By Frei Beto on October 6, 2026
The Monroe Doctrine resurfaces with Trump and Venezuela, as Washington strengthens its influence over Latin America’s oil and minerals.
Latin America Under the White House’s Thumb
If you intend to vote for Flavio Bolsonaro—who promises to throw Brazil’s doors wide open to U.S. interests and who, like his brother Eduardo, enjoys kissing Trump’s hands—you’d do well to learn a little history.
There is an old U.S. doctrine that, from time to time, changes its name, its president, and its rhetoric, but maintains the conviction that the American continent is, by historical right and by force of arms, Washington’s privileged sphere of influence.
The first classic formulation appeared in 1832, when President James Monroe, with the decisive involvement of his Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams, presented the so-called Monroe Doctrine to Congress. Its principle, seemingly defensive, was that European powers should never again colonize the Americas or intervene there.
But it was an obvious geopolitical maneuver. If Europe was kept out, who was left in? Washington. The State Department itself acknowledges that the doctrine established two spheres of influence—Europe and the Americas—and that it would later be used to justify U.S. territorial expansion and interventions.
The formula became even more explicit toward the end of the 19th century. Senator Albert J. Beveridge, one of the great ideologues of imperialism, proclaimed in 1898 that the United States had a “mission” to fulfill and a “duty” to the world. For him, expansion did not stem from mere territorial ambition, but from a kind of divine mandate. In his famous speech “The March of the Flag,” Beveridge asserted that Puerto Rico would belong to the United States and defended U.S. expansion as a national destiny.
Another key figure was Admiral and historian Alfred Thayer Mahan. In his 1890 work *The Influence of Sea Power upon History*, he argued that the greatness of great powers depended on control of the seas, naval bases, and trade routes.
His ideas directly influenced expansionist politicians such as Beveridge, Henry Cabot Lodge, and Theodore Roosevelt. In 1895, Lodge proclaimed in the Senate that the United States dominated the hemisphere and had an obligation to preserve and expand that dominance.
The result was not limited to speeches. Half of Mexico was annexed. The Mexican experience is, perhaps, the most eloquent example of the combination of expansionist ideology and military force.
The presidency of James K. Polk (1845–1849) was associated with territorial expansion and the idea of Manifest Destiny. In 1845, the United States annexed Texas, which had originally been part of the Spanish Empire since the 16th century, had achieved independence in 1821, and was inherited by Mexico. In 1836, it became independent again, and nearly ten years later, it was annexed by the United States.
In 1846, the war against Mexico began. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed in 1848, transferred to the United States a territory that currently corresponds to California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of other states.
The ideological justification was Manifest Destiny—the belief that the expansion of the United States across the continent constitutes a kind of historical destiny. The expression may seem religious, patriotic, and civilizing. In practice, it means war, territorial conquest, and the pushing of borders.
In 1898, the Spanish-American War broke out. The Treaty of Paris, signed on December 10 of that year, required Spain to cede Puerto Rico to the United States, along with Guam and the Philippines. Puerto Rico did not become a state of the great nation to the north. Nor did it remain independent. It became part of a territorial structure subordinate to Washington.
Although it was not formally annexed, Cuba likewise entered the U.S. sphere of influence. The system established after the war ended allowed Washington to exercise strong control over the island. Historian Leslie Bethell observes that the war of 1898 ushered in a new phase of U.S. hegemony in the Caribbean, with Puerto Rico annexed and Cuba transformed into a de facto protectorate.
From that moment on, the Monroe Doctrine took on a new lease on life. If Monroe had told the Europeans “stay out” of the American continent, Theodore Roosevelt added, “we decide what happens here.” In 1904, the Roosevelt Corollary transformed the doctrine into a justification for U.S. interventions in Latin America. From then on, Washington began to assert its role as the hemisphere’s policeman.
In the 20th century, the method underwent changes. When annexing territories became politically more difficult, Washington resorted to military occupations, allied governments, financial pressure, sanctions, and economic control. William Howard Taft’s so-called “Dollar Diplomacy” was one such approach.
Latin America discovered that a country does not necessarily need to plant its flag in a public square to exercise power. This is the case with Venezuela. On January 3, 2026, U.S. troops abducted Nicolás Maduro and his wife and detained them in a New York prison. The operation was presented by the Trump administration as an action intended to bring him before U.S. courts; critics question its international legality.
Since then, Washington has expanded its influence over the Venezuelan economy. In September 2026, Reuters reported that the Trump administration was seeking to expand access for U.S. companies not only to oil but also to Venezuelan gold and other minerals.
The report described the strategy as part of an attempt to deepen the White House’s economic and strategic influence in the country.
Trump himself spoke in September in the vein of a policy reaffirming U.S. “dominance” over the hemisphere, explicitly reviving the logic of the Monroe Doctrine and even going so far as to call it the “Donroe Doctrine.”
Venezuela is not being annexed by the United States. But it has come under the tutelage of the White House. Recent events,such as the military intervention, the change in government, the pressure on oil, and the growing interest in mineral resources, demonstrate this.
Latin American history knows this story all too well. First came the doctrine, then Manifest Destiny. Next came war. Finally, the flag. And when the flag was no longer convenient, came the dollar, military bases, treaties, sanctions, and governments under pressure. Mexico lost territory; Puerto Rico, its sovereignty; Cuba became a protectorate. Panama was born in the shadow of the Canal. Several Latin American countries suffered interventions.
Now, in the 21st century, Washington seems to be testing an updated version of the old doctrine. Not necessarily to annex countries, but to ensure that no government or resources—such as oil and minerals—escape its sphere of influence in the hemisphere.
The geography remains the same. What changes is the vocabulary. And that is why it is so important to remember history.
Source: Alma Plus tv, translation Resumen Latinoamericano – English