, DEI musicals and other seemingly non-humanitarian aid causes abroad.

But beneath the hysteria and political back-and-forth is this reality: American foreign assistance, through USAID or otherwise, must return to its roots and always aim to advance U.S. interests abroad.

Richard Crespin, CEO of the international consulting firm CollaborateUp and a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, makes that case on the latest episode of the Threat Status weekly podcast. He argues that, broadly speaking, U.S. foreign assistance became disconnected from the country’s other policy goals abroad.

“Put very bluntly, during the Cold War we were using foreign assistance to encourage countries to be on our side and not on the side of the Soviets. After the Cold War, I think we started to lose the plot and we started to drift into pure philanthropy,” he said.

“An America First foreign policy, America First foreign assistance,” he said, “should have America’s self-interest in mind.”

There’s a battle unfolding inside the GOP over the nomination of Elbridge Colby, Mr. Trump’s pick for the key post of undersecretary of defense for policy. National Security Correspondent Bill Gertz has unpacked the political drama around the nomination. Vice President J.D. Vance, Mr. Hegseth and other high-level officials have rushed to defend Mr. Colby amid questions from fellow conservatives about his views on China and his alleged roots in the Obama wing of the Democratic Party, including his work for a Democratic think tank, the Center for New American Security (CNAS).

Several Republican senators, including Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton of Arkansas, are reportedly questioning the choice and are in conversations with the White House about the nomination. After Mr. Colby left the Pentagon in 2018, he also worked for WestExec Advisers, a consulting firm founded by Biden administration Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

Some believe that the controversy highlights the divide between today’s ascendant MAGA-driven Republican Party and the “neocon” GOP foreign policy establishment that emerged in the post-9/11 era during the George W. Bush presidency. 

“Bridge has consistently been correct about the big foreign policy debates of the last 20 years. He was critical of the Iraq war, which made him unemployable in the 2000s-era conservative movement,” Mr. Vance said in a social media post on Sunday. “He built a relationship with CNAS when it was one of the few institutions that would even hire a foreign policy realist.”  

One of Mr. Trump’s first actions when he took office last month was to officially designate Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations. That move theoretically paved the way for what on the surface may seem like a far-fetched proposition: the deployment of American Special Forces to Mexico.

The possibility should be taken seriously, The Washington Times Editorial Board argues in a recent piece. 

“Unlike our recent overseas entanglements, the border situation affects American lives. Our military would be taking on the bandits responsible for sneaking millions of illegal aliens into our country,” The Times’ editorial notes. “Now that there’s a leader in Washington willing to stand up to these outlaws, the cartels will eventually realize it’s time to cut their losses. The question is: How much pummeling is required to deliver the message?”

• Feb. 17-21 — International Defense Exhibition and Conference (IDEX) 2025, United Arab Emirates

• Feb. 19 — EU-U.S. Cooperation on Trade and Economic Security: A Conversation with Maros Sefcovic, American Enterprise Institute

• Feb. 19 — Globalizing Perspectives on AI Safety, Brookings Institution

• Feb. 20 — A Discussion of “Arabs and Israelis: From Oct. 7 to Peacemaking,” Wilson Center

• Feb. 20 — Research Security Risks Posed by Foreign Nationals from Countries of Risk Working at the Department of Energy’s National Laboratories, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

• Feb. 26 — 2025 Defense Software & Data Summit, Govini