It started out as a well-planned dinner—one of those occasions when influence, policy, and personality are supposed to coexist together. However, harmony departed the room before the tiramisu did.
The new U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick, arrived at Davos with a message that was anything but timid. His tone was remarkably aggressive when he spoke to a group of powerful economists. “Capitalism has a new sheriff in town,” he said sharply and definitively, praising coal as a viable energy way forward and directly challenging European energy strategy.
The response came quickly.
Before Lutnick had even reached dessert, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde quietly got up and left. Despite being silent, that moment had great significance. Not only was her absence observed, but it also changed the atmosphere of the night.
Al Gore reacted shortly after with audible disapproval. Some claim he was jeered. Some claim there was a loud sigh accompanied by a head shake. In any case, it was an unusually visible expression of discontent at a gathering that is often controlled by tactful diplomacy.
| Name | Howard Lutnick |
|---|---|
| Title | U.S. Secretary of Commerce |
| Notable Moment | Heckled at Davos 2026 dinner |
| Key Incident | Walkouts including Christine Lagarde |
| Quote | “Capitalism has a new sheriff in town.” |
| Credible Source | Financial Times |
These weren’t informal arguments over dinner. There were clear divisions between the new rhetoric and the old standards, between cautious consensus and full-fledged ideology. Those who had come expecting carefully calibrated conversation were uneasy by Lutnick’s confidently delivered statements.
There was no slip or gaffe here. Lutnick had the strong support of the U.S. Commerce Department. “Only one person booed, and it was Al Gore,” the department said in response to questions from media over the disturbances. The tension of the evening has been summed up in that phrase, which is currently doing the rounds.
What many had anticipated would be a private discussion turned into a platform for ideological posturing. Not only from Lutnick, however. Following President Trump’s reelection, his attendance at Davos marked a significant change in tone, which was echoed in his posture, pace, and timing in addition to his policy statements.
The World Economic Forum has faced internal problems and external mistrust in recent years. Once unquestionable, Klaus Schwab’s legacy came under inquiry due to financial mismanagement and poisonous cultures. The credibility gap persisted even if the investigations produced no charges.
Longtime BlackRock CEO and recently named WEF chair Larry Fink was supposed to bring things back to normal. He had the chance to change the mood by hosting the meal. However, the evening turned into something much less formal.
I recall observing Fink’s poise being particularly put to the test as he attempted to regain civility. Despite not being flustered, his body language—partially lifted arms, lowered voice—spoke loudly. More than any speech, that moment stayed with me.
The evening was “spicy,” according to one CEO. Less charitably, another described bi as “a staged provocation.” These remarks highlight a more general unease with Davos’s current state, which is more concerned with drawing boundaries than with mending gaps.
The bizarre tone of the event was further heightened by Trump’s previous comments regarding Greenland, in which he reiterated his unconventional proposal to purchase the island. He made it clear, somewhat sharply, that talks were back on the table even though military force would not be utilized. It was perceived as parody by several guests. It wasn’t.
However, despite the dramatic tension, something useful did occur. The façade broke. Diplomatic meetings such as this have long relied on refined ambiguity. Lutnick’s remarks totally broke that cadence. He didn’t use hedging. He went up to them. Even though it caused controversy, that clarity was clearly seen.
Many had departed early by the end of the evening. Dessert never showed up. There were still a few visitors, chatting softly over half-empty drinks. The atmosphere was contemplative and a little taken aback.
The incident didn’t require an official comment, even if the WEF didn’t provide one. They had sent the message.
Lutnick saw the disturbance as a strength rather than a weakness. He traveled to Davos to challenge rather than to agree. It was a very successful mission, but not in the way the hosts had hoped.
Beyond policy differences, the evening revealed more. It brought attention to a change: disruption is now a purposeful tactic rather than a result of diplomacy. It remains to be seen if this will result in more divisiveness or positive progress.
One thing is certain, though: something important has been stirred when the dinner concludes without dessert and the discussion becomes a headline.
