The Donroe Doctrine: A 21st-century recasting of Monroe Doctrine

The opening days of 2026 were marked by a stunning military operation, "Operation Absolute Resolve," and witnessed U.S. special forces raiding the Venezuelan presidential palace, capturing President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and transporting them to the United States for trial. President Donald Trump later declared that "under our new national security strategy, American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never be questioned again," a statement that formally ushered in a new era of regional policy known as the "Donroe Doctrine." This fusion of "Donald" and the historic Monroe Doctrine has rapidly become the central framework for understanding Washington's current strategy in Latin America.

While the U.S. desire to control its "backyard" has persisted for two centuries, the "Donroe Doctrine" under the "America First" banner is no simple revival. It represents a distinct mutation — more aggressive, overtly transactional and unapologetically reliant on unilateral force, signaling a sharp departure from past practices.

Strategic continuity: The enduring objective

The "Donroe Doctrine" is deeply rooted in the strategic DNA of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, which declared the Western Hemisphere a U.S. sphere of special interest. Despite evolving interpretations over two centuries — from "Manifest Destiny" to the Roosevelt Corollary and Cold War anti-communism — the core objective has remained constant: to prevent external powers from gaining influence and to maintain absolute U.S. primacy.

President Trump explicitly praised the Monroe Doctrine during his first term, and the "Donroe Doctrine" fully inherits this strategic imperative. The “capture” of Maduro, deliberately timed on the anniversary of the seizure of Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega, was a stark reaffirmation of this dominance, which aims to "enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere," as outlined in the November 2025 U.S. National Security Strategy. The continuity also extends to excluding foreign powers, although the focus has shifted from 19th-century Europe to 21st-century rivals like China and Russia, whose investments in infrastructure such as the Panama Canal are framed as direct threats to U.S. interests.

Tactical mutation: From covert influence to overt coercion

The fundamental shift lies not in the objective, but in the methods and rhetoric employed.

Institutional hegemony to transactional predation. The traditional Monroe Doctrine relied on a system of "institutional hegemony." This involved building regional organizations, providing aid and supporting allies — all aimed at creating a “rules-based” order with the U.S. as the undisputed leader. In contrast, the "Donroe Doctrine" engages in brazen "transactional predation." The operation against Maduro, openly targeting Venezuela's oil wealth, exemplifies a strategy that abandons diplomatic pretense in favor of unilateral action. Matias Spektor, professor of international relations at Fundacao Getulio Vargas in Brazil, characterized Trump's actions as "predatory" — discarding any pretense of transactional diplomacy and using threats of tariffs or military action to compel other countries to yield.

Rules-based balancing to force primacy. The "Donroe Doctrine" marks a sharp departure from the past practice of seeking legal justifications for interventions, demonstrating a clear disregard for multilateralism. This is evidenced not only by the unauthorized operation against Maduro but also by a broader pattern of normalizing force through increased military deployments and threats of cross-border strikes. In a Jan. 3 article in the Economist, titled "Donald Trump Wants to Run Venezuela, and Dominate the Western Hemisphere," Ryan Berg of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington observed that Mr. Trump regards the Western Hemisphere differently — as an extension of his "America First" doctrine. 

Ideological veneer to populist pragmatism. The Monroe Doctrine was historically paired with an ideological narrative of "democracy" and "freedom." The "Donroe Doctrine," by contrast, is driven by domestic populist concerns. On Oct. 25, 2025, professor Britta Crandall of Davidson College stated in an interview with Chinese media outlet The Paper that the Trump administration does not prioritize long-term stability in Latin America, and that its policy toward the region is highly subservient to its domestic political agenda. Latin America becomes a focus precisely when issues such as migration waves and the fentanyl crisis dominate headlines. This results in a reactive and unstable policy, reducing strategy to a series of performative actions rather than long-term alliance building.

Pragmatism and peril: The double edge of the Maduro case

The “capture” of Maduro serves as the ultimate case study, showcasing the Donroe Doctrine's pragmatic execution but also its profound dilemmas. The strategy of direct intervention followed by indirect "governance" avoids the pitfalls of prolonged occupation. The operation's speed suggests possible internal collaboration within Venezuela, pointing to a calculated, intelligence-driven maneuver.

However, the action highlights acute strategic short-sightedness and a deep legitimacy crisis. The blatant violation of sovereignty and the pursuit of a puppet regime risk plunging Venezuela into lasting instability. While such coercive tactics may intimidate regional governments in the short term, they are likely to fuel widespread anti-American sentiment over the long term, undermining the very stability the U.S. seeks.

Conclusion: A dangerous upgrade

In conclusion, the "Donroe Doctrine" is a significant and dangerous evolution of the Monroe Doctrine. It retains the core goal of hemispheric dominance but pursues it through methods that are more coercive, less constrained and ideologically unmoored. This shift from "implicit hegemony" to "explicit power politics" poses a direct challenge to the international order based on sovereign equality and non-interference.

Applying a 19th-century logic of spheres of influence to the complexities of the 21st century may ultimately prove counterproductive. Rather than ensuring long-term control, the "Donroe Doctrine" risks accelerating the decline of U.S. influence by awakening a stronger sense of strategic autonomy across Latin America, potentially hastening the emergence of a more equitable regional order that the United States can no longer unilaterally dominate.

(Authors: Yan Liming, research intern at the Academy of Contemporary China and World Studies; and Wei Hongxia, senior fellow at the Academy of Contemporary China and World Studies)