【Wen/Observer Net Columnist Yang Chuqiao】
On December 4, the White House released the new "U.S. National Security Strategy," comprehensively adjusting the global strategic direction, focusing on interests in the Western Hemisphere, and formally proposing the "Trump Doctrine" as a new Monroe Doctrine to ensure U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere.
This strategy is like an authorization letter, legitimizing a series of highly aggressive and transactional actions the United States has already taken in Latin America at the level of top-level design.
From brandishing tariffs to openly interfering in Brazilian internal affairs, to directly linking substantial aid with the results of Argentina's elections, and then gathering the largest fleet in decades in the Caribbean Sea, this new Monroe Doctrine, which claims to be "America First" but actually implements "America Is Everywhere," is now being wielded in an unprecedentedly direct manner against Latin America, which seeks autonomy.
The Strategic Intentions of the "Trump Doctrine"
The proposal of the "Trump Doctrine" is an attempt by the United States, under the backdrop of global strategic retrenchment, to reinforce regional hegemony and lock Latin America again as a strategic appendage serving American interests to maintain so-called "absolute security." Compared to the old Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which aimed to exclude European colonial powers, the "Trump Doctrine" shifts its target of prevention and suppression from European powers to any potential challengers to American hegemony, including regional powers and other external powers.
The new "U.S. National Security Strategy" defines the Western Hemisphere as the frontier for American border security, critical supply chains, and geopolitical competition, meaning that Latin America is no longer treated as an equal partner or neighbor, but rather as a "buffer zone" and "resource pool" for American national security. To this end, the strategy lists specific measures such as expanding the Coast Guard and Navy, using lethal weapons to strike drug cartels when necessary, preventing "foreign hostile forces" from invading and controlling key assets in Latin America, effectively declaring the United States' right to intervene in Latin America.
Compared to the explicitly stated international police role in the "Roosevelt Doctrine" a century ago, the "Trump Doctrine" wraps the new Monroe Doctrine in a layer of cooperation and win-win sugar, but the core is more bitter political and economic intervention.
The "Trump Doctrine" no longer directly claims the right of the United States to intervene in Latin America, but instead establishes a coercive mechanism that forces Latin American countries to cooperate, either actively or passively. It places the United States' core demands—border control, joint anti-drug efforts, excluding "foreign hostile forces," and military access—as the common agenda of the entire Western Hemisphere, transferring the internal governance needs of Latin American countries (such as border security, drug proliferation, and great power rivalry) to them. Regardless of their development levels, Latin American countries must become a border barrier for the United States, and any external economic cooperation conflicting with American interests may be arbitrarily labeled as "foreign hostile forces."
This strategic shift has three underlying motivations:
First, by loudly announcing the construction of a border wall and implementing the "Remain in Mexico" policy, the Trump administration successfully portrayed border immigration as a potential threat to American national identity, culture, and security, transforming domestic social tensions into accusations and military actions against Latin American countries, thus consolidating and intensifying its populist voter base;
Second, in the view of the Trump administration, multilateral cooperation mechanisms such as the Organization of American States have principles that not only constrain the United States but also provide a platform for opponents, hence favoring unilateralism and bilateral deals. The essence of this "divide and rule" strategy lies in the United States leveraging its asymmetric advantage to dismantle collective action among Latin American countries, negotiating policies favorable to itself with each country one by one, thereby maximizing its own interests;
Finally, and most fundamentally, it is the anxiety of the United States in the face of growing influence of other major powers in Latin America, with the "Belt and Road Initiative" always being a key focus of attention and containment for the United States, while Russia's energy cooperation with Venezuela is seen as "a fire in the backyard."
Therefore, the "Trump Doctrine" no longer satisfies traditional competition but through a set of coercive combinations, from open interference in Latin American countries' internal affairs, to linking trade cooperation with distancing from China and Russia, up to threatening the use of military force, to restore the United States' unquestionable leading position in the Latin American region.
The Operating Rules of the "Trump Doctrine"
In fact, before formally proposing the "Trump Doctrine," the United States had already launched many actions against Latin American countries.
In July 2025, the Trump administration cited "responding to threats from the Brazilian government" as a reason to impose a 40% ad valorem tariff on Brazilian exports to the United States, combined with previously implemented 10% "reciprocal tariffs," resulting in approximately 35.9% of Brazilian exports facing a 50% additional tariff. At the same time, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative initiated a Section 301 investigation into Brazil on multiple aspects, including digital trade and electronic payment services, unfair preferential tariffs, intellectual property protection, ethanol market access, and illegal deforestation.
Notably, over the past 15 years, the United States has accumulated a trade surplus of over $41 billion in goods and services with Brazil, and in 2024, the total U.S.-Brazil bilateral trade reached $92 billion, with the U.S. trade surplus with Brazil reaching as high as $7.4 billion. The rationale provided by the United States for imposing additional tariffs clearly contradicts the actual situation, indicating obvious political motives.
In a letter to President Lula of Brazil, Trump explicitly tied the tariff measures to Brazil's internal affairs, demanding the termination of judicial investigations against former President Bolsonaro. Meanwhile, the White House claimed in a statement that Brazil's actions constituted an "unusual threat to American national security, foreign policy, and economy." This is not only a crude interference in Brazil's internal affairs but also reveals the real logic behind the U.S. tariff policy: economic and trade relations are no longer mutual benefits, but rather a political tool to punish "disloyal" partners and interfere in the judicial sovereignty of other countries.
In contrast to the punitive "big stick" toward Brazil, the United States offered a conditional "carrot" to Argentina. In October 2025, the U.S. Treasury announced a $20 billion currency swap agreement with Argentina. Trump explicitly stated during his meeting with Argentine President Milei that the massive aid provided by the United States "in some way depends on who wins the midterm congressional elections," and clearly stated, "If Milei wins, we will continue to support him; if he doesn't win, we will withdraw."
This rare practice of publicly linking economic aid to the election results of another country shows that the U.S. support is not based on Argentina's economic needs or maintaining regional financial stability, but rather aims to back a highly pro-American, aligned government, establishing a solid strategic foothold in the heart of Latin America. This explicit pricing of "loyalty as reward" is the core operating rule of the hegemonic order under the "Trump Doctrine."
More unsettling for Latin American countries is that since November, the United States has conducted the largest military buildup in the Caribbean Sea in decades, under the pretext of combating "drug terrorism," deploying elite forces including the carrier group led by the "Gerald Ford," nuclear submarines, and F-35 fighter jets.
Deploying carrier groups to strike small drug smuggling ships does not conform to military logic; its real purpose is to pave the way for diplomatic coercion and military intervention under the guise of "drug terrorism," with the ultimate goal of overthrowing the Maduro government in Venezuela, which the United States views as the "anti-American axis" in the Western Hemisphere. The declaration in the new "U.S. National Security Strategy" that "lethal force may be used when necessary" provides policy backing for such military operations, placing Latin American countries under unprecedented security pressure.
Latin American Countries' Response
The big stick of the "Trump Doctrine" has not brought obedience and submission from Latin American countries, but rather acted as a powerful catalyst, awakening and uniting the autonomous consciousness of Latin American countries with unprecedented intensity. The most direct backlash comes from the region's major powers.
As the "eye of the storm" of the Caribbean military buildup, facing the threat of war, Venezuela has adopted a strong defensive posture. In September, the Maduro government announced the launch of the "Independence 200 Plan," deploying armies, police, and militias across 284 frontline locations nationwide, conducting military exercises to defend national sovereignty.
After Trump publicly declared the closure of Venezuelan airspace, the Venezuelan military immediately conducted nationwide coastal defense exercises, setting up coastal defense points and observation posts, deploying the S-300VM long-range high-altitude air defense missile system and the "Buk"-M2E medium-range air defense system imported from Russia, establishing a "layered" air defense system ranging from long-range strategic deterrence, medium-range area air defense, to short-range point defense, sending a clear signal of resistance to Washington.
The U.S. seized a Venezuelan oil tanker near its waters. Oriental IC
In issues related to migration and drug control, as a neighbor of the United States, Mexico has borne the most direct pressure. In response to the "Remain in Mexico" policy of the Trump administration and the threat of deploying troops at the border, Mexican President Sheinbaum clearly stated that she would defend national sovereignty and independence, and support the rights of Mexican citizens in the United States. When faced with Trump's accusation that Mexico is tightly controlled by drug cartels, Sheinbaum refuted the unilateral accusations of the United States, pointing out that the proportion of fentanyl flowing into the United States from the border has decreased by 50%. If the United States refuses to take responsibility for drug consumption and arms smuggling, Mexico's efforts would be futile.
Faced with U.S. tariff pressures, the Lula government introduced a comprehensive relief plan called the "Brazilian Sovereignty Plan" in August, with project analysis and approval completed in just 18 days, far below the usual 60-day cycle.
The plan centers on financial support and government purchases, allocating 30 billion reais (approximately 5.56 billion U.S. dollars) from the export guarantee fund of the National Development Bank to provide low-interest loans to enterprises heavily affected by U.S. tariffs; allowing severely affected enterprises to defer federal tax payments, and extending the refund period for enterprises originally planning to export to the U.S., promoting products to other countries; adding 4.5 billion reais to the small and medium enterprise fund to reduce tax burdens; establishing a National Employment Monitoring Committee to closely monitor employment conditions in enterprises and related supply chains affected by U.S. tariffs, striving to reduce job losses.
Local governments also quickly took complementary measures. As an economic center, São Paulo State announced an assistance program, releasing 1.5 billion reais in commodity circulation service tax credit quotas through the "ProAtivo" project, while increasing the credit limit for state-owned enterprises from 200 million to 400 million reais; the state government of Ceará included export products affected by tariffs (such as fish products and cashews) in the public procurement system, used for school meals, hospital meals, and the "Zero Hunger" program, balancing corporate relief and social responsibility.
At the same time, Brazil actively explored diversified markets, with China's vast demand providing a key export alternative for its agricultural products, and multilateral cooperation mechanisms such as the BRICS becoming an important strategic platform for Brazil to deepen South-South cooperation and alleviate the pressure of U.S. tariffs.
The "Trump Doctrine" is a prism, reflecting both the United States' old dream of trying to regain regional hegemony under the anxiety of great-power competition, and revealing the irreversible process of independent self-determination in Latin America in the 21st century. This new Monroe Doctrine stick swung at Latin America did not succeed in shaping a submissive backyard, but instead became an anvil for forging Latin American countries, making them more aware that relying on external powers carries unpredictable strategic risks. Moving away from an economic structure dependent on raw material exports, strengthening domestic industrial chains, and seeking a balance point that serves their own interests in great-power games have become a consensus among Latin American countries. Ultimately, the new Monroe Doctrine brings not the U.S. leading position in the Western Hemisphere, but a more multipolar and non-hegemonic Latin America.
This article is exclusive to Observer Net. The content of the article is purely the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the views of the platform. Without authorization, it cannot be reprinted, otherwise legal responsibilities will be pursued. Follow the WeChat of Observer Net, guanchacn, to read interesting articles every day.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7583515147168121382/
Statement: The article represents the personal views of the author.