President Donald Trump said yesterday that the US operation in Venezuela, which involved strikes on the capital and the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, fell under what he called the “Don-roe Doctrine.” Trump stated that Venezuela under Maduro hosted “foreign adversaries in our region and acquiring menacing offensive weapons that could threaten U.S. interests and lives, and they used those weapons last night.”
“All of these actions were in gross violation of the core principles of American foreign policy, dating back more than two centuries, and not anymore,” Trump said, The Hill reported. “All the way back, it dated to the Monroe Doctrine. And the Monroe Doctrine is a big deal, but we’ve superseded it by a lot, by a real lot. They now call it the ‘Don-roe Doctrine," he added.
The Monroe Doctrine is one of the most influential principles of United States foreign policy. Announced by President James Monroe during his annual message to Congress on December 2, 1823, it essentially declared the Western Hemisphere "off-limits" to European colonization.
At its heart, the doctrine established four basic points that defined the relationship between the "Old World" (Europe) and the "New World" (The Americas):
Non-Colonization: The American continents were no longer open to new European colonization.
Two Spheres: The political systems of Europe (monarchies) were fundamentally different from those of the Americas (republics), and they should remain separate.
Non-Intervention (by Europe): Any attempt by European powers to oppress or control newly independent nations in the Americas would be viewed as a hostile act against the U.S.
Non-Interference (by the U.S.): In exchange, the United States pledged not to interfere in the internal affairs of European nations or their existing colonies.
Historical Context
The doctrine was largely drafted by Secretary of State John Quincy Adams. At the time, several Latin American nations had recently won independence from Spain and Portugal. The U.S. feared that European monarchies (specifically the "Holy Alliance") might help Spain reclaim its lost colonies or that Russia might expand southward from Alaska.
Interestingly, when it was first issued, the U.S. lacked the military power to actually enforce it. It was primarily the British Royal Navy that gave the doctrine teeth, as Britain also wanted to prevent other European powers from dominating trade in Latin America.
Evolution and Impact
While originally intended as a defensive "hands-off" warning, the doctrine evolved significantly over the next two centuries:
Manifest Destiny (Mid-1800s): It was used to justify U.S. westward expansion and the annexation of Texas.
The Roosevelt Corollary (1904): President Theodore Roosevelt added a "corollary" stating that the U.S. had the right to intervene in Latin American nations to maintain stability (the "Big Stick" policy). This shifted the doctrine from a defensive shield to an interventionist tool.
The Cold War: It was invoked to justify opposing Soviet influence in the Americas, most notably during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.
Modern Day: In recent years (including 2025-2026), the doctrine has seen a resurgence in political rhetoric, often cited as a reason to limit the influence of non-hemispheric powers like China or Russia in Latin America.
While the Monroe Doctrine (1823) was originally a "keep out" sign for Europe, the Roosevelt Corollary (1904) turned the U.S. into the region's "policeman."
The key difference is the shift from a defensive posture to an interventionist one.
The Roosevelt Corollary was the theoretical backing for Roosevelt’s "Speak softly and carry a big stick" philosophy.
Notable Interventions:
Dominican Republic (1905): After the nation defaulted on its debts, the U.S. took control of its customs houses to ensure European creditors were paid, preventing a European naval invasion.
Cuba (1906–1909): The U.S. established a provisional government to restore order after a rebellion, citing the need for regional stability.
Nicaragua: Periodic interventions occurred to protect U.S. economic interests and prevent foreign-funded canals from competing with the Panama Canal.
Legacy and Shift
By the 1930s, the aggressive nature of the Corollary had deeply damaged U.S.-Latin American relations. This led Franklin D. Roosevelt to eventually renounce the policy in favor of the "Good Neighbor Policy," which emphasized non-intervention and cooperation.
In 2025 and 2026, the Monroe Doctrine has experienced its most aggressive revival in over a century. Under the current U.S. administration, the policy has moved beyond historical debate and into active military and diplomatic application, specifically targeting the influence of China and Russia in the Western Hemisphere.
Containment of China: The U.S. is actively pressuring Latin American nations to reject Chinese investments in critical infrastructure (like 5G networks, ports, and the Panama Canal), framing these as security threats to the hemisphere.
Operation Absolute Resolve (January 2026): In a dramatic escalation of the doctrine, U.S. forces launched a military operation in Venezuela on January 3, 2026, capturing President Nicolás Maduro. The administration justified this by citing Maduro’s ties to foreign adversaries and his "violation" of hemispheric stability.
Securing Supply Chains: The doctrine is being used to prioritize "near-shoring," pushing American companies to move manufacturing from Asia to "friendly" Western Hemisphere nations like Mexico, Argentina, and El Salvador.
Regional Reactions
The revival of the doctrine has deeply split the Americas:
Supporters: Leaders like Javier Milei (Argentina) and Daniel Noboa (Ecuador) have praised the move, seeing it as a way to strengthen security and economic ties with the U.S.
Critics: Leaders such as Gabriel Boric (Chile) have condemned recent interventions as a violation of sovereignty, arguing that the "policeman of the Americas" approach belongs in the 19th century, not the 21st.
