Secretary of State Marco Rubio has recently focused his rhetoric on perceived threats from entities such as the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Cuban government, and left-wing extremist groups within the United States, framing these as significant dangers to national security. However, analysts and experts suggest that the risks Rubio highlights may be exaggerated or based on outdated information.

In a July 13 op-ed, Rubio warned that U.S. personnel, including soldiers, police officers, Border Patrol agents, and elected officials, could face prosecution by the ICC for alleged violations of international law. He pledged to dismantle the court “brick by brick” to prevent such outcomes. Yet, the United States is not a member of the ICC, and there has been only one brief investigation involving U.S. troops—in Afghanistan in 2020—which was ultimately discontinued. Experts note that while the ICC theoretically could assert jurisdiction over American soldiers accused of war crimes in member countries, actual prosecutions remain highly unlikely since over 100 countries have committed not to extradite U.S. citizens to The Hague. The situation is further complicated by recent geopolitical developments; for instance, Venezuela, where many vessels allegedly attacked under U.S. orders were registered, withdrew from the ICC following U.S. diplomatic pressure, making ICC jurisdiction even more tenuous.

Some analysts speculate that Rubio’s concerns may relate indirectly to Israel, given an ICC arrest warrant issued in 2024 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on allegations linked to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. City officials in New York briefly discussed the prospect of enforcing this warrant during Netanyahu’s visits but ultimately concluded they lacked jurisdiction. Despite criticisms regarding the ICC’s limitations, Rubio previously supported the court’s investigation of Russian war crimes in Ukraine, indicating a more nuanced stance.

In addition to the ICC, the State Department recently released a report titled “Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism,” portraying the Cuban government as an ongoing subversive threat to the United States. The report accuses Cuba of supporting left-wing groups such as antifa and the Democratic Socialists of America, but it offers limited current evidence to substantiate these claims. Rather, much of the report recounts historical episodes dating back to the 1960s and 1980s, including Cuban assistance to Soviet-backed factions and domestic U.S. radical groups. Present-day Cuba faces significant economic challenges, exacerbated by longstanding U.S. sanctions and internal governance issues, leading experts to view its threat as primarily domestic rather than international.

Rubio’s emphasis on left-wing extremism also featured prominently at an international conference he convened in mid-July. He described efforts to combat what he termed “the scourge of far-left terror.” However, many examples cited during the conference referred to groups active decades ago, such as the Red Army Faction and the Symbionese Liberation Army. A 2025 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies found that while left-wing violence in the U.S. has increased in recent years, it remains comparatively low. Over the past decade, left-wing attacks resulted in 13 deaths, whereas right-wing and jihadist attacks caused significantly higher fatalities.

Recent high-profile violent incidents targeting conservative figures were not conclusively linked to organized left-wing groups. Meanwhile, critics note that the Trump administration granted pardons to individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol riot, widely regarded as a significant act of political violence.

Observers suggest that Rubio’s amplification of these threats serves more to bolster his political standing within the Republican base, particularly among supporters of former President Donald Trump, than to address genuine national security concerns. His positioning contrasts with his rivals working on complex diplomatic negotiations regarding Iran and Russia, which have seen limited progress. Rubio’s focus on these largely symbolic or overstated threats appears to be part of a broader strategy to reinforce his credentials ahead of the 2028 presidential campaign.