The Don Job Corollary: Monroe Doctrine Redux

For years my 2011 article on the Monroe Doctrine ranked among the most visited pages on Expat Chronicles. I don’t think it’s a great article, but the internet content game can be like that. You get surprised at what turns out to be evergreen. Maybe there wasn’t much competition as the philosophy was long believed dead.

There is a major update. After Donald Trump ordered the American military to arrest Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro and Celia Flores, he proclaimed the “Donroe Doctrine,” or the resurrection of Monroe Doctrine.

Clearly, this man had never heard of Monroe Doctrine

As always with Trump, there is a heavy dose of absurdity in the boasting. He has not superseded what was done before. Here is a quick list of serious U.S. action in Latin America.

Some of these were nefarious and self-interested, but many were noble at the time and today. I asterisked those that are inarguably benefited the LatAm country. In fact, the Monroe Doctrine was celebrated in Latin America when announced. It conferred sovereign legitimacy on countries that we take for granted today, but which were shaky for generations. Some still are.

Last week, one comment on the Venezuelan virility expressed support for the Monroe Doctrine, as mismanagement in Latin America quickly affects the United States. Another wrote on the Investing Redux piece, “Reality is that most of Latin America is not well served by democracy. Pinochet style strong man has yielded the best economic success and quality of life in the modern era.”

My opinion falls somewhere in the middle. Criticism of Monroe Doctrine and U.S. intervention is grossly exaggerated, and a healthy dose of gratitude is warranted. I wouldn’t say that gratitude is completely absent. I met many Colombians during my time there who appreciated American military support and wanted to continue it in perpetuity.

“Too much is made about the imperative for U.S. atonement or humility; they are both overrated,” wrote Mexican intellectual Jorge Castañeda in 2009, the height of anti-American sentiment in the region.

What exactly is Trump’s addition to the Monroe Doctrine? Most importantly, it is the resurrection of it. But it also looks like he’s extorting the new Venezuelan government for about $3 billion in oil. That and other actions in the region comprise something new.

Here are curated comments from Trump’s press conference, rearranged for clarity:

We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper, and judicious transition… [Venezuela is] gonna have peace, justice. You’re going to have some of the riches that you should have had for a long period of time that was stolen from you.

We’ll run it properly, we’ll run it professionally. We’ll have the greatest oil companies in the world go in and invest billions and billions of dollars. We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country.

I’d like to do it quickly, but it takes a period of time. You know, we’re rebuilding, we have to rebuild their whole infrastructure. Their infrastructure is rotted.

This is quite a departure from “no more forever wars” and the “nation-builders wrecked far more nations than they built,” but we’ve all come to expect a 180-degree turn at any time on any issue.

Considering this quote and recent actions in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Honduras and Mexico, I used performance-enhancing-drugs (AI) to help define what the Don Job Corollary would be if this is all there is to it.

Trump Corollary

The U.S. will aggressively intervene in Latin American countries to pursue geopolitical alignment and Chinese containment within a transactional framework that rewards right-wing allies with massive financial support and legal clemency while punishing left-wing governments through regime-change efforts, tariffs and economic pressure. Promoting ideology and deferential working relationships are prioritized over democracy, the rule of law or institutional stability. Also, we are declaring anew the War on Drugs.

I only massaged most of that AI slop. Only the last sentence was written completely by me. I can’t believe it. I just can’t believe it. The War on Drugs AGAIN. People think we’re going to win this time.

Reading that Corollary doesn’t sound crazy, and it’s consistent with what I’ve come to see as what has driven this right-wing surge that propelled Trump to power. I think there is a huge part of the country that is sick and tired of apologizing and being sorry. They don’t believe America or white people are evil. In fact, they believe they’re a force for good in the world.

Trump is naturally so unapologetic, it’s just the way he’s built. And that is what is so thrilling for the people who support him.

4 comments

  1. I got interested in Panama this year and made a trip to Boquete, a beautiful town in the mountains. There are no direct flights. I flew to Panama City, then took the bus to David, then took an Uber to Boquete. I did each in one day, but they could be done the same day with some planning. I read about Panama’s independence and asked ChatGPT about the role of the US. You said the US forced their independence from Colombia. The explanation from ChatGPT is more along the lines that Panama was not very happy being part of Colombia so it was more a case of the US supporting their desire to be independent. We can dive into it deeper if you want. And I may go back to Boquete some day. The temps are nice year round with highs in the 70s. I went during the rainy season because I like rain. I might go expat there, but I would probably pick Pereira, Colombia because it is also nice temps and doesn’t have as much of a dry season, it has better shopping options (Boquete is rather small), and, maybe most importantly, it’s cheaper.

    Like

    1. Describing what happened to fit in a bulletpoint is tricky. The Americans forced Panama’s independence on Colombia. They were tired of negotiating the canal with Bogota.

      I concede there was an organic independence movement in Panama, and it was its own colony before Nueva Granada. But that movement never got off the ground. Then The Colonel sent gunboats and it became a quite rare bloodless independence.

      Panama’s flag is a tribute to Uncle Sam, but I don’t think any country wants to dedicate their existence to the gringos up north. So they call it “separation,” not “independence.”

      Maybe a better way to phrase the bulletpoint.

      Like

  2. Colin,

    I’ll try posting this reply here. I went back to ChatGPT and it seems to think I understated the US role a bit, and you overstated the US role a bit. Here is an exact except from ChatGPT’s long reply:

    Where his claim goes too far

    • Saying the U.S. “forced” independence implies Panama had no meaningful internal drive—which isn’t true.
    • The independence movement didn’t “never get off the ground”; it had failed before, but it existed, organized, and was waiting for an opportunity.
    • The U.S. did not invent Panamanian nationalism; it exploited and accelerated it.

    A useful analogy is that Panama struck the match—but the U.S. supplied the gasoline and stood guard. The historian’s synthesis (the consensus view)

    Most serious historians would say something like:

    Panama’s independence was locally desired, externally enabled, and geopolitically engineered.

    Or more bluntly:

    • No U.S. intervention → no successful independence in 1903
    • No Panamanian separatism → no independence to support

    Both conditions were necessary.

    If you wanted a one-sentence reply that stays accurate without escalating:

    “Panamanian independence was locally desired but only succeeded because the U.S., acting in its own interests, prevented Colombia from stopping it.”

    That sentence would make most historians nod rather than argue.

    Like

  3. Colin You also mentioned the US invading Panama (1989 I think) to remove Noriega.  When the US took Maduro I remembered the Noriega similarity and I looked it up in Wikipedia.  It mentioned that when the US invaded a Panama a Colonel in the Panamanian army took some troops to David, where I staged for one night on my vacation, and then he took the troops up into the mountains, which is where I went, too.  But then he decided to surrender rather than stage a guerilla battle with the gringos.  It was a little thrilling to think that I had also taken that slightly important journey myself.  I imagine that in the case of the Colonel the movie might have gone something like this: “Colonel, the American army is approaching.””Soldier, bring me that white flag.” Regards, Steve 

    Like

Leave a reply to DallasSteve Cancel reply