In a dramatic geopolitical development, former President Donald Trump has invoked a centuries-old foreign policy doctrine to rationalize recent U.S. military operations in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of Nicolás Maduro. During a January 3rd press briefing at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump resurrected the Monroe Doctrine—originally articulated in 1823—to validate American interventionism in the Western Hemisphere.
The Monroe Doctrine, established by President James Monroe during a period of global transformation following Latin American independence movements, fundamentally distinguished between the ‘Old World’ (Europe) and the ‘New World’ (the Americas). It committed the United States to non-interference in European affairs while declaring the Americas closed to further colonization, positioning any European meddling as a direct provocation against U.S. interests.
The doctrine was significantly expanded by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1904 through his ‘Roosevelt Corollary,’ which cast the United States as the ‘Policeman of the Americas.’ This amendment granted Washington purported authority to militarily intervene in Latin American nations during instances of perceived ‘governmental failure,’ setting precedents for actions ranging from the annexation of Puerto Rico to Cold War anti-communist operations.
Trump’s contemporary application of this doctrine aligns with his administration’s newly articulated National Security Strategy, which emphasizes three core objectives: securing priority access to strategic resources (particularly Venezuelan oil reserves), stabilizing governments to reduce northward migration, and countering influence from global competitors like China and Russia in the region.
The updated strategy explicitly states that the U.S. will prevent ‘non-hemispheric competitors’ from establishing military presence or controlling strategic assets in the Americas—a clear reference to China’s role as Venezuela’s primary oil purchaser. Trump’s vision appears to extend beyond Venezuela, with aspirations ranging from Greenland acquisition to Panama Canal reclamation, suggesting an expansionist reinterpretation of American sovereignty that challenges conventional geographical boundaries.