Liberty Exposé: Marco In Munich
In February, international diplomats, government officials, and statesmen coalesced within the luxurious halls of the Hotel Bayerischer Hof for the annual Munich Security Conference. In attendance was U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio, who, much like Vice President J.D. Vance in the year prior, delivered a speech encapsulating American interests, global affairs, and the intertwined relationship between the United States and its European allies. But unlike the firebrand rhetoric and condemnation hallmark of Vance’s oration, the remarks of Rubio were contrastingly conciliatory and even-keeled in tone, albeit not necessarily in content.
Rubio delineated the idea that the triumph of capitalism over communism in the Cold War delivered the promise of a rose-colored future, where the nations of tomorrow would be ushered into a Utopia rooted in international trade and commerce, retiring nationhood as a relic of the past. An era of a rules-based global order, a “world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.” A time when “the end of history” would finally be achieved. Rubio insisted that such an idea was no less than fantasy, and a foolish one at that. An unobtainable dream, whose misguided vision has defined the political and cultural policies of the last century. Policies which, according to Rubio, culminated in the widespread consequences of domestic deindustrialization, an outsourcing of sovereignty and weakened borders, and a rising tide of mass migration carrying a host of potential economic and societal catastrophes.
Rubio’s discussion at Munich was rife with points that, on paper, any American conservative should stand behind wholeheartedly. But these well-received claims also pose an interesting question: Is the reaffirmation of American commitment and the pursuit of global achievements outlined by Rubio, whether alone or in concert with “our friends here in Europe”, truly in the interests of American citizens who rallied behind the campaign promises of “America First”? Or are the claims within Rubio’s speech the first rays in a renewed dawn of American foreign intervention and global obligation?
Make the west great again
“We are part of one civilization - Western civilization.” — Marco Rubio
A key aspect within Rubio’s speech was his emphasis on the shared historical relationship between America and its European allies. Rubio traced the American lineage from the initial voyages of Christopher Columbus, to English settlers in colonies along the Atlantic, to the wave of French, Scots-Irish, German and Spanish immigrants who shaped American culture during the westward expansion of Manifest Destiny. Thousands of oceanic miles may separate America from its foreign forbearers, but the United States “will always be a child of Europe.” Rubio attested it is this common heritage of language, culture, and Christian faith that allowed America and European nations to reshape a “shattered continent in the wake of two devastating world wars.”
United together in solidarity and purpose, America and Europe were able to surmount the seemingly impossible. But great achievements were not the only shared outcomes brought about by this transatlantic partnership. The problems, domestic and foreign, currently plaguing nations on each side of the Atlantic were born out of the post-Cold War “dangerous delusion”. “We made these mistakes together,” stated Rubio, yet noticeably absent from his speech was the admission of other mistakes found within the “lessons of 5,000 years of recorded human history.” Mistakes which led to the horrors of imperialism and the exploitation of indigenous peoples across the lands they called home. But perhaps the rectification of these latter mistakes will be addressed at next year’s conference in Munich. For now, Rubio insisted it is high time to combat the detriments of globalization across the Western hemisphere, “and now, together, we owe it to our people to face these facts and to move forward, and rebuild.”
While Rubio championed the need for strengthened transatlantic bonds between “heirs to the same great and noble civilization” to amend the mistakes of yesterday, his speech left little doubt about which nation would stand at the helm of a “new Western century.” The United States of America.
“And I am here today to leave it clear that America is charting the path for a new century of prosperity, and that once again we want to do it together with you, our cherished allies and our oldest friends.” — Marco Rubio
The foreign policy directions of the Trump administration, and the interconnected goals which Rubio claims America and European nations are both equally invested in, are outcomes that America would prefer to undertake side by side with countries across the European continent. But European involvement, as suggested by Rubio, is arguably not a necessity in ensuring that the future is not a “faint and feeble echo of our past.”, as he acknowledged, “we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone”. European allies have the potential to be instrumental in realizing the reclamation of Western civilization’s checkered past, but only if these allies follow the standard charted by the U.S. and the U.S. alone. Allies who are not “paralyzed into inaction by fear - fear of climate change, fear of war, fear of technology” and will commit themselves fully to the idea that “we, the West, have inherited together – what we have inherited together is something that is unique and distinctive and irreplaceable”. The message, despite its heartwarming veneer, is clear: play ball by the American playbook or be relegated to cheering or jeering on the sidelines.
An economically and defensively emboldened Europe is undoubtedly a net positive, especially considering America contributes a gargantuan 62% of NATO’s $1.59 trillion defense spending, yet only if the nations of the European continent undertake the revitalization described by Rubio on their own accord. Rubio’s proposal for the reinvestment of transatlantic bonds may indeed conceive a new era of Western prosperity, but can the potential benefits of an increased American foreign involvement outweigh the concerns of an American populace unsatisfied with the current State of the Union?
America First?
Rubio’s sermon at Munich was described as a “message of reassurance” by moderator Wolfgang Ischinger, a sentiment paralleled by many American and foreign media outlets. However, this communication of reassurance and restored confidence may fall short of reaching American citizens from its origin in Munich, given that many Americans are against increased foreign involvement and intervention. For those who marshalled behind President Trump’s commitment to a full stop on endless foreign wars, Rubio’s speech seems to indicate a reversal of a campaign promise that helped Trump secure his victory in the last election.
The implications of this reversal are most evident in the Global South, particularly nations throughout Central and South America. Rubio hammered home the need for an American and European “unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South.”, economies once dominated by American corporate interests. The U.S. is leading this charge in our own modern era, with the Trump administration’s direct intervention in Venezuelan politics ousting the nation’s former leader Nicolás Maduro, firmly enshrining Venezuela under the sphere of American influence. And for whose benefit? The 80 million barrels of oil acquired from America’s “new friend” to the south may contribute to driving down consumer costs at the pump, but this is no different than the logic behind President Biden tapping into the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve for the same purpose, minus the kidnapping of a foreign leader. The U.S.’s actions in Venezuela may even reverberate across the Caribbean to Rubio’s family homeland of Cuba, with American intervention on the island being a concrete possibility in the near future.
Rubio criticized the actions of nations that endanger American and global stability while hiding “behind abstractions of international law which they themselves routinely violate.”, citing the current ineptitude of the United Nations, which he conceded “still has tremendous potential to be a tool for good in the world.” There is a certain air of irony to Rubio’s statement, as UN experts and international organizations staunchly condemned the American abduction of Maduro as a violation of international law itself. It would seem the standard only applies to those who lack the sufficient hard power to enforce it, thereby sidestepping diplomatic fallout of any consequence. Such actions set a dangerous precedent for other actors on the stage of global affairs, paramount among them China and their longstanding desire for complete reunification with Taiwan.
America has a personal stake in the foreign affairs of European nations and countries across the globe, but “America First” means ensuring the needs of those in our domestic heartland are met before any action is taken overseas, and potential spoils of intervention should never be an acceptable casus belli. Rubio’s oration, and the recent foreign policy undertakings of the Trump administration, indicate a renewed commitment to American intervention across the globe. This may be out of necessity, because only in what Rubio describes as a “perfect world” can the actions of violent regimes be resolved by “diplomats and strongly worded resolutions.”, and our world is certainly far from perfect. But what if Europe doesn’t want to walk hand in hand with America towards a new Western Horizon? What if the burden of carrying this endeavor of “renewal and restoration” falls solely on the shoulders of America?
For a populace tiring of foreign entanglements and overseas expenditures, Rubio’s speech in Munich may outline a new doctrine in which the interests of the American people appear to be far from first.
