My take on Monroe Doctrine! Personal Opinion

The Monroe Doctrine is one of the most dominant ideas in the history of the foreign policy of the United States. First declared by the President James Monroe in 1823, the doctrine was initially formulated as a defensive declaration which was supposed to guard then newly independent Latin American states against repeated European colonial encroachment. As time went on though, its definition and use widened much beyond its original purpose and formed the power dynamics of the Western Hemisphere.

The doctrine also developed within a certain historical setting. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the Latin American nations had recently acquired independence over Spain and Portugal. Meanwhile, European nations were also contemplating on reclaiming their former colonies. Being a young nation, the United States was afraid of the re-emerging of the European presence in the Americas as it was a threat to the stability of the region and the national security of the future. In reaction, Monroe stated that the Western Hemisphere was no longer subject to European colonization and any move to extend the European political influence would be considered a hostile act.

At the beginning, the Monroe Doctrine was a symbol than a doctrine. The United States did not have the military capability to impose it and depended much on the British naval power to discourage the European involvement. The doctrine served as a diplomatic warning and not really as a policy in most of the nineteenth century. It was also significant not so much as an aspect of immediate enforcement as setting up a long term image of the Americas as an autonomous political domain.

The doctrine became more aggressive in nature as the United States became economically and militarily stronger. Towards the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries it was more and more being utilized to justify American intervention into Latin American affairs. In 1904, The Roosevelt Corollary was introduced and it was a major change. It claimed that the United States was within its rights to interfere with the Latin American nations to ensure order and to provide safeguard to economic interests. Such reinterpretation made the Monroe Doctrine not a defense against the imperialism of the Europeans but an instrument of American domination in the region.

The effects of this change were severe. Although the doctrine used to be tabled as a policy of protection, it was experienced as a policy of intervention and control in many Latin American countries. American intervention in nations like Cuba, Nicaragua and Dominican Republic created bitterness and strengthened the imperialism arguments by the American nation. Consequently, the Monroe Doctrine turned into the representation of unequal relations of power, instead of the cooperation between hemispheres.

The doctrine was once more revisited during the cold war whereby this time it was in opposition to Soviet influence in the Americas. Uncle Sam activities in such locations as Cuba and Central America were discussed as the need to spread communism. This also incorporated the doctrine into the ideological struggle of the world, making it highly relevant to the world way beyond the nineteenth century.

The Monroe doctrine is controversial today. Although few American policymakers do not mention it to establish influence regionally, most of the Latin American leaders dismiss it as outdated, paternalistic. The history of the development of the doctrine demonstrates that the principles of the foreign policy could modify their sense with time, and they were determined by the power, interests and historical situation. Finally, the Monroe Doctrine is a demonstration of how a concept that was meant to oppose an empire slowly became attached to one.

.