OPINION:
One of the most popular magazines in the years after World War II was the Ladies’ Home Journal. One of its most popular features was “Can this marriage be saved?”
Why am I dredging up this tidbit of journalistic trivia? Because of Marco Rubio’s address at the Munich Security Conference — on Valentine’s Day, no less.
A year ago, it was Vice President J.D. Vance who spoke in Munich. Ever since, major media platforms — including Foreign Policy, The Wall Street Journal, Politico, NPR and the BBC — have been suggesting that the U.S. and Europe may be heading for a “divorce.”
President Trump’s secretary of state has now shifted the discussion to the possibility of a reconciliation.
To be fair, Mr. Rubio’s message was not significantly different from Mr. Vance’s. Both were based on Mr. Trump’s Weltanschauung, or his general perception of the world.
The difference between the two speeches was largely one of tone and tenor, but Mr. Vance’s did seem to imply that Europe’s attorneys might soon be hearing from America’s.
Mr. Rubio, by contrast, conveyed the idea that marriage vows are lifelong and unconditional, in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. “We are bound to one another,” he told the Europeans.
That said, marriages evolve. Europe and America tied the knot with the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 1949. Lord Ismay, NATO’s first secretary-general, quipped that the purpose of the union was to keep “the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.”
So, it was in America’s interest for our European allies, wrecked by World War II, to get themselves back into shape economically and politically.
America’s Marshall Plan, which contributed $13.3 billion to Europe’s recovery, was strategic. Stable, prosperous democracies make for trading partners, not aid dependents. We were more than willing to do the heavy lifting militarily.
That was then, this is now. Four years ago this week, Vladimir Putin deployed Russian troops and tanks on a war of aggression and conquest, which he has attempted to spin as a “special military operation.”
Should he prevail against Ukraine, his free and democratic neighbor, do you really think he will not deploy additional special military operations against other nations in the future?
Just days before his invasion of Ukraine, Mr. Putin forged a “no-limits” partnership with Xi Jinping, China’s ruler. Around their axis, the rulers of Iran and North Korea now revolve as well.
As Messrs. Vance and Rubio made clear, Washington in this new era needs a strong and capable partner, not a nervous Nellie taking to the couch while America bears the burden of standing up to the world’s multiple bullies.
Here, we must acknowledge that America’s marriage is polygamous. Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania count as solid allies, doing everything they can to defend themselves and contribute to the collective security of the West.
The same cannot be said of Spain, currently governed by a coalition led by the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party. Britain, under the leadership of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, last week denied the U.S. the use of the military base on Diego Garcia, in the Indian Ocean, to use against the theocratic tyrants in Tehran.
Canada, led by Prime Minister Mark Carney, also is problematic, as is France, in recent years forcibly driven out of a string of African nations, thereby opening doors for Russia and China to expand their influence across that continent.
Mr. Rubio concluded his remarks by telling Europe that America’s “destiny is and always will be intertwined with yours” and that the two continents should be “proud of what we achieved together in the last century, but now we must confront and embrace the opportunities of a new one — because yesterday is over, the future is inevitable, and our destiny together awaits.”
He received a standing ovation.
I’m going to resist the temptation to end this column on that optimistic note. Why? Because Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a leader of the ascendant Jeremy Corbyn wing of the Democratic Party, also attended the Munich conference.
As soon as she opened her mouth, it became obvious that she lacks the basic knowledge of world affairs that should be expected of a pottery major at a community college.
Asked whether the U.S. should defend Taiwan, she babbled: “Um, you know, I think that, uh, this is such a, you know, I think that this is a, um, this is of course a very long-standing, um, policy of the United States. Uh, and I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point, and we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic research and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.”
If, a few years hence, she or someone of her ilk is in the White House and the Europeans have not risen to the challenges articulated by Messrs. Vance and Rubio, if they are still obsessing over carbon dioxide, flagellating themselves over the alleged past sins of Western civilization, leaving their doors open to unvetted immigrants from radically different cultures, and fielding too many JV militaries, then they will find themselves in a forced marriage with the communists in Beijing, the imperial revanchists in Moscow, the Islamists in Tehran and the personality cultists in Pyongyang — abusive spouses all.
And they’ll remain in that wedlock till death do them part.
• Clifford D. May is the founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a columnist for The Washington Times and host of the “Foreign Podicy” podcast.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.