Over 200 years ago, President James Monroe declared the Western Hemisphere off-limits to Europe. This became known as the Monroe Doctrine. It marked the start of a new chapter in U.S. influence in the region, leading to numerous interventions in Latin America.
Since then, the U.S. has intervened in Latin America nearly a third of the time in its global actions. From 1823 to now, the U.S. took measures it deemed necessary, often removing governments or using force, sometimes resulting in international condemnation.
In 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry famously stated that the Monroe Doctrine was “over.” This pointed to a shift: the U.S. aimed to engage with Latin America as partners rather than as subjects. Fast forward to today, and the latest National Security Strategy from the Trump administration seems to revive this doctrine, placing U.S. interest back at center stage.
The recent strategy suggests that prioritizing the Western Hemisphere is crucial for U.S. security. The narrative links regional stability with countering influences from China and drug trafficking. For example, securing ports and resources from outside powers, especially regarding military and cyber operations, is highlighted.
Notably, the administration’s strong language about combating “narco-terrorists” is tied to the broader rivalry with China. This strategic focus underpins recent military actions, including controversial boat strikes in the Caribbean aimed at drug trafficking. Experts have warned that these actions could violate international law, as they were not authorized by Congress. Many feel that the administration uses the label of “narco-terrorists” to justify aggressive policies.
One significant figure in this narrative is Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, often labeled a “narco-dictator.” Despite Venezuela’s relatively minor role in U.S. drug imports, it sits at the heart of Trump’s concerns due to its vast oil reserves and ties to China. Venezuela’s coastline is also critical for U.S. shipping routes.
The U.S. strategy suggests that continued engagement is essential, particularly as Venezuela has deepened its relationship with China. Recent reports indicate that Maduro may be looking to pivot away from China by offering the U.S. significant stakes in oil resources. This could signal a desire for better relations with Washington, contrasting with a focus on regime change that many believe the Trump administration pursues.
Amid all this, Latin America’s response has been fragmented. Regional leaders are hesitant, often responding to the U.S. one-on-one rather than as a united front. While there are calls for peace, many fear being labeled as “narco-states” under U.S. scrutiny.
As history unfolds, it’s clear that the dynamics of U.S. influence in Latin America are complex. The echoes of the Monroe Doctrine remind us that, even today, the U.S. still views the region as its domain, keen to assert its presence in a rapidly changing world.
