By Huan Yuping, People’s Daily
A series of recent actions taken by the United States against Venezuela—from military strikes and forcible capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, to open declarations of intent to “run” Venezuela and gain control over its oil resources—have laid bare the underlying logic of domination and power politics that define the so-called “new Monroe Doctrine.”
These measures not only constitute a blatant violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty, but also challenge and undermine the international law and basic norms governing international relations enshrined in the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.
I.
The “new Monroe Doctrine” is by no means a novel concept. Rather, it represents the continuation and a dangerous escalation of the United States’ traditional hegemonic policy in the contemporary era.
An article published on the website of Spain’s El País observed, “By intervening in Venezuela, Washington is reviving the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine,” noting that the U.S. approach amounts to a “gunboat diplomacy 2.0.”
At the end of 2025, the White House released the 2025 National Security Strategy, explicitly stating: “After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland and our access to key geographies throughout the region.”
Recent actions, including military action against Venezuela, threats directed towards Latin American countries like Cuba, and overt territorial ambitions expressed toward Greenland, a Danish territory, have given the international community a clearer picture of the trajectory of U.S. policy and heightened concerns over the regional and global consequences that this “new Monroe Doctrine” may bring.
What exactly does the “new Monroe Doctrine” entail? The United States’ own words and deeds provide a stark answer.
Its objective is to be ensuring that the Western Hemisphere becomes what U.S. politicians have termed “our hemisphere,” subordinating territories, resources, and sea lanes of regional countries to U.S. interests, and aligning their domestic and foreign policies with the United States’ will.
The United States is discarding all pretenses and openly relying on brute-force methods, including military strikes, intimidation and coercion, economic pressure, and efforts to instigate regime change. Guided by doctrines prioritizing “might makes right” and “America First,” the United States demonstrates a willingness to pursue its self-serving interests with minimal restraint.
What will the “new Monroe Doctrine” bring to the region? History offers a clear warning.
“All the way back to 1823, James Monroe established the Monroe Doctrine. You are a part of it now, you are a part of that legacy.” A U.S. politician recently declared. This amounts to an open admission that today’s United States is inheriting and perpetuating a historical tradition of intervention and exploition that once caused immense suffering to the peoples of Latin America.
From seizing more than half of Mexico’s territory in 1848, to occupying Haiti with troops in 1915, to invading the Dominican Republic, Grenada, and Panama during the Cold War, the record is long and grim. As The Guardian has pointed out, “Almost every country in the region has experienced some form of U.S. intervention, overt or covert.”
Historically, Monroe Doctrine implementation reduced Latin America to a long-term “strategic backyard,” a “supplier of raw materials,” a “dumping ground for goods,” and a “cultural colony” of the United States. The development trajectories of Latin American countries were repeatedly disrupted, and their peoples endured extensive suffering.
As Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano revealed in his book Open Veins of Latin America, this pattern of “externalized development” remains a recurring script: the underground wealth of other nations must fuel the U.S. hegemony.
II.
When assessing the current situation, a U.S. scholar has asserted that Venezuela has become a springboard for the 21st-century Monroe Doctrine.
As the United States reasserts the Western Hemisphere as a foreign policy priority, Latin America and the Caribbean are likely to face potential disruptions to peace, stability, and development, with regional autonomy significantly constrained.
The United States has justified its increased military presence in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific as part of its efforts to combat “narco-terrorism,” yet its recent escalation to direct military action against Venezuela highlights a troubling pattern of manufacturing security crises in the region. Such interventions pose a significant threat to the Latin American people’s pursuit of peaceful lives. Through overt interference in the internal affairs of Latin American nations, the United States has intensified political divisions, creating serious risks to the region’s political stability.
By imposing asset seizures and tariffs, the United States is siphoning development resources from the entire region northward, depriving regional countries of their right to independent development and severely impacting local economies and livelihoods.
By stoking confrontation between so-called “pro-U.S.” and “autonomous” camps in the region, the United States undermines regional unity and self-reliance, obstructing regional integration eventually.
The harm caused by the “new Monroe Doctrine” extends far beyond Latin America. Following the U.S. military action against Venezuela, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that such actions had set a “dangerous precedent.”
At its core, the doctrine represents a fundamental clash between hegemony and justice, “spheres of influence” and sovereign equality, and unilateral dominance and mutual respect. It directly contradicts the international law and basic norms governing international relations, violates the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and the foundation of international relations, and threatens to undermine fairness and justice on a global scale.
When the UN Security Council convened an emergency meeting on the U.S. military action against Venezuela, U.S. politicians responded that “they didn’t care what the UN says,” bluntly exposing the United States’ contempt for the UN, for multilateralism, and for the international order.
Undermining international norms endangers all nations. Hegemony, by its nature, does not restrains itself. By openly placing brute force above justice, it breeds insecurity and instability across the world.
Indeed, the expansionist ambitions and predatory mindset now on display in the United States reflect a striking sense of being “out of sync with the times,” alarming and unsettling the global community.
Some analysts pointed out that the “new Monroe Doctrine” is not a revivial but a “dangerous escalation.” The Washington Post has warned that if such barbaric behavior becomes normalized, the consequences would be disastrous, with “might makes right” becoming the sole rule.
III.
The world does not need a “new Monroe Doctrine,” and history will inevitably consign it to the dustbin.
The UN Charter clearly states that “The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members,” and that “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the UN.”
In today’s international relations, sovereign equality is the prerequisite for peaceful coexistence, while the rule of international law is the fundamental safeguard and the backbone of fairness and justice. These most basic principles underpin the long-term peace and stability of the world and must be jointly upheld by the international community.
In response to the U.S. action against Venezuela and the rising “new Monroe Doctrine,” the strongest and broadest consensus within the international community is to defend the international law and basic norms governing international relations, and to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.
Voices from around the world have noted that “the United States is willing to disregard long-established international legal principles to achieve its own goals,” that it “poses a serious threat to the international order established after World War II,” and that it has “effectively erased the very existence of international law.”
The “new Monroe Doctrine” and the global condemnation it has received act as a mirror, reflecting both the limits of hegemonic powers’ global expansion and their reckless use of localized force. It also underscores the ongoing shift toward a multipolar world and the democratization of international relations—along with the inevitable twists and turns along this path.
Temporary advantage lies in power, but lasting victory lies in justice. History moves forward, and justice will ultimately prevail over brute force. In the face of hegemony, the international community must firmly stand on the right side of history, jointly safeguard international fairness and justice, and ensure that righteousness prevails and the world remains upright and bright.
