The U.S. Secretary of State will face the dual challenge of explaining and advancing American interests in foreign policy while also understanding what that foreign policy represents in the eyes of the president. This is a challenge faced by every Secretary of State, but this one inherits a particularly complex moment in history, alongside an unconventional president leading the nation.
1.
Marco Rubio’s confirmation as Secretary of State in Trump’s 2.0 presidency was met with a sense of relief on the American political stage. Ninety-nine senators voted in his favor, with not a single vote against—a unique scenario unlikely to repeat for other nominees of the new administration. Rubio stands as a representative of the traditional Republican Party, appointed by a wholly untraditional president, at a time when one world order has ended, and the new one is yet to begin. As demonstrated during his five-hour confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Rubio, with eloquence and detailed knowledge of global issues, is undoubtedly the qualified figure to lead American diplomacy during the most challenging global period since the end of World War II.
In Rubio’s analysis—presented here in simplified and reduced form—the post-World War II world order was built and guaranteed by the U.S., aiming to expand the realms of freedom and open markets. This order allowed China to enter, “exploiting its benefits without assuming its responsibilities.” The liberal world order, rooted in the “end of history” thesis (Fukuyama’s idea that all nations would naturally gravitate toward democracy), was an illusion that has now reached its end, Rubio argued. We have entered a period of a new world order.
In seeking Senate confirmation, Marco Rubio positioned himself as the first Secretary of State tasked with helping shape this new global order.
2.
From his extensive testimony, I will highlight three parameters that outline the early contours of this new world order. The first parameter is the U.S. national interest. As Rubio stated, American foreign policy will be anything that delivers greater security, power, and prosperity to the U.S. This parameter can be achieved through alliances (which Rubio strongly supports, particularly NATO), or through redefining or expanding them (e.g., in Latin America, Southeast Asia, or East Asia). However, it can also be interpreted as an isolationist threat: the U.S. will no longer be responsible for upholding a liberal world order of open markets but holds tools to protect its strategic economic interests (markets, production, energy prices, technological dominance, etc.).
The first parameter is closely tied to the second: China. During his confirmation hearing, Rubio described China as “the most powerful and dangerous adversary this nation has ever faced.” He emphasized that the Chinese Communist Party “has lied, cheated, hacked, and stolen its way to superpower status at the expense of the United States.” Furthermore, he warned that if the current trajectory continues, the U.S. will become dependent on China. Consequently, much like the Cold War period with the Soviet Union, defining American foreign policy to ensure greater security, wealth, and prosperity is essentially defining a strategy to interrupt China’s current trajectory, wherein America is in an unstoppable decline and China is in an unstoppable ascent.
These two parameters will be tested against the third: ending the war in Ukraine, either through a prolonged ceasefire or (less likely) a cessation of hostilities with a political process to find a solution. This will be the first test of U.S.-Europe relations, considering the broader context of U.S.-China confrontation. Rubio articulated the American position during his confirmation: Ukraine must accept that it will not regain the territories occupied by Russia through war, and Russia must acknowledge that it cannot, through war, force the remainder of independent Ukraine to submit to its will. The test will lie in how successfully the U.S. and Europe can unify their positions and negotiate with Russia as a united front. For Putin, and much of the world, this will mark the beginning of the new world order—one where American singular leadership no longer exists but paradoxically must be reaffirmed through U.S. leadership within the Euro-Atlantic coalition.
3.
Rubio’s elaboration extends beyond this—there is no political hotspot or distant corner of the globe for which he lacks an articulated opinion as part of (largely bipartisan) foreign policy. However, Rubio is well aware that he is the head of diplomacy, the direction of which is defined by the president, Donald Trump.
This creates a unique challenge for the first Secretary of State in the new world order, as he must simultaneously formulate two diplomacies. One is external—how America defines its interests in new and complex geopolitical circumstances. The other is internal—how the Secretary of State, at the helm of the world’s largest diplomatic apparatus, understands and conveys what the president defines as the United States’ global interests.
The second challenge is difficult in any context, but under President Trump, it becomes exponentially harder due to his unconventional style. When Trump declares that the U.S. wants Greenland or the Panama Canal, it is not an easy proposition for the American ambassador in Denmark or Panama to promote, nor for the Secretary of State to explain at the U.N. Behind these bombastic statements, however, lie deep geopolitical reasons that must be articulated and justified by the State Department and its leader. In the case of Greenland, it’s the race for the Arctic—not just for its underground resources but also because, with global warming, this region may soon create new shipping lanes for global trade. In the case of the Panama Canal, it’s the fear that Chinese investments there (and elsewhere in Latin America, including Pacific ports) pose a risk to the U.S., akin to the Soviet-funded revolutions of yesteryear, from Cuba to Bolivia.
4.
As I write these lines, Marco Rubio has officially started his first day on the job. He will face one of the most challenging tasks in one of the most complicated times in history. Among all the challenges, one of the most critical will be ensuring that his words resonate as part of an Atlanticist tradition—one that preserves and builds alliances of Western civilization. In a situation that, under other circumstances, would seem paradoxical, Rubio’s challenge will be to embody the foreign policy of a traditional American Republican, the kind who—from Eisenhower to Reagan and George Bush—won the Cold War, and to do so at the dawn of a new Cold War.