The Trump administration’s last-minute snub of the Aspen Security Forum this week betrays a growing animosity between the U.S. government and wider national security community.

The Pentagon on Monday pulled senior Defense Department officials from the annual event —only a day before the start of the four-day summit in Colorado — claiming the bipartisan gathering “promotes the evil of globalism, disdain for our great country, and hatred for the President of the United States.”

The strong wording has alarmed some experts and former government officials, who see a growing tendency for the administration to cut off anyone who criticizes or so much as offers an alternative view to that of the current U.S. government — putting up a barrier between them and the decision makers. 

“The Trump administration doesn’t like dissent, I think that’s pretty clear. And they don’t like dissenting views at conferences,” a Republican political strategist and frequent forum attendee told The Hill. “Causing a stir about perceived criticism of the Trump administration makes people afraid to cross them and lose access to the administration. They might be cut off from people who are implementing policies.”

But the shunning of events on the national security and foreign policy circuit does no favors for the administration’s national security goals, experts say, as they lend a platform to potentially different viewpoints that could be useful for Washington.

Case in point, those that gathered at the mountain retreat were described as “bewildered” by the decision due to the forum’s well-known bipartisan agenda, with several former Trump administration officials slated to speak, according to the political strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

“It was a surprise because most of us were traveling to the conference when the announcement occurred,” they said. “I think most people who attend the event frequently never viewed it as being partisan or anti-Trump. So it was bewildering and I think a little bit concerning.”

The Aspen Security Forum, described as the “premier national security and foreign policy conference,” is among the most high-profile such events and for years has attracted Republican and Democratic administration officials, business leaders, and analysts. 

During Trump’s first term, several top officials including then-CIA chief and later Secretary of State Mike Pompeo attended the forum.

This year’s lineup included Mark Esper, an acting defense secretary in Trump’s first term, Condoleezza Rice, a former national security advisor and secretary of state under President George W. Bush, and David Petraeus, the short-lived CIA director under President Obama. Speakers covered a range of issues that included the U.S. strategy on Taiwan, Russia’s war in Ukraine, NATO, and how Trump’s tariffs will affect Washington’s alliances.

More than a dozen pulled administration officials were set to appear on several panels, including Navy Secretary John Phelan. But the Pentagon suddenly declared they would not attend and would not do so moving forward as “their values do not align with the values of the DoD,” according to spokesperson Sean Parnell.

Only one administration official ended up attending the conference and they were not associated with the Pentagon: Adam Boehler, Trump’s special envoy for hostage release. 

Even without the defense officials in attendance, panelists praised a number of Trump’s recent moves, including his decision to offer lethal aid for Ukraine, the U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and prompting NATO countries to foot more of the bill when it comes to defense spending. 

National security elites also appeared resigned that the norms and conventions that sprang up following World War II — which have dictated U.S. use of military force and how Washington addresses long-held partners and alliances — are now upended thanks to Trump.

“We have to recognize that we’re probably not going back to exactly that system,” Rice, a co-chair of the Aspen Strategy Group, said at the closing panel of the summit.  

Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution think tank, said he wasn’t doing any hand-wringing over Trump’s 11th hour snub, and was viewing the official pullout as just the new norm for at least the next three years.

“If they want to have a little bit of a culture war over this particular forum, I’m just going to view it as a reminder of how they view the world, as opposed to a major problem,” O’Hanlon said, referring to the administration’s isolationist tendencies. 

“They’ll be willing to just hold a grudge if they decide you’ve slighted them or you’re not of their worldview. And that’s just the way it’s going to be,” he added.

O’Hanlon noted that as long as administration officials appear at some similar forums and are willing to engage, he doesn’t see an issue. But should they stop attending any such events moving forward, that’s a cause for concern.

“If they just occasionally feel a slight from somebody and pull out of this or that, that’s one thing. If they stop being willing to engage in any kind of forum, unless you somehow prove that you’re a complete MAGA Republican, that would be much more concerning.”

Aspen organizers, meanwhile, have made clear their invitation to the Trump officials remains open. The political strategists said the organizers were more concerned about ensuring that there’s a presence of government officials going forward at the event. 

“This is a major security forum, it’s an open exchange of ideas, and they made it very clear throughout the event that the officials are invited back anytime in the future,” they said. “I think there’s a hope that that they will come back next year.”