by Francesco Giappichini –
“Donald Trump defends the size of his punishment”, or “Donald Trump defends the size of his punishment”. This is the title of a dense report published on March 4, 2016 by the famous US newspaper Cnn (Cable news network). They reported the attack on President Donald John Trump by the future Secretary of State of the United States, Marco Rubio, and the response of the Tycoon. Both were involved in the 2016 primary elections of the US Republican Party, which would have given Trump a victory over Senator Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz, and over Rubio’s other challenger: the the future of “the most important diplomat in the world”, as he writes North American newspapers.
Following are the words of the senator for Florida, Rubio, who was born in 1971 in Miami to immigrants from Cuba, and at the time was embarrassed by the former president, who emphasized the his brief profile: “He always calls me “Little Marco”. I admit he is taller than me. I don’t understand why his hands are the size of someone who is five feet tall. You know what they say about men with small hands? You can’t trust them.” This was followed by a response from the incoming head of state: “He took it into my own hands. No one had ever taken him out I’ve never heard of such. Are they small? promise you there are no problems with this I promise.”
Perhaps those observers are right who describe the new team of the Trumpian government as a grotesque group of unpresentable people: “His government looks like the bar from Star Wars”, called on talk shows. But, unlike some future colleagues, Rubio cannot be classified among the “yes men”, the faithful are always ready to say yes moreover, during the 2016 election campaign the debate was not just about violence: if is does Trump will turn out that he will not entrust even his smallest companies to the Latin lawyer, the another by calling him a fraud. Rubio, in fact, has represented, during the Biden Cabinet, a kind of shadow secretary of state for Latin America.
And if anything, it is debatable whether the nomination will mean new relevance to the region, which has been neglected by Washington for decades; or whether the “backyard” will continue to receive secondary importance, despite the appointment of Rubio. Which has already been identified by the Hispanic media as “the Latino with the most important cargo in the history of the EE.UU government.”. However, let us proceed to analyze the background of the future Secretary of State, and the reasons for his appointment, and to anticipate the conditions that will arise with him at the helm of the Department of the State. Rubio is the son of immigrants who left Cuba in 1956, more than two years before the supreme leader, Fidel Castro, rose to power.
And yet, even in this regard, controversy has flourished. Raised in an anti-Castro global culture in Miami, when he decided to enter politics it was more convenient to lie: he revealed himself as the son of refugees persecuted by communism, and a member of a community of refugees from the Revolución. Only later did the truth come to light: not only was there no persecution, but in fact in 1959 his maternal grandfather went, and then in 1961, the mother and brother returned sine, temporarily to the Caribbean island, to confirm (albeit with negative results) different economic opportunities. So “Little Marco” was forced to apologize, claiming that he had not yet researched his family history.
In any case, his political commitment has always been focused on Cuba, even before the rest of Latin America, and it is on this front that he has built his reputation as a hawk, a “halcón” in Castilian, and as anti-. a communist with fiery rhetoric. A good example with the attacks on the former president Barack Obama for his melting policies to Havana. As chairman and vice chairman of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (Committee on Intelligence or SSCI), known in Italy as the Select Committee on Intelligence, he addressed all policy questions foreign And in holding this position, in addition to being a member of the Committee on Foreign Relations, he not only frequently attacked Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Russia, Iran and China ; but it also targeted left-wing Latin American governments, and their leaders.
From Brazil to Colombia, from Chile to Mexico of the former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador (Amlo) « who gave parts of his country to drug cartels and is a supporter of tyranny in Cuba, a murderous dictator there the Nicaragua and a drug trafficker in Venezuela.” And he did not save Peronist Argentina, just think of the attacks launched against the former president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. On the hand other, he has often shown support for Israel and Latin American countries ruled by moderate and conservative forces, especially Argentina under the ultra-liberal president Javier Milei. However, experts are divided about the reason for In the opinion of some, the tycoon chose the senator from Miami for his long history of opposition to Latin American autocracies, for his deep knowledge of the region, and for his enduring friendship with local conservative leaders.
All this with the aim of bringing the Subcontinent back to the center of Washington’s strategies. For others, the tycoon would above all value his anti-communist rhetoric and his commitment to liberal democracy. The conditions that may arise from his management remain to be seen, assuming that some global affairs are directly managed by the White House. This is the case of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Rubio initially supported Kiev; and still later, after Trump promised to end the conflict with a negotiated peace, he spoke of a common sense solution: unfortunately «the truth is that the way in the the war in Ukraine will end as a negotiated solution. We hope that when that time comes, there will be more influence on the Ukrainian side than on the Russian side. That’s the real goal here, in my mind.” And again: what we’re funding here is a war of stagnation. This has to be stopped, because otherwise that country will go backwards hundred years.” The position against Iran is more concrete: yes, to a pragmatic solution negotiated with Tehran, but only if, in fact, the regime of the Ayatollahs ceases to be so. Even more aggressive are the (regular) anti-Chinese statements, which point the finger at the very foundations of the Asian country’s economy. So in August ’20 Beijing imposed sanctions on him, in response to similar measures ordered by Washington against Hong Kong administrators: the Chinese reportedly hit him for harsh criticism of Hong Kong’s famous National Security Law in the June ’20.
How might Senator Marco Rubio’s appointment as Secretary of State influence the US’s approach to regime change in Latin America, particularly with respect to countries like Cuba and Venezuela?
Guest 1: Good morning, and welcome to our interview about the appointment of Senator Marco Rubio as the Secretary of State by the new US administration. Our website, World Today News, has been able to gather information that suggests Rubio’s history of opposition to Latin American autocracies and his anti-communist rhetoric played a significant role in his appointment. Additionally, his knowledge of the region and relationships with conservative leaders in the region are also seen as contributing factors to his selection. As we all know, Rubio has a long-standing commitment to Cuba and has been vocal in his opposition to the Obama administration’s policies towards the country. What do you think are the implications of Rubio’s appointment on US relations with Cuba and Latin America as a whole?
Guest 2: Well, I think it’s clear that Rubio’s appointment signals a shift towards a more hawkish approach towards Cuba and potentially other Latin American countries with left-leaning governments. His history of fiery rhetoric against these governments suggests that he is likely to continue pushing for more aggressive policies that promote regime change and counterintuitive democratic movements. However, it remains to be seen how he will balance this with his commitment to liberal democracy and pragmatic diplomacy. His past support for negotiated solutions with Iran and Russia also suggests that he may be open to such an approach in other regions. With regard to Russia and Ukraine, there are mixed signals as he initially supported Kiev but later suggested a negotiated peace, indicating a potential shift in his stance on the conflict. I believe Rubio’s appointment could have both positive and negative impacts on US relations with Latin America, depending on how he balances competing interests and approaches different countries in the region.
