By reimagining the Monroe Doctrine through a national-populist lens, Donald Trump aims to reassert American hegemony at a time of strategic rivalry with China. The “Trump Corollary” is more than a symbolic gesture: it signals a deliberate embrace of power politics across the Americas.
Ricardo Martins
Trump’s statement marking the anniversary of the Monroe Doctrine reinterprets the original 1823 principle — non-interference of external powers in the Western Hemisphere — into a wider, ideologically charged assertion of sovereigntist U.S. primacy.
The “Trump Corollary,” formally articulated in official presidential documents, reflects President Trump’s effort to craft a legacy as a decisive shaper of American power, countering narratives that frame his presidency as contributing to the country’s sharp geopolitical and economic decline.
Trump’s “Trump Corollary” does not revive the Monroe Doctrine in its nineteenth-century form; instead, it transforms it into a doctrine of hemispheric sovereignty anchored in national-populist principles
It functions not only as a symbolic repertoire but also as a geopolitical means of shaping strategic narratives that justify a more assertive U.S. posture in the hemisphere, illustrated by proposals to take control of the Panama Canal, incorporate Canada and Greenland, and rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America.”
The “Trump Corollary” is a desperate attempt to reframe hemispheric politics along five geopolitical axes:
1. Reassertion of U.S. Hegemony in the Western Hemisphere
The text positions the United States as the uncontested arbiter of political, economic, and security developments in the Americas. By linking Monroe’s doctrine to “restoring privileged access to the Panama Canal” and “reestablishing American maritime dominance,” it signals a revitalised projection of hard power across key strategic infrastructures and sea lanes.
2. Framing of External Actors as Systemic Threats
Although the proclamation does not name specific states, the references to “foreign nations,” “faraway powers,” and “non-market practices in supply chains” implicitly evoke concerns about China’s expanding economic, technological, and logistical footprint in Latin America. The new corollary positions U.S. actions as protective measures against perceived encroachment by extra-hemispheric powers.
3. Linking Domestic Sovereignty to Hemispheric Control
The message blends internal political themes—border control, anti-drug operations, trade protectionism—with external strategy. By asserting that “globalist institutions” will not influence American destiny, the proclamation shifts the Monroe Doctrine from a classical anti-colonial statement into a broader doctrine of national-populist sovereignty, denying multilateralism and portraying hemispheric leadership as a precondition for shaping the domestic political and economic trajectories of Latin American governments.
4. Hemispheric Trade Realignment
The emphasis on “historic trade deals” with El Salvador, Argentina, Ecuador, and Guatemala frames economic diplomacy as an instrument of geopolitical consolidation, seeking to anchor supply chains around the United States and reduce Latin America’s reliance on external markets, while simultaneously bolstering right- and far-right-wing governments through preferential trade arrangements and politically friendly lending.
5. Hardening of Security Paradigms
The themes of drug interdiction, “narco-terrorist networks,” and border protection extend the doctrine into the realm of transnational security governance. The “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine thus becomes a justification for U.S. interference and interventions in Latin American countries, carried out in the name of American domestic security and regional stability.
Overall Geopolitical Interpretation
The “Trump Corollary” acquires its full geopolitical significance when read through the prism of intensifying U.S.–China competition in Latin America.
By reaffirming hemispheric sovereignty and denouncing the influence of “foreign nations” and “non-market practices,” the message implicitly targets China’s expanding presence in the region, ranging from port management and critical infrastructure to telecommunications, energy, and commodity financing. Over the past two decades, Beijing has become a major trade partner and lender for several Latin American states, many of which rely on Chinese investment to diversify economic dependencies.
Venezuela remains an overwhelmingly attractive target for U.S. policy under Trump — not primarily because of ideology or “democracy promotion,” but because of raw strategic value. Economically, the country holds some of the largest proven oil reserves in the world (roughly 17% of the global total), giving it an immediate and immense resource appeal.
Venezuela offers the U.S. a two-fold prize: valuable natural resources and a geopolitical foothold in Latin America that neutralises the presence of China, Russia, and even Iran, making it a strategic priority beyond narcotics or humanitarian rhetoric.
Trump’s proclamation seeks to reverse this trajectory by reasserting U.S. primacy as the central political, economic, and security actor in the Western Hemisphere, signalling to Latin American governments that closer alignment with Washington is now framed as a condition for stable access to U.S. markets, security cooperation, and logistical networks. In doing so, the “Trump Corollary” positions the Monroe Doctrine as an instrument of strategic containment aimed at curbing China’s influence rather than merely excluding extra-regional powers in general.
However, most Latin Americans do not share Trump’s perspective. For them, China provides tangible investments and financing without imposing ideological conditions, such as shifts in economic orientation or political regime. By contrast, Trump’s security-driven approach is widely viewed as generating insecurity and chaos, paving the way for subsequent control over strategic resources. In short, China has come to be seen as a more stable and reliable partner in the region.
In conclusion, Trump’s “Trump Corollary” does not revive the Monroe Doctrine in its nineteenth-century form; instead, it transforms it into a doctrine of hemispheric sovereignty anchored in national-populist principles. Its geopolitical meaning lies in projecting an America First worldview outward: protecting U.S. autonomy, constraining external power projection in the Americas, centralising hemispheric supply chains, and legitimising renewed U.S. strategic political activism across the Western Hemisphere, including regime change in Latin America.
Ricardo Martins, PhD in Sociology, specializing in International Relations and Geopolitics
No comments:
Post a Comment