Afrasianet - Dr. Mada Al Fateh - The undeniable fact is that Trump's style and manner of speaking and expressing his ideas, as well as his frankness as he expresses his contempt for international organizations, international law, and even institutions It's hard to imagine Biden, or Obama, or any former president insulting other presidents, or using profane words in an official forum in the way we saw with Trump.
However, it is difficult to ignore the long history of the United States with absurd wars, sponsoring coups and attempts to spread chaos, from which hardly any continent has been spared.
At the time of Trump's first presidential bid, Rubio was his own rival for the Republican nomination. At the time, he was calling Trump a "crook" and that a government under his leadership would be a mess.
As for the war, the United States has a long story to tell, as that country grew up talking about the ring and is obsessed with the task of subjugating the world and possessing power, and for this purpose, American politicians did not hesitate to show the greatest degrees of power in moments of challenge and confrontation.
Stephen Walt, a professor at Harvard University, called this condition "war addiction" in one of his articles, saying that the United States cannot abandon this addiction and the practice of waging wars, despite the fact that every president declared at the beginning of his term that his reign would be a reign of peace.
In this case, the United States differs fundamentally from other countries because, unlike others, it often does not pay the cost of its wars, it can simply borrow, without its citizens feeling the weight of this debt, because of Washington's control over the global economy.
This makes it easy for American presidents to describe other allied countries as reluctant and weak in the face of war decisions, and the fact is that the weight of these wars falls primarily on other countries, while the United States, primarily because of its location and financial control, as well as because of the indirect benefit it derives from financing its burgeoning military industry, is safe.
President Trump would not have been able to do what he did in Venezuela, and then Iran, without the support of state institutions, especially foreign policy and security experts. As for what appears in the American and international media that he is responsible for all decisions, and considering him as the sole official, it seems like a technique of preparing a scapegoat in case the plans fail, or things do not go as planned, by suggesting that all of this is the individual mistake of a reckless president with whom the American state has nothing to do High messages, and as Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who does not deny his admiration for the time of religious wars, and who treats the Iran war as a crusade.
With the importance of these names, another name that plays pivotal roles in foreign policy and whose understanding of the world dominates the American decision stands out: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Rubio is not a new name on the political scene: he served in the Senate for 14 years, but he came to global attention during the Venezuela operation, in which President Nicolás Maduro was kidnapped, subjugating the country, which for decades seemed out of control.
It was said at the time that Rubio, who is originally from Cuba and whose family experienced the bitterness of living under communist totalitarianism, had a hateful vision of all leftist regimes, especially in Latin America, and called for their overthrow and change, and that he was the main driver of the successful Caracas process, which made Trump think of repeating it in other countries such as Iran and Cuba.
The story of Rubio's immigrant family, who arrived in the United States with no money and no language, to work both his mother and father in simple jobs, was a testament to success stories and integration, but today they themselves are required to be a springboard for punishing other countries under a regime that tries to entrench racism and hatred of immigrants.
The relationship between Rubio and Trump is currently at its best, with Trump once saying that Rubio may be able to etch his name in history as the best U.S. secretary of state.
The funny thing is that this wasn't always the case: during Trump's first run for president, he was in competition with Rubio himself for the Republican nomination. Rubio was calling Trump a "crook" and a government under him would be "chaos," while Trump was calling him "little Rubio."
That wasn't the only change in Rubio's ideas, which The Economist likened to a chameleon, whose skin had changed, because he wanted to be aligned with his president on directions he previously held a different point of view, such as the issue of mass deportations of migrants, and the attitude toward the Ukraine war, which was initially viewed more like sympathetic Europeans Those who demand that Ukraine be armed with the ability to confront Russia.
Rubio is now seen as a moderate negotiator, who can restore the cohesion of European-American relations, which have been severely damaged, especially compared to hard-line Vice President J.D. Vance.
The funny thing is that many, including President Trump himself, see the two men as delivering the same message, but in a different language, with Vance tending to be rough and direct, while Rubio retains a more diplomatic language.
In the near future, the two men, Rubio and J.D. Vance, may be in contention for the position of president during the upcoming election, so the two men are cautious in the face of positions and statements, which could be invoked, or later exploited in the context of the electoral contest, especially Rubio, whose caution was evident in In the Middle East, Rubio aligns with the Israeli government's vision and supports its war on Iran, but his priority, even as national security adviser, has remained the reshaping of South America.
Rubio, who is afflicted with the Cuban knot, and who holds the regime there with the survival of his family and large numbers of his citizens exiled outside their country, supports a change similar to what happened in Venezuela in his native Cuba, under the pretext of getting rid of the dictatorship and in order to shoot a mercy bullet at the decrepit regime there.
Rubio may not be directly responsible for the Iran crisis, in which Trump implicated everyone, but the latter was undoubtedly influenced by the Caracas experience, in which, with Rubio's encouragement, a troubled president was eliminated smooth, which has brought Venezuela into a new era.
What Trump did not calculate was the difference between the two countries, and that Venezuela's circumstances were different from Iran's.
