Critical Issue

On

“The Monroe Doctrine”

.
Why is it a critical issue?

• In his latest address to the US Congress on the ongoing conflict between Russia-Ukraine,
former US Presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders was heard making two very important
statements which are indicative of the current geopolitical state in the eastern Europe.

• “Vladimir Putin may be an autocratic leader, but it is hypocritical for the United States to
insist that we as a nation do not accept the principle of spheres of influence. For the last
200 years, our country has operated under the MONROE DOCTRINE, embracing the
principle that as the dominant power in the Western Hemisphere, the United States has
the right to intervene against any country that might threaten our legit interest”.

• He also said that “ Under the MONROE DOCTRINE , the United States has undermined
and overthrown at least a dozen countries throughout Latin America, Central America
and the Caribbean”
He was further heard saying….

• “The Monroe Doctrine is not ancient history. As recently as 2018. Donald Trump's
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, called the MONROE DOCTRINE is as relevant today as it
was the day it was written.”

• “in 2019, former Trump National Security Adviser John Bolton declared, the MONROE
DOCTRINE is a live and well”.

• Owing to these statements and looking after carefully observing major geopolitical
events that have taken place in the last two decades, it is important for us to carefully
deconstruct “MONROE DOCTRINE”, and its overall far reaching impact on the global
power structure in general.
So where did the Monroe Doctrine come from?
.

• In the 1820s, European monarchies were faced with considerable challenge not just
within Europe but also in the southern colonies across the Atlantic.

• The winds of democracy & rights emanating from the French Revolution and American
revolution were fanning the flames of independence in South America.

• People in the United States were cheering for their southern brethren, and were
encouraging them to break away from old fashioned, monarchical, tyrannical Spanish
rule.

• This was also the period when James Monroe in 1823 , the then President of USA had
openly declared “NO MORE EUROPEAN COLONIZATION IN AMERICAS”, He further said
that the AMERICAS were the concern of US and expected no more meddling by the
European Monarchies even in the affairs of Latin or South America.
.

• These were incredibly bold statements considering the fact that the United States was
not exactly a world power, precisely major world military power in 1823.

• They could at best be said to be a minor power even in the Americas. As they didn’t wield
Navy power. And let's remember that in this era where having a strong Navy was
tantamount to being able to take over the world.

• So, despite such incredibly bold assertion made by Monroe, none of the European
Monarchies felt hardly threatened by such proclamations.
.

• Now, if you think back to early American colonial society, the economic system was
known as mercantilism.

• And mercantilism is the practice where colonies were existing to enrich the mother
country. So all trade goes through the home country. And that means that the home
country is going to be making sure that the colonies are not trading with any other
international partners because they want to be the ones who are enriched by the natural
resources of the colonies.

• So when Chile and Argentina and Venezuela revolted from Spain, it meant that their
markets were now opened up to trade with United States and to England.

• England and the United States are not eager to see these new nations be returned to
their colonial status because thanks to mercantilism, they're not going to be able to trade
with them anymore.
England Reaches out to the USA

• So with this idea in mind, the British foreign secretary and named George canning
approached the American Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, proposing a joint
proclamation , between the United States and Great Britain, saying that the powers of
Europe should not interfere in the new world.

• USA was very skeptical about as the War of of 1812 had not taken place too long
beforehand, and the United States didn't have nearly the strength to actually make an
equal partnership.

• The War of 1812 was a conflict fought by the United States of America and its indigenous
allies against Great Britain and its allies in British North America, with limited
participation by Spain in Florida.
What convinced America to go for “MONROE DOCTINE”?

• At this point in time President James Monroe is not only concerned about the possibility
of European powers coming down here and trying to start fights with each other over the
fate of South America.

• Monroe was also worried about Russia, who had recently made some territorial claims in
Canada saying that their territory should come all the way down there and the Russians
had started putting some forts on the coast of California, close to modern day in San
Francisco.

• Monroe's sees the old monarchical powers of Europe sort of encroaching both from the
north and the south side of USA. Thus in 1823, drafted by John Quincy Adams, James
Monroe makes the announcement of the Monroe Doctrine.

• He says, No more colonization, asks Russia to leave and no more interference in general
and don’t try to bring New Republic's back into colonies under the rule of monarchies.
just keep your monarchy out of our hemisphere altogether.
.

• Monroe makes this statement completely outside of the relationship with the United
Kingdom. So it doesn’t appear to be like riding the coattails feeling of being allied with
Britain.

• But nevertheless, the only way that the United States could actually count on the
Monroe Doctrine being enforced was because the British Navy is so incredibly powerful.

• Because they knew that the British Navy which wanted neutrality of the seas, which
wanted to be able to continue to have these trade relationships with new nations in
South America would defends the neutrality and the independence of South America by
proxy, and by doing of enforced the Monroe Doctrine.

• Certainly the nations of South America and Latin America appreciated this declaration of
independence for the Americas coming from the United States, but they certainly knew
that it was more about the United States making sure that they themselves were
protected, then wanting to have a real equal partnership with South America.
Furthermore…

• The Monroe Doctrine really wasn’t of much significance in the 19th century but It was
certainly a justification as the United States continued to push West in their quest of
manifest destiny.

• But it will become increasingly important in the 20th century as the United States
stepped onto the world stage with the Spanish American War, under the auspices of
William McKinley.

• Also drawing form the MONROE DOCTIRNE Theodore Roosevelt, said that the Caribbean
is the province of the United States and the nations of Latin America and South America
can only be dealt through the United States.
Monroe Doctrine in 21st Century.

• “I think it [Monroe Doctrine] is as relevant today, as it was the day it was written,”
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson stated on February 1, 2018 in response to a reporter’s
question.

• This was a significant statement on the heels of his first trip to Latin America, and an
attempt to provide a connection of long-term values between the United States and Latin
America.

• His comment, however, roused new questions and old concerns over the Monroe
Doctrine as the potential guide for the Trump administration’s policy in Latin America.
.

• After a 20-year hiatus since the fall of the Soviet Union, the 2017 National Security
Strategy (NSS) and 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) identify a new great power
competition as the priority security threat to the United States.

• Although focused on Europe with Russia, and Asia with China, this great power
competition is just as applicable in Latin America where China is aggressively using the
economic instrument of power.

• According to the World Economic Forum, since 2010, “China [has] loaned $65 billion to
Venezuela in exchange for oil, $21 billion to Brazil and approximately $15 billion to both
Argentina and Ecuador.”
..

• Moreover, China increased its investment in 2017 to more than one billion dollars. Gone
are the days of European great power colonization of Latin America; however, this heavy
debt laden investment could become a more subtle form of colonization if nations
cannot pay back the loans.

• As both Russia and China continue to invest in Latin America, it plausibly is only a matter
of time before either will deem a country’s internal decisions contrary to their own
national interests and use undue control to ensure their interests are protected.
The Cost of “MONROE DOCTRINE”

• US did emerge as the super power in the 21st century , creating a uni-polar world order
with its persistence of MONROE DOCTRINE. But all of this has come at a great price for
US and its allies and the nations which were subjected to it , and not often this has
produced desired results.

• As a result of Eastward expansion of NATO seen as manifestation of MONROE DOCTRINE

• Various plans under the influence of MONROE DOCTINE have turned out be disastrous,
such as the wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, went horribly wrong.

• War in Vietnam cost US 59,000 American deaths and The casualties in Vietnam, Laos and
Cambodia are almost incalculable.
…

• In Afghanistan what began his response to the horrific attack against US 9-11 -2001
eventually became a 20 year war, costing the United States $2 trillion in over 3500
Americans who were killed not to mention 10s of 1000s of Afghan civilians.

• George W. Bush claimed in 2003 that the United States had put the Taliban out of
business forever. The Taliban is in power today.

• The war in Iraq based on the fear of non existent weapons of mass destruction led to the
deaths of some 4500 US troops and the wounding physical and emotionally 1000s of
others. It led to the deaths of hundreds of 1000s of Iraqis, the displacement of over 5
million people and regional destabilization whose consequences the world continues to
grapple with today.

• In other words, contrary to the foreign policy expectations on the line of MONROE
DOCTRINE, military interventions turned out to be wrong and lead to millions of innocent
people paying the price.
Munroe Doctrine, NATO-Expansion and Russia-Ukraine Conflict.

• The war in Ukraine has , up untill now , has brought about over 50,000 civilian casualties.
Not to mention millions of refugees, flooding neighboring countries as they flee what
could be the worst European conflict since World War 2.

• There is also the possibility that this regional war could escalate to other parts of Europe,
a continent with many nuclear weapons.

• The counter measures in form of economic sanctions over Russia, could result in massive
economic upheaval, with impacts on energy and gas and oil prices world over.

• Banking, food supplies and the day to day needs of ordinary people throughout the
entire world. It is likely that Russians will not be the only people suffering from sanctions.
They would be felt throughout Europe, they would be felt right here in the United States,
and likely around the world.
…

• The continued persistence of MONROE DOCTRINE, leading to simplistic refusal to

• One of the precipitating factors of this crisis, at least from Russia's perspective, is the
prospect of an enhanced security relationship between Ukraine and the United States
and Western Europe, including what Russia sees as the threat of Ukraine joining the
North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, NATO, a military alliance originally created in 1949 to
confront the Soviet Union.

• When Ukraine became independent after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Russian
leaders made clear their concerns about the prospect of former Soviet states becoming
part of NATO. And positioning hostile military forces along Russia's border.
.

• Such concerns have been duly pointed out by former US official in memos or documents.

• One of those officials was William Perry who served as Defense Secretary under
President Bill Clinton has said that “in the last few years, most of the blame can be
pointed at the actions that Putin has taken, but in the early years, I have to say that the
United States deserves much of the blame for the quote, our first action that really set us
off in a bad direction was when NATO started to expand bringing in Eastern European
nations, some of them bordering Russia”

• The head of CIA William Burns pointed out during his services in the US Embassy in
Moscow in 1995 that “hostility to early NATO expansion is almost universally felt across
the domestic political spectrum in Moscow”.

• In 2008, Burns wrote in a memo to Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice that “Ukrainian
entry into NATO is the brightest of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just putting in
more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players. I have yet to
find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO is anything other than a direct challenge to
Russian interests”
Conclusion

• So it is safe to say that the current Ukrainian Crisis is not an act of Russian belligerence
out of thin air, rather a full-fledged response on growing concerns of Eastward NATO
Expansion in accordance with the MONROE DOCTRINE.

• Because it would be hard to believe that United States would not have something to say
if for example, Mexico, or Cuba or any country in Central or Latin America, or the form a
military alliance with the US adversary.

• Russia might have receded form being a great power post 1991, but it still hold
considerable political and military clout in international political order and looks to regain
its lost ground with support of a rising China.

*******************************************THE
END***************************************