The Monroe Doctrine in the nascent US development days, in a comical way designed to protect the US from external aggression from the nations from where the settlers came, settle and formed the US. AND….. then they became traders, intruders, world influencers, money lenders, democracy protectors, world police, demo-autocrats, culture imposers, Western ( no longer applicable, with Europe too subjected to President Trump’s changed ‘foreign policy’). etc etc….

The article is from AI and seems to have taken in all the points that are necessary for explaining the ‘Doctrine’ in its present context….. your opinions are welcome on this instant, ready to eat recepie 😏 It is kept as it is received from AI. Thanks AI

In the current context of January 2026, the Monroe Doctrine has returned to the forefront of global politics in a dramatic and literal way. Its recent application in Venezuela marks one of the most significant shifts in U.S. foreign policy in decades.
Here is how the Monroe Doctrine is currently playing out in the Venezuelan context:

1. The “Trump Corollary” and Operation Absolute Resolve
   On January 3, 2026, the U.S. launched Operation Absolute Resolve, a massive military operation involving airstrikes and special forces that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife.
   President Trump has explicitly invoked the Monroe Doctrine to justify this, framing the intervention as a necessary step to:

• Remove “Foreign Adversaries”: Reasserting the original 1823 goal of keeping non-American powers (specifically citing Russia, China, and Iran) from having influence in the Western Hemisphere.
• **Restore Preeminence: The administration has introduced what some call the “Trump Corollary” (a modern successor to the Roosevelt Corollary), which asserts that the U.S. has “international police power” to intervene in the hemisphere to secure its own national security and economic interests.

1. Control of Natural Resources (The “Don-roe Doctrine”)
   Unlike the original doctrine, which focused on preventing colonization, the current application has a heavy focus on resource security.

• Oil Infrastructure: Trump has stated that the U.S. will essentially “run” Venezuela’s oil industry until the infrastructure is rebuilt.
• The “Don-roe” Rebrand: In recent press conferences, the President jokingly referred to it as the “Don-roe Doctrine,” suggesting that the U.S. has “superseded” the original 200-year-old policy with a more aggressive, hands-on approach to managing the region’s assets.

1. National Security and “Narco-Terrorism”
   The U.S. has used the Monroe Doctrine’s framework—the idea that instability in the Americas is a direct threat to U.S. safety—to frame Maduro not just as a political rival, but as a criminal.

• Legal Justification: The capture was presented as the service of a 2020 arrest warrant for narco-terrorism.
• Border and Migration: The administration argues that by “stabilizing” Venezuela under the Monroe Doctrine, they will reduce the flow of migrants and drugs, which they view as a violation of the hemisphere’s “peace and safety.”

1. International Conflict and Sovereignty
   The revival of the doctrine has caused a massive rift in international relations:

• The UN Response: Many nations, along with the UN Security Council, have condemned the move as “naked imperialism,” arguing that the Monroe Doctrine does not override modern international law or the sovereignty of independent nations.
• Regional Alarm: Countries like Colombia and Mexico have expressed deep concern, fearing that the “Trump Corollary” might be applied to them next if their internal policies don’t align with Washington’s interests.
  Summary Table: Monroe then vs. Now
  | Feature | Original Monroe Doctrine (1823) | Present Context (2026) |
  |—|—|—|
  | Primary Target | European Monarchies | Russia, China, and “Narco-states” |
  | U.S. Action | Passive warning (Non-colonization) | Active military intervention (Regime change) |
  | Economic Goal | Open trade | Direct control/stabilization of oil reserves |
  | Status | Defensive “Shield” | Offensive “Sword” (Trump Corollary) |
  The Monroe Doctrine is no longer just a historical concept; it is currently the active legal and political shield the U.S. is using to justify its direct governance and military presence in Venezuela.
  Would you like me to look into the specific legal charges Maduro is facing in New York, or how other Latin American countries are reacting to this “Don-roe Doctrine”?

Hello! 🌻 You likely mean the Monroe Doctrine, which is a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. It was introduced by President James Monroe in 1823 during his annual message to Congress.
At its heart, the Doctrine was a “keep out” sign for European powers, asserting that the Western Hemisphere (the Americas) was no longer open to colonization.
The Four Core Principles
President Monroe, with heavy influence from his Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, laid out four main points:

• Non-Colonization: The Americas were “henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.”
• Two Spheres: The political systems of Europe (monarchies) and the Americas (republics) were essentially different and should remain separate.
• Non-Intervention: The U.S. would consider any attempt by European powers to extend their system to any part of the Western Hemisphere as “dangerous to our peace and safety.”
• U.S. Neutrality: In return, the U.S. promised not to interfere in the internal affairs or wars of European nations.
  Why was it issued?
  In the early 1820s, several Latin American nations had recently won independence from Spain. The U.S. feared that:
• Spain or France might try to reclaim these new republics.
• Russia was expanding its influence down from Alaska into the Oregon Territory.
  Significance and Evolution
  Initially, the U.S. didn’t have the military power to actually enforce this. For much of the 19th century, it was actually the British Royal Navy that enforced the doctrine because Britain also wanted to keep other European rivals out of Latin American trade.
  However, as the U.S. grew stronger, the Doctrine evolved:
• The Roosevelt Corollary (1904): President Theodore Roosevelt added a “twist,” stating that the U.S. had the right to intervene in Latin American countries to maintain stability. This changed the Doctrine from a shield against Europe into a sword for U.S. intervention.
• Cold War Era: It was used to justify opposing Soviet and Communist influence in countries like Cuba, Nicaragua, and Grenada.
• Modern Day: It remains a topic of debate, sometimes cited as a symbol of U.S. protection and other times as a symbol of “imperialism” over its neighbors.
  Would you like me to look into how the Monroe Doctrine is being discussed in current 2026 politics, or perhaps explore the “Roosevelt Corollary” in more detail?