Two weeks before taking office, the future US President Donald Trump signposts to the astonished public around the world in a confusing, Trump-like press conference what we have to prepare for.
The time until the inauguration is proving to be anything but calm. The announcements sound dramatic, sometimes frightening. He mockingly refers to Canada’s outgoing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as governor and adds how great it would be if Canada became the 51st state of the USA. He wants to buy Greenland from Denmark and bring the Panama Canal under American control, if necessary, with economic pressure or military means. He calls on NATO members to spend five percent of their gross domestic product on the armed forces. Some politicians, but also security experts and the media, jump over the stick that Trump holds out to them without questioning what is to be financed with the additional funds. At best, there are concerns about how the insane sums can be raised.
Trump’s rigorously presented territorial claims evoke memories of the Monroe Doctrine. In 1823, then-President James Monroe articulated the principles of American foreign policy in his annual address to Congress. During the 19th century, the main aim was to curb European influence in Latin America. The core of this doctrine, which shaped US foreign policy until the last century, was the claim to play the dominant role in the so-called “Western Hemisphere” (North, South and Central America) – whether as a benign hegemon or, if necessary, by military intervention. The Monroe Doctrine, as reinterpreted at the beginning of the 20th century, established U.S. territorial expansionism. While this doctrine was originally intended to prevent European intervention, the Roosevelt amendments of 1904 and 1905 justified American intervention. After that, Latin America was considered the US backyard. America did not shy away from intervening by force in the region dozens of times, overthrowing governments and appointing agreeable satraps. Now Trump is blatantly picking up on this doctrine, but without mentioning it by name.
Is the world on its way back to the gunboat politics of the 19th century? Is the rules-based international order, often invoked by the West, passé? Trump unabashedly relies on the law of power. He is not only indifferent to the power of the law: the judiciary and the rule of law are repellent to him. As president of the USA, he not only demonizes American justice, as he has proven in his many lawsuits: now it seems he doesn’t give a damn about international law.
How serious Trump is about his announcements, how much one can still rely on the USA as ally and friend, is open to speculation. In any case, Trump seems to be prepared to push through the MAGA project—which was mainly domestically oriented during his first term in office—with brute force and to accept international conflicts.
There are at least four lenses through which to interpret the seriousness of Trump’s announcements. Presumably, all four notions play a role.
First, Trump’s statements and his politics have always been characterized by his narcissism and ego. Trump’s second press conference after his election has brought him into the spotlight worldwide. Not only the Canadian, Panamanian, Greenlandic and Danish governments reacted in part with clear rejection of his absurd territorial claims. All over the world, as far away as China, Japan and South Korea, Trump’s ideas are accompanied by head shaking. But this is exactly the attention that flatters Trump. When at the same time his son lands in Greenland in Trump’s own plane and the pictures go around the world, Trump is in the spotlight and can feel like the centre of power. Therefore, the Gulf of Mexico should also be renamed the Gulf of America. “What a wonderful name,” he said.
The second interpretation points to Trump’s erratic and chaotic politics. Trump has always been good at announcing drastic measures. We are building a wall along the Mexican-American border and “Mexico will pay for it”. The wall was not completed, and neither did Mexico pay, but that does not stop Trump from continuing to make blatant threats or construct nonsensical connections. At his press conference, he spoke of whales that went mad and died because of the existence of wind turbines in the sea. Now, if only drops of water are coming out of showers and taps in parts of the USA (“drip, drip, drip”, as he insinuated), then of course the outgoing President Joe Biden is responsible. These repeated lies, denials of facts, nonsensical allegations, far-fetched claims of causes and chaotic speeches are a core element of the incoming president’s policy. Thus, they should be taken seriously. They are not just irony and satire.
Third, threats and blackmail were already part of Trump’s political repertoire during his first term in office. Trade tariffs can be threatened against not only China, but also against allies and neighbours. If necessary, American forces can intervene to get the Panama Canal under US control. This is needed for American security. If the European NATO countries stop paying, then they will be left to the Russian aggressors. Often this policy produces results – see the discussion in Europe about the necessary percentage of GDP for security. In South Korea, the government and security experts are discussing how to react if the US no longer continues to offer its protective function and Trump perhaps makes a deal with Kim Jong-un (“the little rocket man”) after all. The Middle East is threatened with “hell on earth” if Hamas does not release all hostages before he takes office shortly.
Fourthly, at the press conference with this hodgepodge of crude ideas, the imperialist wish list was the most frightening. When the president-elect was urged by journalists during the press conference to affirm whether he would really use military force in Panama if the country did not abandon the canal—clearly in violation of existing international treaties—or whether he would do the same in Greenland, the answer was clear: No, he could not rule that out. “We need them for our economic security – the Panama Canal was built for our military.” When asked again whether he could rule out the use of the military, he answered just as clearly: “I’m not going to commit to that.” This is imperialist rhetoric. This is gunboat diplomacy towards smaller neighbouring countries. This is strong man politics. This is the language and disregard for international law that we know from Vladimir Putin. All in the name of the Make America Great Again concept.
The New York Times concluded on January 7 after the press conference: “Not since the days of William McKinley, who engaged in the Spanish-American War in the late 19th century and ended up with U.S. control of the Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico, has an American president-elect so blatantly threatened the use of force to expand the country’s territorial boundaries”.
The confused ideas and neo-colonialist threats, if implemented, will unhinge the existing international order. While Trump’s advisers during his first presidency prevented some obviously dangerous and illegal actions, its gravely concerning that he now seems to surround himself with a team of advisers who are slavishly loyal to him and his intentions.
Herbert Wulf is a Professor of International Relations and former Director of the Bonn International Center for Conflict Studies (BICC). He is presently a Senior Fellow at BICC, an Adjunct Senior Researcher at the Institute for Development and Peace, University of Duisburg/Essen, Germany, and a Research Affiliate at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago, New Zealand. He serves on the Scientific Council of SIPRI.
Note:This article was issued by the Toda Peace Institute and is being republished from the original with their permission.
Source:https://toda.org/global-outlook/2025/back-to-the-monroe-doctrine.html
