Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s recent diplomatic tour, highlighted by a significant stop in Budapest, Hungary, signals a profound shift in US foreign policy. This mission extends the “America First” ideology beyond domestic borders, seeking to bolster right-wing populist leaders and reshape international alliances. Far from a fleeting moment, this approach reflects a deeper, institutionalized change in Washington’s global engagement, stirring both support and sharp criticism across Europe.
The Core of America First’s Global Ambition
The “America First” global strategy, deeply rooted in President Donald Trump’s worldview, aims to redefine international relations through a lens of national interest and transactional alliances. This philosophy, often characterized by skepticism towards multilateral institutions and a preference for bilateral deals, prioritizes perceived American sovereignty above traditional diplomatic norms. It views global affairs as an extension of domestic political battles, where both internal “liberals” and foreign entities are seen as potentially exploiting the United States.
Rubio’s Pivotal Role in Europe
Central to this evolving strategy is figures like Marco Rubio, whose visit to Budapest in February exemplifies the approach. There, Rubio met with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a figure often described as embodying “MAGA before MAGA existed.” Orbán’s political tactics—including politicizing the justice system, implementing strict immigration policies, empowering sympathetic oligarchs, and challenging press freedom—are seen by many as a blueprint for a potential future Trump administration. This alignment marks a significant pivot for Rubio, who in 2019 joined bipartisan colleagues in expressing concern over Hungary’s democratic erosion under Orbán. Now, his message has shifted dramatically, declaring a “golden era of relations” between the US and Hungary, largely attributed to Orbán’s personal connection with Trump.
A Blueprint for Global Influence
The backing of Orbán’s government ahead of Hungary’s April election is not an isolated incident. It’s a clear manifestation of a new US foreign policy actively intervening in foreign elections to promote or preserve right-wing populist leaders. Trump’s administration has explicitly codified these goals in its national security strategy, which praises the “growing influence of patriotic European parties.” These refer to nationalist and anti-immigrant movements across Europe, such as France’s National Rally, Germany’s AfD, and Reform in the UK. Beyond Europe, the White House has previously sought to influence elections in Argentina, Brazil, Honduras, and Poland, demonstrating a consistent pattern of inserting itself into the domestic politics of other nations. This strategic support aims to cultivate a “reactionary internationale” of like-minded conservative partners.
Navigating Transatlantic Tensions and Ideological Divides
This aggressive embrace of nationalist populism has ignited considerable transatlantic tension. Many European leaders, traditionally viewing the US as a protector and champion of liberal democracy, now perceive it as a potential threat to their own political stability and values. The ideological disconnect extends beyond long-standing disagreements on defense spending or trade.
Reshaping the US National Security Doctrine
The “America First” agenda, as outlined by political strategists, embodies a consistent “big plan” for global reordering. This strategy operates through three distinct methods: elimination, transformation, and subjugation. Domestically, elimination targets the “deep state” through massive federal government cuts and regulatory rollbacks. Internationally, this translates into withdrawing from global agreements like the Paris Agreement and questioning military alliances such as NATO, which are deemed “bad deals.” Transformation seeks to shift culture away from “weak progressive ideology” both at home and abroad, promoting a “warrior culture” within institutions and criticizing perceived liberal biases in education and media. This message resonates in figures like Vice President JD Vance, whose Munich Security Conference speeches conjure an idealized Western Europe threatened by “mass migration” and non-White nations.
Europe’s Uneasy Alliance
Rubio’s recent remarks at the Munich Security Conference echoed Vance’s sentiments, albeit with more diplomatic nuance. While advocating for strong EU partners and an end to the Ukraine war, he subtly hinted that America’s defense of Europe might be contingent on the continent adopting a “MAGA” view of Western civilization. European leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission Vice President Kaja Kallas vehemently push back against such rhetoric. Kallas, in particular, robustly rejected the notion of a “woke, decadent Europe facing civilizational erasure,” emphasizing that people still aspire to join the European project. This pushback highlights a fundamental clash between US nationalist ideology and European values centered on human rights and integration. Mainstream European politicians warn that a resurgence of right-wing populist nationalism directly threatens stability and democracy, recalling the continent’s bloody past.
The Evolving Landscape of MAGA at Home and Abroad
While “America First” seeks to project power globally, the movement itself faces evolving dynamics and internal challenges domestically. These domestic shifts underscore the complexities of exporting the ideology.
Internal Fractures and Successor Debates
The “Make America Great Again” movement, despite its enduring force, shows signs of internal divides. With Trump constitutionally limited from seeking the 2028 Republican nomination, a “team of rivals” emerges, including Vice-President J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, vying to define the movement’s future. Vance, favored by Trump’s sons, aligns with those seeking to solidify an ideological foundation for Trumpism. Rubio, in contrast, represents a bridge to the old-guard Republican establishment, having undergone a significant “Maga transformation” to adopt America First foreign policy. These internal dynamics reveal a struggle for control and direction, with figures like Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene publicly accusing Trump of losing touch with his base over policy feuds, including disputes over the release of Jeffrey Epstein files. Billionaires like Elon Musk have also publicly criticized Trump’s economic policies, like tariffs.
Electoral Pragmatism vs. Ideological Purity
The tension between adhering to “America First” purity and electoral pragmatism is also evident. For instance, U.S. Representative Derrick Van Orden, a staunch Trump supporter, has reportedly moderated some positions to secure re-election in a competitive district. Despite a history of harsh rhetoric, Van Orden joined Democrats to extend Obamacare subsidies—a measure unpopular with traditional MAGA ideology but popular with voters in his district. He also co-sponsored a bipartisan bill to ban congressional stock trading, another widely supported measure. These instances demonstrate that even within the MAGA-aligned ranks, some politicians may adjust their stances to navigate tough electoral landscapes, highlighting a potential divergence from strict ideological adherence when faced with practical political realities.
Public Opinion and Policy Challenges
Public opinion polls further illustrate the challenges faced by “America First” policies. A recent KFF Health Tracking Poll revealed widespread public unfavorability for a budget reconciliation bill, particularly when specific health-related impacts were highlighted. For instance, when informed about decreased hospital funding or increased uninsured individuals, support for the bill plummeted, even among MAGA supporters. While a majority of MAGA supporters initially favored certain provisions like Medicaid work requirements, support significantly eroded when details about the practical implications or potential loss of coverage were presented. This suggests that while the “America First” brand commands loyalty, public support for specific policies, even within the base, can be fragile when confronted with tangible consequences. Similarly, the White House’s refusal to appoint a special counsel for the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, despite “MAGA dissent” and initial openness from Trump, indicates a strategic move to quell internal outrage and control narrative, rather than bowing to all demands from segments of the base.
A New Era of US Foreign Policy: Implications and Reactions
The overarching implication of this “America First” global strategy is a fundamental reordering of international relations. Trump’s approach is not haphazard but a deliberate effort to dismantle perceived liberal and foreign constraints, executed by MAGA ideologues.
Trump’s “Big Plan” for Global Reordering
The “America First” strategy follows a consistent framework of elimination, transformation, and subjugation in foreign affairs. “Elimination” involves withdrawing from international agreements and questioning multilateral bodies, while also downsizing the State Department. “Transformation” aims to shift global culture, ridiculing human rights promotion and sanctioning international bodies, actively accusing European democracies of “backsliding” and supporting nationalist parties against their own governments. “Subjugation,” when other methods fail, involves projecting strength through aggressive demands and devaluing cooperation. Examples include Trump’s past tariffs on allies, his calls for specific US access to Ukraine’s critical minerals for military aid, and his coveting of Greenland. This approach establishes a system of “patrimonialism,” favoring allies while punishing foes through economic or political leverage, as seen in the promise of US financial aid to Hungary if Orbán remains in power.
European Responses to a Transformed Alliance
Faced with this transformed US approach, European leaders are increasingly considering robust, independent strategies. The old Republican establishment, once a powerful force, is now widely viewed as a “relic of the past,” making traditional European lobbying efforts less effective. Experts suggest Europe must adopt a confrontational yet strategic response, focusing on three pillars: reinvent, fight back, and diversify. “Reinventing” means reshaping the rules-based international order without relying on US leadership, building resilient international institutions, and boosting European conventional deterrence within NATO. “Fighting back” involves strongly defending liberal democratic values against foreign interference, upholding international law, and positioning Europe as a haven for researchers and businesses by strengthening its rule of law. Finally, “diversifying” entails reducing reliance on critical US suppliers (e.g., energy, technology), expanding global partnerships beyond traditional alliances, and fostering European sovereignty. This comprehensive response aims to prevent European marginalization and preserve its values in a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape.
Frequently Asked Questions
What defines the “America First” global strategy being promoted by figures like Marco Rubio?
The “America First” global strategy, championed by leaders like Marco Rubio, is characterized by a strong focus on national interests, a skepticism towards traditional multilateral institutions, and a preference for transactional alliances. It views international relations as an extension of domestic policy, seeking to dismantle perceived “liberal” and foreign constraints on American power. This approach includes supporting right-wing populist leaders abroad, questioning existing defense alliances like NATO, and leveraging economic and political power to reshape global dynamics through methods of elimination, transformation, and subjugation, as seen in Rubio’s mission to bolster Viktor Orbán in Hungary.
Which European leaders and nations are central to the “America First” foreign policy approach?
The “America First” foreign policy particularly focuses on fostering alliances with nationalist and populist leaders in Europe. Key figures include Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who is seen as an ideological blueprint. Other “Trump-friendly” governments, such as Slovakia’s, are also targeted for support. The strategy aims to empower “patriotic European parties” like France’s National Rally, Germany’s AfD, and Reform in the UK, which challenge established liberal leaderships. This selective engagement often creates tension with mainstream European leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron, who push back against what they perceive as threats to European democratic values.
How do European leaders and public opinion respond to the expansion of “America First” ideology?
European leaders and public opinion generally express significant concern and resistance to the “America First” global strategy. Mainstream politicians, such as Emmanuel Macron and Kaja Kallas, push back against rhetoric that questions European democratic values and integrity. They warn that the rise of right-wing populist nationalism threatens stability and democracy, recalling historical lessons. In response, experts suggest Europe needs to adopt a strategy of “reinventing” its own independent institutions, “fighting back” against foreign interference in democratic processes, and “diversifying” its alliances and critical supply chains to reduce reliance on a potentially unreliable US. Public opinion within Europe, according to polls, also shows widespread unpopularity for Trump’s worldview.
Conclusion
The expansion of the “America First” ideology into global foreign policy, actively championed by figures like Marco Rubio, marks a pivotal moment in international relations. This deliberate strategy, aimed at reshaping alliances and bolstering right-wing populist movements across Europe and beyond, challenges decades of traditional US diplomatic engagement. While encountering internal friction and mixed public reception at home, its projection abroad fundamentally redefines transatlantic relations, prompting European leaders to consider bold, independent strategies to safeguard their values and interests. The interplay between domestic political shifts and ambitious foreign policy initiatives will continue to shape the geopolitical landscape, demanding constant vigilance and adaptation from all global actors.
