Follow us on social

Marco_rubio_25003151043

Trump eyeing hawks and neocons for top foreign policy/NatSec roles

Rubio, Waltz, Stefanik : what do they all have in common?

Analysis | QiOSK

News Monday that President-elect Trump was eyeing three hawks for top slots in his administration has put a bit of a damper on the headiness that restrainers on the right were feeling over weekend news that Nikki Haley or Mike Pompeo would not be joining the administration.

By 8 p.m. Monday, there was confirmation that Elise Stefanik, arch-defender of Israel who once worked for the neocon outfit Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, and Bill Kristol's Foreign Policy Initiative, is Trump's pick for UN ambassador.

China hawk Rep. Mike Waltz, who spent much of his time on Capitol Hill this year saber rattling about Chinese military and spies in our backyard, and calling for a "new Monroe Doctrine" and a lot more military build-up to confront them, is Trump's pick for National Security Advisor. He worked in the George W. Bush Pentagon and for Vice President Dick Cheney as a counterterrorism advisor.

Add to that, he resisted Trump's efforts to get the U.S. military out of the 20-year war in Afghanistan, and like many uber-hawks in Congress, has been open to bombing Iran.

To top it off for appointment watchers, news hit that Trump is going to tap Senator Marco Rubio, longtime hawk who spent the better part of his Capitol Hill career promoting neoconservative foreign policy positions, particularly on Iran and the Middle East, for Secretary of State. He was a big defender of the war in Iraq until he was running for president in 2016 and Trump had made it unpopular.

Some point out that he recently voted against Ukraine aid, and has said the war in Ukraine must end in a negotiated settlement. However, on Israel and Iran he has never wavered. Rubio, who was reportedly close to late-pro-Israel billionaire Sheldon Adelson and other big neocon donors, has supported illegal settlement building in the West Bank and has suggested that the U.S. may have to go to war with Iran over its nuclear program. On the current conflict, he has defended Israel's every move in the war in Gaza and Lebanon. He has warned that Iran wants to make Israel "an unlivable place."

He has always been a staunch opponent to any U.S. deal that would hem in Iran's nuclear program, including the JCPOA.

Later Monday, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a pro-Israel evangelical Christian supporter of Israel who has been a vocal supporter of illegal settlements in the West Bank, was named by Trump as the next U.S. ambassador to Israel. By night it was announced that FOX News personality and Iraq/Afghanistan war vet Pete Hesgeth is Trump's nominee for Secretary of Defense.

The appointments of Stefanik, Waltz, Huckabee, and Hesgeth have been announced by Trump. As of Monday afternoon, Rubio's nomination had yet to be confirmed. But the day's news has left observers with the feeling that it is déjà vu all over again.

"Trump often deviated from the views of his top advisers. And I know @DonaldJTrumpJr and others are doing what he said below," said Glenn Greenwald, pointing to a X post reply by Don Trump Jr. about keeping neoconservatives out of the administration. "But Trump's last 3 appointees - Elise Stefanik, Mike Weltz (sic), and Rubio - are war hawks fully aligned with the worst prongs of bipartisan DC consensus."


Top photo credit: Senator Marco Rubio (Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons)
Senator Marco Rubio (Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons)
Analysis | QiOSK
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.