Who is Thomas Fugate, the 22-year-old head of US counter-terrorism

CP3, established under the Biden administration, was conceived as an integrated response to the growing phenomenon of ideologically, supremacist or politically motivated domestic violence. Under Braniff, it had about eighty employees and managed funds worth tens of millions of dollars. Today, under the new Trumpian administration, the centre is down to just over twenty employees and the budget has been almost wiped out.

Fugate's appointment has therefore taken on more political than technical significance. For the Trump administration, depowering CP3 means archiving an approach considered ideological, 'liberal' and even, according to some circles of the most radical right, 'anti-conservative'. "You don't need sociologists or educators to stop terrorists. It needs police. It needs repression,' said an advisor close to the president, summarising the pragmatic and muscular approach that characterises the new DHS line.

But Fugate's arrival at CP3 is not just an internal signal. American security, already under pressure due to the rekindling of tensions with Iran and threats of cross-revenge linked to the international context, is now also facing a fragile picture on the domestic front. Politically motivated shootings, threats to public officials and exasperated polarisation make fertile ground for violent drifts. For this very reason, many analysts considered the choice of an inexperienced profile like Fugate a gamble.

Criticism came across. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy wrote: '22 years. Never a day's experience fighting terrorism. But he is loyal to Trump, so he got the job. At a time when we fear Iranian attacks, this is who is protecting us'. Moderate figures in the Republican Party have also expressed misgivings, albeit often in a reserved form, fearing political repercussions for openly contradicting the president.

Those who know Fugate paint a mixed picture of him. Some speak of an ambitious guy with a natural talent for internal party dynamics, capable of quickly gaining the trust of the leadership. Others describe him as an idealist, fascinated by the rhetoric of 'lean government' and determined to reduce what he sees as waste and duplication in the national security system.

At the moment, Fugate has not yet publicly outlined an operational plan for the future of CP3. According to some sources, the real goal may be the progressive dismantling of the centre, considered by the new administration to be a legacy of the progressive era. Others suggest that the young executive may simply be a 'ferryman', chosen for his political allegiance and destined to occupy the role until a future deeper reorganisation of the DHS.

What is certain is that Thomas Fugate's name is destined to remain at the centre of the debate in the coming months. A symbol of a new generation of Republican leaders born and bred under the influence of Trumpism, he represents at the same time the unknown of a choice that could turn out to be either bold or fatal. At the heart of a bureaucratic and operational machine as complex as that of American security, the Texan outsider will now have to prove whether political loyalty can really replace experience or whether, on the contrary, he risks leaving the country more exposed to threats than ever.