 |
| Pix Credit here |
The Trump Administration has been celebrating its first 100 days in office (see, e.g. my discussion The
Imprimatur of Accolade From the Political Apparatus, President Trump
Distributes "ICYMI: Celebrating President Trump’s Incredible First 100
Days"). Mr. Rubio, now both Secretary of State and National Security Advisor (see, e.g., reporting here) has also issued a 100 Day Statement (100 Days of an America First State Department), the text of which follows below.
It is in some ways quite a bit more informative than most. For in the process of extolling the work of his ministries (and that is the fundamental point of these writing, no foul there), Secretary Rubio has also has quite elegantly described the animating spirit of both his task and of America First. That task, and the transactions around which it is built and elaborated (on the action-vision framework of this Administration see The
text of and Reflections on "Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump
Secures Agreement to Establish United States-Ukraine Reconstruction
Investment Fund"), is built around a straightforward though quite complex and slippery framing. Just as the animating spirit of the 2nd Trump Administration is transaction; so the animating spirit and drover of Secretary Rubio, the Department of State, and more importantly America First, is borders. For Secretary Rubio, then, the measure of accomplishment is necessarily a function transactions (this is, again for emphasis, a transactional presidency) in, of and around borders.
What are borders to which Secretary Rubio refers? The borders are physical, transactional, systemic, and conceptual.
One hundred days ago, America’s borders were open, while China could close the Panama Canal at a time of Xi Jinping’s choosing. Our leaders seemed content to allow violence to become the permanent norm, from Ukraine to Gaza, to our own college campuses and southern border. From every post abroad, and office in Washington, memos poured in describing what we must do, what we couldn’t do, but not what it was possible to do.Only one hundred days later, change has come. From reorganizing the Department to meet the challenges of the 21st Century, to bringing transparency to foreign assistance, to ensuring Panama’s exit from the Belt and Road Initiative, and working hand in hand with regional partners to deport illegal immigrants and designate vicious cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, our team has proven it is possible not merely to admire problems, but to solve them. (100 Days of an America First State Department)
Encased within those sentences are the entirety of the action-border operational coding of America First both in its internal and external dimensions.
The first touches on physical borders. The project of moving from the 1920's closed to the 2020's open border generative premise is rejected. The physical border aligns with the territorial borders of the Republic (plus its dependencies). Those can be sealed, or opened at the discretion of the State, but they must exist, and to exist they must have meaning, and to have meaning they must exclude, control, manage, and shape movement around, in and out of them. Transactions around borders, then, becomes the physical manifestation of America First, at least in the sense of (re)defining the physical "meaning" of the nation defined in territorial space. Those transactions are to be (re)conceived in light of contemporary realities that affect everything from the old 18th century notions of invasion (something that was already on the minds of the judiciary in the 1950s in the dicta to the Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v. Sawyer case (343 U.S. 579 (1952))). Borders are the fundamentally defining "Belt" of the America First Belt & Road Initiative.
The second touches on the borders of control, in physical and virtual spaces, of the pathways in and through which America First manifests its transactional character between borders. These are the pathways that make the newly reformulated standard of reciprocal trade possible. These are the American Silk Roads--pathways that must be protected in physical and virtual spaces (and which require the building of necessary narrative, that is narrative that "sells" around the objective). Secretary Rubio mentioned the Panama Canal. He might as well have mentioned the Suez Canal, the South China Sea and the pathways marked by cables, pipelines, and signal based routes, all of which support and through which it is possible to engage in economic, social, and cultural transactions around which America First is built. These are the "Silk Roads" of the America First Belt & Road Initiative.
Third, those pathways, like the physical borders of the Republic, must be defended. The defense of those borderlands require a different sort of transactional interaction. On the inside it requires a (re)framing of notions of invasion, an issue deeply intertwined with re-imaginings of the concept of border and borderlands, as well as of the nature of warfare, projection into the State, and ultimately of the old performances that once upon a time were meant to distinguish the State from other institutions of power through which performances the State was positioned at the top of the institutional hierarchy of power. On the outside it requires something old and something new. The old is the well worn efforts to protect trade routes and access to markets through military force (from cooperation to mutual defense and friendship arrangements, to something more intrusive), or by threats of annexation the theatricality of which appears to have produced its own counter performances that have further accelerated on a global basis the (re)framing of the notion and protection of physical/virtual borders. This is the security architecture element of America First.
The fourth touches on the great patriotic campaigns deeply aligned with notions of borderlands and conceptual national autonomy. That great patriotic campaign is built, in part, on the (re)creation of distinctions based on citizenship. The distinction of citizenship imposes on non-citizens an "abuse of hospitality" standard as the basis for physical presence within the Republic's borders, and attaches great consequence to law breaking of any kind.
Critically, the State Department has now made clear that a visa is a privilege, not a right. . . .There is now a one-strike policy: Catch-And-Revoke. Whenever the government catches non-U.S. citizens breaking our laws, we will take action to revoke their status. The time of contemptuously taking advantage of our nation’s generosity ends. This extends to the thousands of foreign students studying in the United States who abuse our hospitality. (100 Days of an America First State Department)
The "abuse of hospitality" standard extends significantly to the speech-acts of visitors, especially where these may have "effects" on citizens.
The fifth brings Secretary Rubio back to the complementary nature of America First as an architecture for something far more significant--the space within which it is possible to project the fundamental imperative of transactions. Everything is a transaction. Everything is a bargain. The notion of reciprocity, though, has developed a decidedly fractured approach, at least in the sense that both sides of any bargain may be measured by quote different standards--standards that are relevant to each of the parties, but which may have little relation to the measure of the other. This transactional strategy applies to all aspects of America First--from borders, to markets, to pathways, to visitors (individuals and investment). "While in Europe, I also made clear that while we are bound by a common history, faith, culture, and economic interests, friendship is not a one-way street. It requires honesty when reciprocity is lacking, and not just in the realm of defense spending." (100 Days of an America First State Department). This suggests the character and nature of the win-win strategy of the America First Belt & Road Initiative.
And the last, the last brings Secretary Rubio to the heart of the matter for the Department of State--its role its ensuring that border protected pathways to win-win strategies maintain, open, and expand, private markets. State aid appears increasingly characterized as domestic sinecures and foreign bribery (that is the (re)framing of foreign aid in its pre-2025 form one suspects from the text of the the Secretary's essay). These must be re-coded in the sense that the algorithm of State engagement around transactiosn must be updated or perhaps folded into a new App. The internal target for the Secretary of State appears to have been the subsidy of NGOs and the privatization of aid. "Gone are tens of billions of dollars in contracts to NGOs at home and abroad that often undermined the interests and foreign policy of the United States. And gone are the days when merit took a back seat to radical, anti-American ideologies." The external target appears to have been the officials on the receiving end of aid. It was the system of aid as a transactional device with little by way of "win" for the Republic that appears to have targeted it for elimination within the cognitive framework of a transactional presidency. in the "In Africa, America needs a policy of trade, not aid, and over the past hundred days the State Department has replaced handouts with firm diplomatic engagement aimed at ending conflicts and expanding opportunities for American companies. . . In Africa, and around the world, our message is that while USAID may be closed, America is open for business." (100 Days of an America First State Department).
And there it is. Whether one agrees or disagrees, strongly or otherwise with this (re)vision, one can at least be grateful for the clarity. For opponents, of course, it provides a means to chart courses of resistance. For those more sympathetic, it suggests the doorways to strategic opportunity or the basis of political support, especially where it might require sacrifice. And at its foundation are the notions of border and borderlands, those spaces the definition and control of which in physical and virtual spaces, produce the terrains in which the transactional aspirations of the 2nd Trump Administration rests.
 |
| Pix credit here |
100 Days of an America First State Department
Author: U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio
One hundred days ago, America’s borders were open, while China could close the Panama Canal at a time of Xi Jinping’s choosing. Our leaders seemed content to allow violence to become the permanent norm, from Ukraine to Gaza, to our own college campuses and southern border. From every post abroad, and office in Washington, memos poured in describing what we must do, what we couldn’t do, but not what it was possible to do.
Only one hundred days later, change has come. From reorganizing the Department to meet the challenges of the 21st Century, to bringing transparency to foreign assistance, to ensuring Panama’s exit from the Belt and Road Initiative, and working hand in hand with regional partners to deport illegal immigrants and designate vicious cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, our team has proven it is possible not merely to admire problems, but to solve them.In the process, the State Department is becoming a leaner machine, eager to deliver for the taxpayers. Gone are offices like the former Global Engagement Center, which sought to censor the American people. Gone are tens of billions of dollars in contracts to NGOs at home and abroad that often undermined the interests and foreign policy of the United States. And gone are the days when merit took a back seat to radical, anti-American ideologies. By consolidating offices, eliminating bureaucracy, and ensuring a culture where the State Department’s many talented voices can be heard, our impending reorganization will leave the United States with a foreign policy that is less expensive and more effective.
The State Department has begun, once more, to speak for our citizens’ interests abroad. Our hemisphere is our neighborhood, and we cannot allow it to be conquered by an adversary. In my first hundred days, I undertook three trips to our hemisphere, including central America and the Caribbean where I stressed that Chinese efforts to gain control of critical infrastructure threaten the United States, and secured an agreement to terminate Beijing’s management of the Panama Canal.
I brought a similar message to our friends in Europe, making clear that our extensive shared interests, especially in resisting Chinese aggression and Islamic extremism, are precisely why the United States cannot afford to shoulder the burden of every conflict imaginable in Europe. At the recent NATO summit I attended, our allies recognized the need to increase defense spending not to 2 percent as requested in 2017, but to 5 percent, following the lead of nations like Poland. There was a shared understanding that ending the war in Ukraine is in the interests of both the combatants, and the entire Transatlantic alliance.
While in Europe, I also made clear that while we are bound by a common history, faith, culture, and economic interests, friendship is not a one-way street. It requires honesty when reciprocity is lacking, and not just in the realm of defense spending. Efforts to regulate, exclude or censor US companies directly concern the United States, and raise questions about just how common our values may be. Europe’s energy policies also directly affect the United States as they left the continent dependent on Russian gas, and exposed “green” supply chains to Communist China control.
In Africa, America needs a policy of trade, not aid, and over the past hundred days the State Department has replaced handouts with firm diplomatic engagement aimed at ending conflicts and expanding opportunities for American companies. Last week, the Foreign Ministers of Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo joined me here at the State Department to sign a Declaration of Principles to end a war that has dragged on in one form or another for over twenty-five years. In Africa, and around the world, our message is that while USAID may be closed, America is open for business.
There is no more immediate American interest than the protection of our nation’s borders. Both during my trips to the region, and across dozens of bilateral engagements, I have made clear that the arrival of millions of foreign nationals at our border is unacceptable. Foreign nations have a responsibility to prevent their citizens from illegally entering the United States and possess a duty to assist us in removing those already here. We are working with regional allies in Latin America to secure agreements to take back both their own illegal aliens, but also those from third nations. And we have made it clear to less friendly nations such as Venezuela that a refusal to take back their nationals constitutes a hostile act. Partnership is valued, but hostility will be punished.
Critically, the State Department has now made clear that a visa is a privilege, not a right. Under the Biden Administration’s “Catch and Release” policy, illegal aliens were often provided with a get-out-of-jail-free card after arrests for criminal activity including domestic violence, and assault. There is now a one-strike policy: Catch-And-Revoke. Whenever the government catches non-U.S. citizens breaking our laws, we will take action to revoke their status. The time of contemptuously taking advantage of our nation’s generosity ends.
This extends to the thousands of foreign students studying in the United States who abuse our hospitality. When Hamas, one of the world’s most notorious terrorist organizations, launched its barbaric October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, brutally murdering more than 1,200 innocents, and parading the dead bodies of murdered babies through the streets of Gaza, the Biden Administration did very little to protect our Jewish citizens and the American people at large from foreign terrorist sympathizers in their midst. They allowed campus buildings to be overrun by violent thugs, and Jewish students to be excluded from classrooms.
No more. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, any alien who “endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization” is inadmissible to the United States, and henceforth that law will be enforced to the letter. The State Department now reviews law-enforcement information about student visa holders and when we find those who have supported terrorists or otherwise abused our hospitality, their visas are instantly revoked.
Terrorists are on the run not just in America but around the world. With the unyielding support of the United States Department of State, Israel has crippled Hezbollah in Lebanon, and shattered Hamas in Gaza, leaving the terrorist group facing destruction if they do not release their hostages and lay down their arms. We have re-designated the Houthis as what they are – a foreign terrorist organization and made clear that those who disrupt the freedom of navigation and trade in the Red Sea will meet the fate of pirates throughout history. Iran, having seen the consequences its proxies have faced after challenging the new Administration, is now pursuing an agreement that will allow them to save face while surrendering their nuclear capabilities.
I am honored by the trust President Trump placed in me and I am proud of the work the Department of State has done over the past hundred days to implement his agenda and put the American people first. With an impending reorganization that will unleash the Department’s talent from the ground-up, the State Department is set to continue to play a pivotal role in ensuring the safety, security and prosperity of the American people over the next four years.
Marco Rubio was sworn in as the 72nd secretary of state on January 21, 2025. The secretary is creating a Department of State that puts America First.
No comments:
Post a Comment