U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivers a powerful and provocative address at the American Compass Fifth Anniversary Gala in Washington, D.C., on June 3. In a speech referencing the U.S. reaction after Pearl Harbour, Rubio draws parallels to current global conflicts, issuing a stern warning to Ukraine and Russia. He addresses rising geopolitical tensions, U.S. resolve, and the importance of national strength. Watch the full speech here.
#MarcoRubio #UkraineRussia #PearlHarbour #AmericanCompass #USPolitics #RubioSpeech #Geopolitics #WashingtonDC #GlobalConflict #ForeignPolicy
Also Read
Sajindas Devidas Reveals How AI-Driven Nudges Are Quietly Redefining User Behavior :: https://www.oneindia.com/in-the-news/sajindas-devidas-reveals-how-ai-driven-nudges-are-quietly-redefining-user-behavior-4166947.html?ref=DMDesc
Power Of Reusability: Creating Configurable Payroll Rules That Scale Across Modules" By Rajagopal Arputham :: https://www.oneindia.com/in-the-news/the-power-of-reusability-creating-configurable-payroll-rules-that-scale-across-modules-by-rajagopal-4164205.html?ref=DMDesc
article testing new :: https://www.oneindia.com/temp/article-testing-new-4058241.html?ref=DMDesc
~PR.274~HT.408~ED.420~
#MarcoRubio #UkraineRussia #PearlHarbour #AmericanCompass #USPolitics #RubioSpeech #Geopolitics #WashingtonDC #GlobalConflict #ForeignPolicy
Also Read
Sajindas Devidas Reveals How AI-Driven Nudges Are Quietly Redefining User Behavior :: https://www.oneindia.com/in-the-news/sajindas-devidas-reveals-how-ai-driven-nudges-are-quietly-redefining-user-behavior-4166947.html?ref=DMDesc
Power Of Reusability: Creating Configurable Payroll Rules That Scale Across Modules" By Rajagopal Arputham :: https://www.oneindia.com/in-the-news/the-power-of-reusability-creating-configurable-payroll-rules-that-scale-across-modules-by-rajagopal-4164205.html?ref=DMDesc
article testing new :: https://www.oneindia.com/temp/article-testing-new-4058241.html?ref=DMDesc
~PR.274~HT.408~ED.420~
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Thank you. Thank you, Bernie. Bernie Moreno. How's the Senate?
00:19Thank you guys for having me. It's an honor. I want to thank Chris for the introduction. Did
00:24you get my office? Yeah. He just said, the one I used to have, the one in Russell? Yeah.
00:30Did you find any cash or gold bars? No. Is there media here? There's a, it's a joke. It's
00:41a joke. You know, guys, no. Thank you, Chris, for that introduction and actually very proud
00:45of the work he did with us on the Small Business Committee and Oren and everyone here in American
00:49Compass for hosting me here tonight. A couple observations of seeing someone, we really only
00:55got to serve together for like 10 days, you know, because I got confirmed pretty quickly
00:58and by the way, the president was so, I mean, I got 99 out of 100 votes because the vice
01:05president at the time had seated up and filled and the president for some period of time expressed
01:09great concern about the fact that I had 99 votes in the Senate. He didn't know that was
01:12a good thing or a bad thing, but I told him recently, sir, you don't have to worry about
01:16that anymore. I don't think I'd get 99 votes now. And anyways, but thank you for this chance
01:23to speak to you. And by one more thing I want to tell you about, I spent, you know,
01:27now that I'm in an executive branch, we oftentimes have to deal with the fact that, you know,
01:31we want to do something that's like, well, but there's a statute or there's a law on the
01:36books that limit our ability to do things by executive action. You know, it requires us
01:41to go through certain steps. And so I increasingly find myself saying, who the hell wrote these
01:45laws? And today I was reminded it was actually me who passed a certain law that stood as an
01:51impediment to quick action. So anyways, I've grown in my appreciation for the executive branch
01:59more and more each day. And, but that's also the media is going to say, oh, he's for an
02:05authoritarian form of government. No, I just, you know, some of these laws I passed are getting
02:10in the way of my current life. So we have to work through it. We will. But thank you guys
02:14for this chance from the work that you've done. And I know that obviously you're going
02:17to spend a lot of time focused on domestic decisions, but I want to hopefully pitch you
02:22a little bit tonight about what I've learned and what I already believe coming into this
02:25job, that so much about what happens domestically, economically is increasingly intertwined in
02:31geopolitics. It always has been. I think that's one of the lessons we forgot, but I think we've
02:36been reminded of that here most recently in a number of events have brought that to bear.
02:41The first thing I would say is, I think it's always been true. One of the amazing things,
02:48one of the reasons why history repeats itself, people like to say that, is because human nature
02:52does not change. Technologies change, what the clothes we wear change, even languages change,
02:57governments change, a lot of things change. But the one thing that is unchanged is human nature.
03:02It's the same today as it was 5,000 years ago. And that's one of the reasons why history
03:07often repeats itself. And one of the things about human nature, I'm not trying to sound
03:13like a psychologist here, but one of the things I think history proves is that one of the things
03:16we are programmed as people with is the desire to belong. In fact, if you notice, if you put
03:22humans anywhere, a handful of people anywhere, one of the first things they start doing is
03:26trying to create things that they can join or be a part of. And that's true for nationhood
03:32and nation states, the concept of nationhood. Now, it's a new concept. I mean, before that we all,
03:38but we had something, you know, we always had organizations, whether it was city states or tribal
03:42organizations, but the advent of the nation state is a normal evolution of human behavior
03:50because people think it's important to belong to something. And being part of a nation is important.
03:56And I think that's really true, obviously, increasingly in how geopolitical decisions are
04:01made. I think that's obvious and people understand that, but it's some, one of the things that we
04:05forgot. And we certainly forgot it at the end of the Cold War. If I can take you back the end of
04:10the Cold War and understand for me, these are formative years because I grew up in the 80s,
04:14the greatest, probably the greatest decade ever confirmed by the, yeah. You know why I know this?
04:20Because my kids might have young, you know, young, I say young, they're like 24, 22, 20, just turned
04:2820 and one who's 17. Every, all they do is watch reruns from the 80s and 90s. They don't make good
04:33TV anymore. Everybody wants to watch stuff from the 80s and 90s. So that's just my pitch. The 70s were
04:38a dark period of time because of disco music. But in the 80s, yes, we had a disco fan back there.
04:45Uh, but, uh, but the 80s, you know, we, we did, the hair was a little too big, but other than that,
04:51um, but, but going back the 80s, you grew up. And I remember in 1983, now I'm aging. I just turned
04:5654. I feel 55, but I, um, and, uh, in, what must be 1983, do you guys remember a movie called, uh,
05:05the, oh gosh, what was it? It was about nuclear war. Do you remember this? It was 19, no, war games.
05:12That was a great movie. I'm talking about when I was on TV that scared the hell out of me. There
05:15was the day after, do you remember that movie, the day after this is traumatizing and they had
05:19this thing on television, but basically grew up on understanding that the world at any moment could
05:23end because the United States and the Soviet union were headed for conflict and war and that, you
05:28know, maybe we wouldn't even make it to 25 and things of this nature. I forgot about war games.
05:33The warrior is another good movie where this guy hacks into the computer. This is an 80s hacker.
05:38This is not, I can remember the phone and the modem and, uh, it was a, what was that actor?
05:42It was the same Matthew Broderick. It's a great movie. I, I know I'm completely off topic,
05:48but let me just tell you, I lived in Las Vegas at the time. And if you recall the first city
05:53that he blows up in the war games is Las Vegas. And I was sitting in the audience and everybody's
05:57like chuckling. I have nothing funny about this Las Vegas strike in any event. Um, so this is
06:03where we grew up. And then in 1989 and 1990, 91, it was my first years in, in college. And literally
06:10the entire world just transformed my, before my very eyes. Understand you grew up your whole life
06:14and like the whole world is about the Soviet union. And all of a sudden the Soviet union no longer
06:18exists. My favorite memory of that is that I was actually taking a course that fall and by a Soviet
06:24expert at, uh, the, I think it was in Gainesville, Florida. And this poor guy's entire career came
06:31coming down over a three month period as the Soviet union collapsed. It's like all these years of
06:35work, you have a PhD in Soviet studies and now the Soviet doesn't exist anymore. So I don't know
06:40what he did after that. I need to check up on that guy because, uh, but anyways, the point is the
06:45whole world transformed and there was this effusive exuberance, the belief that the cold war is over,
06:52we won, and now the entire world is going to become just like us. Free enterprise democracies.
06:57That was just a very idealistic thing to believe. But here's the other conclusion they made. And
07:03that is that everybody, that it didn't, nationhood no longer mattered when it came to economics.
07:08That right now the world would no longer have borders. It wouldn't matter where things were made.
07:13What mattered is they were made in the most efficient place. And it became mantra. And look,
07:17I think it became part of Republican orthodoxy for a very long time. An orthodoxy that I came up in,
07:22which was, it's okay if productive capacity moves to another country. Because what that will do is it
07:28will free up our workers to do work that's even more productive and pays them more. It was the famous
07:33or the infamous idea that who cares that you lost your job at a factory, you're going to learn how to
07:38code. And then you're going to be, you're going to make a lot more money doing that. Well, it was
07:42completely unrealistic, number one, and became incredibly disruptive that that decision was made.
07:47But here's the other implication of it. It robbed the nation of its industrial capacity,
07:52of its ability to make things. And its industrial capacity and its ability to make things has two
07:56ramifications. The first is it hurts your economy. It hurts your country. It robs people of jobs.
08:02And the transition is not nearly as easy, but it also ends up becoming corrosive and destructive to
08:06communities. And as a result, we had a Rust Belt. We had places that were gutted. And we had families
08:12that for generations that worked in a certain field or for a certain company. And all of a sudden,
08:16that company or that field vanished because it moved somewhere else where it was cheaper to do.
08:20And those jobs were gone and obviously became incredibly destructive, not just for the United
08:25States, by the way, but for many nations in the industrialized West. But the other thing it robbed
08:30us of is the ability to make things, which is a national security impairment, and a very significant
08:36one. If you go back to World War II, the admiral who had been tasked with planning Pearl Harbor,
08:45thought it was a really bad idea. He went through and obviously followed orders, but he thought it
08:49was a very bad idea because he had spent a substantial amount of time studying in the United
08:53States when he was younger. And his conclusion was that attacking the United States was a bad idea
08:59because even though at the time militarily we were behind the Japanese, certainly technologically
09:03otherwise, we had factories and we had access to raw material and resources. And he knew that over
09:09time, once those factories and those raw materials were put to the war machine, the Japanese would
09:16not be able to keep up. And you could very well argue that the end of World War II, that the victory
09:21in World War II, both in Europe and especially in Asia, was the result of America's industrial capacity.
09:27When the Japanese lost a plane, they lost a plane. When we lost a plane — and their planes were better than
09:33ours for a long time — when we lost a plane, we were able to produce hundreds to replace it.
09:38Industrial capacity mattered in terms of national security. And that's never changed. That's always been true.
09:45And so today what you find is because of all those years of neglect, because of the loss of industrial capacity,
09:50we didn't just undermine our society. We didn't just undermine our domestic economy. We've undermined
09:57our position in the world. And what you will find, and what we find even now, is that increasingly,
10:03on geopolitical issue after geopolitical issue, it is access to raw material and industrial capacity
10:10that is at the core both of the decisions that we're making and the areas that we're prioritizing.
10:15It's because — now the technologies are different, but nonetheless, that is what we're increasingly
10:20prioritizing. And that's become really apparent to me. I think it was even going into this job,
10:26but in the months that I've been there, on place after place — every country in the world is now
10:30pitching themselves as a source of rare earth minerals. Every country in the world — by the way,
10:35they're not that rare, so every country has access to it, but it's become a big — but that alone is not
10:40enough, because you have to have access to rare earth minerals, but then you have to have the
10:44ability to process them, and you have to make them into usable material. And frankly, what the Chinese
10:51have done over the last 25 or 30 years is they've cornered the market. And this is one of the true
10:56challenges to sort of pure, free enterprise view of these things. You cannot compete with a nation-state
11:02who has decided they're not interested in making money. They're not interested in making money in this
11:07field. They're interested in, in the short term, in dominating the market, being the sole source
11:14provider for the world of a certain product. Because once you establish industry dominance
11:19in any one of these fields, you can charge the world whatever you want. Now, one thing is if we
11:24said, well, this happened because they're just better than us. But that's not why it happened. It
11:30happened because we literally gave it away. Because we made the decision, we made the policy decision that
11:35it was okay. We were okay with 80-something percent of the active ingredients in most of our generic
11:41pharmaceuticals coming from another country. We were okay with giving that away. We were okay with
11:47giving away all kinds of things like that. And now, now we are in a crunch. And I say we, I mean the
11:54rest of the world is in a crunch because we have realized that our industrial capability is deeply
11:59dependent on a number of potential adversary nation states, including China, who can hold it over our
12:06head. And so, in many ways, the nature of geopolitics is now adjusted to that and is adjusting to that.
12:13And it will be one of the great challenges of the new century and one of the priorities of this
12:17administration under President Trump is to reorient our domestic and the way we pursue geopolitics to
12:26take into account for the fact that you can never be secure as a nation unless you're able to feed
12:32your people and unless you're able to make the things that your economy needs in order to function
12:36and ultimately to defend yourself. There is virtually none of the leading-edge industries of the 21st
12:42century and we don't have some level of vulnerability. And it's become one of the highest geopolitical
12:48priorities that we now face, not simply access to raw material, but figuring out how can we have
12:54in more industrial capacities in these critical fields, ideally domestically, but if not here,
13:00then diversify the global supply chain so that it cannot be used against us as a point of leverage
13:06at a time of potential conflict. In fact, unless we fix it, some of these conflicts will never happen
13:12because we will never be able to enter the amount of leverage they will have on us will begin to constrain
13:17our ability to make foreign policy. Unable to get into a tremendous amount of detail, let me just say that
13:23even as I speak to you now there are a number of foreign policy issues in which we're having to
13:28balance what we would ideally want to do with what we may not be able to do in the short term until we
13:36fix these problems. This is a real challenge in American geopolitics and it's one that's become a
13:41priority and goes right to the heart of the decisions that were made over the last 20 or 30 years that
13:46were that were a mistake and that we're now trying to correct. The other, which is more broad,
13:52but I think also ties to economic policy is the following. Part of the decisions that were made
13:58were in the end, if something is good for the global economy, that's really what matters.
14:04Ultimately, a lot of public policy decisions were made without the nation state in mind. Rather,
14:08the decision was, is this good for the global economy? Is this good for global economic growth? Is
14:14this good for prosperity in other places, even if it may not be in our interest? And we made those
14:19decisions even during the Cold War to some extent. We allowed nations to treat us unfairly in trade,
14:25but we allowed them to do it because we didn't want those countries to become victim to a communist
14:30revolution that would overthrow them. But then we kept it going. And so today there are multiple
14:34countries around the world that are fully developed economies, but whom we have enormous trade imbalances
14:41because they want to continue that system moving along. And that has to be corrected.
14:45But here's the final point, and here's why this is also critical. Because not only did we take out
14:50nation state interest and the national interest out of economic policies, we also took it out of the
14:54way we made foreign policy decisions. The idea that our foreign policy, depending on the place and on the
15:02issue, should be centered and focused primarily on what is good for the United States, was completely lost.
15:08Time and again, we made decisions in foreign policy because of what was good for the international order,
15:14or what was good for the world. And I'm not saying those things are irrelevant. But the number one
15:20priority of our foreign policy of the United States, the number one foreign policy priority of the United States
15:27needs to be the United States, and what's in the best interest of the United States.
15:31That's not isolationism. That's common sense. On the contrary, in order to do that, we have to engage in the world.
15:42But we need to engage in the world in a way that prioritizes our national interest above all else.
15:47And the reason why we do that goes back to my point at the outset of this with human nature.
15:52And that is, that's what other countries do all the time. Virtually every single nation state we
16:00interact with prioritizes their national interest in their interactions with us. And we need to begin
16:06to do that again, and we're beginning to do that again, prioritizing the national interest of the
16:10United States above everything else in making these foreign policy decisions. And I'll close by saying
16:16that's where foreign policy works best. As I've said to multiple foreign leaders, including some with
16:20whom we haven't had engagements with for many years, I said the way foreign policy works best is when
16:25our national interests are aligned, when they're aligned, that's where we have incredible opportunity
16:32for partnership together. And when they're not aligned, that's where I expect them to pursue their
16:37national interest and us to pursue ours and to do so peacefully if possible, and that's the work of
16:42diplomacy. And so I think the work you have done to reorient our thinking towards the national
16:47interests, both in our domestic economic policies, as well as in our foreign policies is critical work
16:53for 21st century conservatism. And I thank you for all the work you've provided. You've done great
16:57work. When no one else was talking about these things, when no one else was providing the material
17:02that allowed us to build public policy and challenge thinking, you were doing it. And I encourage you to
17:07continue to do it because this is going to be the work of a generation. There's still much work to be done.
17:12We are in the midst of an important and long overdue realignment in our thinking in American politics,
17:18and it takes organizations like American Compass to drive the innovation and the thinking.
17:23And we appreciate everything you've done up to this point and encourage you to continue to do that.
17:27And one of the people who has really been a leader in this regard, someone who I actually got to know
17:33as part of this project and this thinking, back when he was only a best-selling author and not even a
17:39political figure yet, is our current vice president who is doing a phenomenal job and someone who I've
17:45grown tremendously. My admiration for him has grown tremendously. I admired him before. I admired him
17:50in the Senate. I admire him a lot more now as vice president because I think vice presidents are just
17:56more impressive than senators, Bernie. That's all. But I can say that now that I got 99 votes. I don't
18:04need their votes anymore. But the vice president is doing a phenomenal job and I think is one of the
18:09most powerful and clearest voices in the world, really at the edge, at the leading edge of this
18:16new thinking in American politics. And it's my honor to serve with him in this administration. And it's
18:21my honor to invite him onto the stage now to speak to all of you. So thank you for the opportunity to
18:25be here. Ladies and gentlemen, the vice president of the United States, J.D. Vance.
18:39Subscribe to One India and never miss an update.
Comments