President Trump has put the U.S. on an expansionist path not seen since the early 1800s, trying to increase national territory and influence with an ironclad view that the Western Hemisphere, if not most of the globe, belongs to America.
That outlook, dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine,” has led to the toppling of the government in Venezuela and a framework deal to bolster the U.S. presence in Greenland, and it could transform the war-torn Gaza Strip into a resort mecca shaped largely by American influence.
The president isn’t planning to stop there.
He has repeatedly spoken of retaking control of the Panama Canal and making Canada the 51st state. In recent days, Mr. Trump has declared that Cuba is “ready to fall” and that the Colombian president’s days in office are numbered.
Mr. Trump’s strategy is simple despite the many moving parts and complexities. It’s about removing what the president sees as obstacles to U.S. security and economic strength while exerting influence across the Western Hemisphere with impunity.
The State Department summed it up succinctly hours after U.S. troops removed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from power early this month.
“This is OUR Hemisphere and President Trump will not allow our security to be threatened,” the agency wrote on social media.
The White House declared an unbridled success. Officials say the Venezuelan operation has reduced the amount of illegal drugs coming into the country without the loss of American lives. The plan for Gaza, meanwhile, promises to “unleash total security and prosperity for all in the region.”
Mr. Trump hailed the Greenland framework as giving the U.S. “total access” to the mostly icy island.
Critics, however, say the president’s expansionist ideology has disrupted financial markets and alienated allies with little to show for the effort.
“This hasn’t gone anywhere of substance that’s valuable to the United States,” said Jim Townsend, an adjunct senior fellow of trans-Atlantic security at the Center for a New American Security. “It’s been a lot of bluff and bluster that’s resulted in nothing of value, and it’s going to result in undermining things of value like relations with important countries like Canada and the NATO alliance because no one’s going to trust us anymore.”
Mr. Trump’s expansionist agenda could be inspired by President McKinley, whose territorial ambitions at the end of the 19th century led to the U.S. annexation of Cuba, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and American Samoa. Mr. Trump also shares McKinley’s affinity for tariffs, reduced government bureaucracy and restricted immigration.
Mr. Trump has compared his expansionist desires to the modern equivalent of the Monroe Doctrine. President Monroe developed the doctrine in 1823 to prevent European colonization of the Western Hemisphere, especially in South and Central America.
The White House National Security Strategy, published late last year, lays out Mr. Trump’s plans for expansion, including a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine to “restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere.”
The Monroe Doctrine also was the basis for the Roosevelt Corollary of 1904, in which the U.S. assumed the role of a police power to intervene in other countries.
“The White House talks about the Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which harkens back to the Roosevelt Corollary,” said Michael O’Hanlon, director of foreign policy research at the Brookings Institution. “The Roosevelt Corollary was not about taking land. It was about exercising influence.”
Mr. Trump has seized on that idea and begun referring to it as the “Donroe Doctrine.” He said it has superseded the Monroe Doctrine by “a lot.”
For some, Mr. Trump’s ambitions appear to run contrary to his campaign promises to keep the U.S. out of overseas conflicts. During the 2024 campaign, Mr. Trump pledged to end “forever wars,” reduce foreign entanglements and pursue an “America First” agenda.
Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a national security think tank, said Mr. Trump’s actions have been consistent with his campaign pledges.
“He ran on not getting the United States into foreign entanglements and long, protracted wars. He didn’t run not using military power, and we know from the first administration that he was not a restraint or isolationist president. He was very comfortable with using military power,” she said.
Still, Mr. Trump has avoided serious conflicts with military powers such as Russia and China. He backed away from deepening U.S. involvement in Ukraine and has been ambivalent about China’s saber-rattling with Taiwan.
“Whether it’s bombing Iran over the summer, going after Maduro in Venezuela or going after Greenland, these are countries that can’t fight back against the United States,” Ms. Kavanaugh said. “Trump likes to use the military in overwhelming quantities against weak adversaries.”
Analysts say the risk-reward ratio of the president’s actions in Greenland and Venezuela remains to be seen.
“It’s going to take us a long while to get the oil in Venezuela and to get the minerals in Greenland. There’s a lot that needs to be done,” said Mr. O’Hanlon. “But we also paid a big price in terms of our relations with Europe and made ourselves look like the most awful bully.”
The 1951 Defense of Greenland agreement already allows for a U.S. military presence on the island in perpetuity and offers other advantages.
“We could have gotten exactly what we wanted through the 1951 agreement. It’s in there to allow us to do that, but we got what we wanted by intimidating allies, puffing our chests and acting like a boor,” Mr. O’Hanlon said.
After a week of dizzying twists and turns in his efforts to acquire Greenland, Mr. Trump struck a framework deal to expand U.S. influence on the island, which is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark.
Before that deal was reached, the U.S. president threatened to acquire Greenland by force, raising the once-unthinkable scenario of one NATO ally turning against another. Mr. Trump threatened to impose more tariffs on European nations whose leaders opposed the idea. He ultimately backed away from both threats.
Negotiations on the deal remain in flux but are expected to include an agreement to station more U.S. forces in Greenland, expanded European efforts to boost security in the Arctic and granting the U.S. the right of first refusal on investments in Greenland’s mineral resources.
Mr. Trump called the deal “really fantastic” but has offered few details.
In Venezuela, Mr. Trump is trying to overhaul the oil industry, giving U.S. companies access to the world’s largest reserves.
U.S. forces raided the country, captured Mr. Maduro and his wife and brought them to the U.S. to stand trial on narco-terrorism charges after weeks of bombing alleged drug boats, seizing oil tankers transporting sanctioned oil and an unprecedented military buildup in the region.
Although Exxon and other oil companies have questioned the viability of Mr. Trump’s plan because of political instability and lack of infrastructure in Venezuela, the president said America will reap the benefits of selling its oil.
“Venezuela is going to be very successful, and the people of the United States are going to be big beneficiaries,” the president said.
• Jeff Mordock can be reached at jmordock@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.