The Trump administration’s military actions against Venezuela are part of a wider campaign across Latin America, Journalist Ben Norton, founder of Geopolitical Economy Report, wrote in SheerPost.

During the first year of Trump’s second term, the US government has:

• Carried out lethal strikes on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, killing dozens without trial, including fishermen from Venezuela, Colombia, and Trinidad and Tobago;
• Imposed sanctions on Colombia’s democratically elected left-wing President Gustavo Petro;
• Enforced 50% tariffs on Brazil under leftist President Lula da Silva;
• Threatened to seize control of the Panama Canal, violating Panama’s sovereignty;
• Sustained and intensified the decades-long blockade of Cuba;
• Directed CIA operations aimed at overthrowing or assassinating Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro.

These actions form the “sticks” of Trump’s neocolonial policy, while the “carrots” include economic bailouts for right-wing allies, such as the $40 billion offered to Argentina’s libertarian President Javier Milei, a Trump ally.

Historical roots of US imperialism in Latin America

In Norton's view, US meddling in Latin America is long-standing. Columbia University historian John Coatsworth notes that the US overthrew at least 41 governments between 1898 and 1994. Over the past 30 years, Washington has backed numerous coups, regime-change efforts, and “color revolutions".

Congressional Research Service data show that the US military has intervened in every Latin American country except French Guiana. US imperialism has traditionally been bipartisan, continuing under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Trump’s approach, however, represents a more overt and aggressive interventionism aimed at:

• Exploiting natural resources: Latin America’s oil, gas, minerals, agriculture, and water are key targets. Trump has publicly expressed his desire to “take over” Venezuela for its oil.
• Countering China: The US seeks to sever Latin America’s ties with China, which is the region’s largest trading partner. Secretary of State Marco Rubio pressured Panama to withdraw from China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
• Installing right-wing regimes: Washington aims to replace leftist governments with pro-US, oligarch-led administrations that maintain low wages to facilitate the “friendshoring” of manufacturing from Asia.

Leaders like Argentina’s Milei and Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa exemplify this strategy, as per the piece.

Related News

From detention to the frontlines: Ukrainians in US face deportation

25 oil‑exporting states tied to 'Israel’s' genocide in Gaza: Report

The Donroe Doctrine: Monroe Doctrine revived

Trump has revived the Monroe Doctrine, which historically declared Latin America the US “backyard”. The original doctrine was used to justify territorial expansion, including the US-Mexico War (1846–1848), which resulted in the annexation of resource-rich territories such as California and Texas.

Today, the so-called “Donroe Doctrine” extends Trump’s ultra-nationalist “America First” ideology into a neocolonial framework. According to The Wall Street Journal, it treats the hemisphere as “an extension of the US homeland,” rewarding loyalty and punishing defiance. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth summarized this approach as “the Americas first.”

Trump’s team, including Marco Rubio in the dual role of Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, is focused on consolidating US control from Canada and Greenland to the southern tip of South America. This approach has been termed “Monroe 2.0” by Steve Bannon, reflecting its appeal to the MAGA base.

From Monroe to Donroe

First articulated in 1823, the Monroe Doctrine was a cornerstone of early US foreign policy, asserting that the Western Hemisphere was off-limits to further European colonization or interference. While framed as a safeguard for the independence of Latin American nations, it effectively established the United States as the dominant power in the region, justifying decades of political and military meddling under the guise of protecting sovereignty.

The Donroe Doctrine, a term coined by the New York Post to describe a new US foreign policy approach under President Donald Trump, blending his name with the historic Monroe Doctrine, extends this logic into the 21st century. It reflects Washington’s efforts to maintain strategic control over the Americas and counter external influence, particularly from China and Russia, through diplomatic pressure, trade policies, and security alliances.

Whereas the Monroe Doctrine sought to repel European empires, the Donroe Doctrine seeks to preserve US primacy in a multipolar world, signaling continuity in America’s hemispheric ambitions under a modern geopolitical framework.

Controversy and criticism

The Monroe Doctrine has long been a subject of controversy, celebrated by some as a declaration of hemispheric independence yet condemned by many in Latin America as a cover for US imperialism. Over the decades, it provided justification for meddling, regime changes, and economic dominance, transforming a policy of protection into one of control.

The Donroe Doctrine, meanwhile, has sparked debate for reviving this interventionist legacy under a modern guise. Critics argue it reflects Washington’s unwillingness to accept what it perceives as the growing influence of China, Russia, and regional powers in Latin America, framing strategic competition as a matter of “security". Supporters, however, see it as a necessary response to preserve stability and deter external meddling in the Western Hemisphere.

The pretext of the 'war on drugs'

The Trump administration frames its interventions as a fight against drug trafficking. Yet, evidence suggests these claims are false:

• The majority of US drug deaths are linked to synthetic opioids like fentanyl, not cocaine;
• Venezuela is not a significant source of fentanyl or cocaine destined for the US;
• Intelligence assessments confirm that many targeted boats cannot even reach US waters.

The Financial Times notes that Trump’s operations in Venezuela are primarily aimed at regime change, with strategic goals including access to oil, gold, diamonds, and coltan. Plans reportedly involve either a “Panama-style” or “Libya-style” intervention, both potentially catastrophic for civilians.

US alliances with drug traffickers

The US government has long supported drug traffickers when it serves its geopolitical interests, Norton insinuated, citing former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, described in a 1991 DIA report as “one of the more important Colombian narco-traffickers” and a “close personal friend of Pablo Escobar,” as having received US backing for decades.

Under Trump, Marco Rubio has publicly defended Uribe, while sanctions and military operations target leftist leaders such as Gustavo Petro. Petro, who has pursued independent policies like joining China’s Belt and Road Initiative, has been falsely accused by Trump of drug trafficking.

These patterns reflect a US strategy of destabilizing independent governments, exploiting regional resources, and enforcing political alignment with Washington.

Unlike previous administrations, Trump openly embraces neocolonial policies. He eschews rhetoric about democracy or human rights, instead projecting a blunt vision of US domination in the Western Hemisphere. According to critics, this administration’s approach is rooted in lies, exploitation, and militarism, revealing the empire’s “true face” for all to see.