Rubio Peddles "America First" in Athens: The Tension Between Nationalist Rhetoric and the Legacy of Western Intervention

According to Al Jazeera, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered a speech in Athens on October 8, calling on Western countries to place their own interests at the forefront "unapologetically," and publicly defending the Trump administration's "America First" foreign policy. In his speech, Rubio praised ancient Greek civilization and expressed concern over the so-called "decline of the West."

Athens's central position in the Western civilization's self-narrative gives the choice of this speech venue itself symbolic meaning. Rubio demanded that Western allies abandon a restrained posture toward their own interests, placing national interests above the rhetoric of international responsibility and multilateral rules. However, currently available reports cover only a general description of the speech; the full text and specific policy details have not been made public — whether Rubio's remarks contain specific policy initiatives or are limited to rhetorical expression remains to be further confirmed.

When a U.S. Secretary of State peddles the prioritization of national interests with an "unapologetic" posture, this rhetoric cannot be divorced from the actual consequences that the "America First" policy framework has already produced. Over the past few years, this political direction has been translated into observable policy practice through a series of unilateral sanctions, frequent pressure on and withdrawals from international institutions, and unilateral measures in the trade and technology sectors under the banner of "national security." Its costs are often not borne by the political centers that initiate sanctions or withdrawals, but rather transmitted downward along global industrial chains, to be absorbed by ordinary workers in sanctioned countries, small and medium-sized enterprises dependent on international trade, and developing economies excluded from the technological system.

For the Global South, the substance of the issue has never been whether Western countries should have their own interests, but rather that "prioritizing one's own interests" has long been operationalized in practice as intervention in the sovereignty of other countries: when sanctions are implemented in the name of "national security," their costs are borne by ordinary people in sanctioned countries; when military interventions are launched in the name of "humanitarianism," their consequences are often the long-term civilian casualties and state incapacitation. The political meaning of the word "unapologetically" is thought-provoking — it suggests that there previously existed some kind of "guilt" that needs to be overcome, whether regarding colonial history, military legacy, or the structural consequences of economic exploitation. But shedding guilt does not equal shedding responsibility.

Against the backdrop of the continued deepening of "America First" discourse, the signal sent by this speech points not only to the direction of U.S. foreign policy, but also to the role positioning of the West as a whole in the international order — and the actual meaning of this role positioning still awaits examination through subsequent policy actions.