The Monroe Doctrine never went away

by Jim Hodgson

Beyond the constant babbling of That Man Next Door is a real plan for U.S. domination of the Americas. 

The Trump administration’s 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) says it will discourage Latin America and Caribbean nations from working with each other and with countries from outside the hemisphere. Overtly racist and nationalist, it also presses European countries to take “primary responsibility” for their own defence.

New York Times headlines in recent days.

The document was released Thursday night (Dec. 4) and neatly summarized Friday night (Dec. 5) by U.S. historian Heather Cox Richardson:

In place of the post–World War II rules-based international order, the Trump administration’s NSS commits the U.S. to a world divided into spheres of interest by dominant countries. It calls for the U.S. to dominate the Western Hemisphere through what it calls “commercial diplomacy,” using “tariffs and reciprocal trade agreements as powerful tools” and discouraging Latin American nations from working with other nations. 

“The United States must be preeminent in the Western Hemisphere as a condition of our security and prosperity,” it says, “a condition that allows us to assert ourselves confidently where and when we need to in the region.” …

It went on to make clear that this policy is a plan to help U.S. businesses take over Latin America and, perhaps, Canada. “The U.S. Government will identify strategic acquisition and investment opportunities for American companies in the region and present these opportunities for assessment by every U.S. Government financing program,” it said, “including but not limited to those within the Departments of State, War, and Energy; the Small Business Administration; the International Development Finance Corporation; the Export-Import Bank; and the Millennium Challenge Corporation.”

Should countries oppose such U.S. initiatives, it said, “[t]he United States must also resist and reverse measures such as targeted taxation, unfair regulation, and expropriation that disadvantage U.S. businesses.”

Think of it. The tariff fights with Canada, Mexico and Brazil. The stepped-up sanctions against Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua. The mass murders of alleged “drug-traffickers” by exploding their boats in the open sea. Overt threats of “land strikes” in Mexico, Colombia and Venezuela. Trump’s interventions in national elections in Argentina and, most recently, Honduras. These are all part of the same strategy for renewed U.S. dominance.

Resistance grows and is not futile.

I take my title today from the headline over La Jornada’s lead editorial Sunday, Dec. 7:  Monroe nunca se fue. Trump’s policy (“Donroe”) rejects the polite notion of a “good neighbour policy” towards Latin America and the Caribbean promoted after 1933 by Franklin D. Roosevelt and others. But that approach was betrayed repeatedly by presidents from both parties who involved themselves in coups in Guatemala, Brazil, Chile, Honduras and elsewhere, along with invasions of the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Grenada and Panama – and the wars in Central America in the 1980s and U.S. support for paramilitary death squads in Colombia.

The people of Honduras went to the polls Sunday, Nov. 30. Before the vote, Trump did two things: he pardoned former President Juan Orlando Hernández, convicted last year in the United States for trafficking cocaine; and he endorsed the candidate of Hernández’s National Party, Nasry Asfura (known as “Tito” or “Papi”). A week after the vote, Asfura is in what election officials called a “technical tie” with a slightly more centrist candidate, Salvador Nasralla of the Liberal Party. Those two parties represent different factions of Honduran family oligarchs. 

Whichever of them is ultimately declared the victor (a process that could take until Dec. 30), the ruling Libre party has been pushed aside. President Xiomara Castro had led the country for the past four years; her party’s candidate, Rixi Moncada, has only about 20 per cent of the official count – although many aspects of the election remain in dispute – including U.S. interference.

Key here is the coup On June 28, 2009, that ousted the elected government of Mel Zelaya, not quite a half-year into the administration of Barack Obama and his secretary of state Hillary Clinton. Their machinations brought about more than 12 years of rule that facilitated drug-traffickers, mining, corrupt land sales and human rights abuse – only partly subdued after the election of Castro four years ago.

“The abuse of force,” concludes La Jornada’s editorial, “is not, as [Trump] pretends, a sign of strength, but the recourse of one who cannot attract his neighbours with technological innovation, productive investment, exemplary institutions or a viable model of civilization.” 

The “feminist foreign policy” is dead. What next?

by Jim Hodgson

A decade of promises and at least a measure of good will were flushed away with Prime Minister Mark Carney’s declaration that his government does not have a feminist foreign policy.

Speaking in Johannesburg at the end of the G20 summit, he said issues such as gender equality and reducing gender-based violence are an “aspect” of his government’s foreign policy. “But I wouldn’t describe our foreign policy as feminist foreign policy.”

Frankly, it was always hard to reconcile proclamations of feminist foreign policy (FFP, as it came to be known) by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his foreign ministers with Canada’s efforts to sell weapons abroadinaction in Gaza, and preference for threats and sanctions over dialogue in Venezuela. After all: wouldn’t a truly feminist foreign policy veto arms sales to Saudi Arabia because of its suppression of women’s rights? 

House of Commons finance committee chair Karina Gould, who served in several cabinet posts under Trudeau and ran against Carney for the Liberal leadership, told the Canadian Press that Carney’s words “certainly” mark a departure from the previous government. But she insisted the policy the prime minister described remains feminist.

“The ideals that he was talking about continue to be feminist, and I think that what it means is that as Canadians, we expect that we’re going to stand up for gender equality around the world and here in Canada,” she said.

“Prime Minister Carney is making it very clear he is no friend to women and he is no friend to gender equality in this country,” NDP MP Leah Gazan told reporters Nov. 24.

International Women’s Day march, Guatemala City, March 8, 2023 (Jim Hodgson photo)

Feminist aid policy

The Trudeau government did somewhat better with its Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP). Beyond policy documents, FIAP seemed to produce some results across the development cooperation sector with promotion of gender equity, empowerment of women and girls, and rights and inclusion for 2SLGBTQIA+ people. 

Even so, there were calls for more. Canada’s ecumenical justice coalition KAIROS said FIAP was “sound policy” but that its funding priorities needed “to align the advancement of human rights and women, peace and security with economic empowerment.”

After the Harper government in 2009 refused to support the KAIROS international assistance work, funding was restored by the Trudeau government to a revamped KAIROS Women, Peace and Security program. 

Now Trudeau is gone, his “sunny ways” undermined by the SNC Lavalin affair and his treatment of cabinet ministers who were women. And international development cooperation is being buried in favour of investment regimes, eternal debt and oceans that rise along with temperatures.

“Inside/outside strategies”

And so I find myself thinking in different ways. Sometimes I feel that I placed too much faith in the official spaces, even as I always identified most strongly with social movements. Sometimes we used “inside/outside” strategies: those who could talk to the politicians would do so; the rest of us would march in the street outside. I think of anti-free-trade demonstrations in Québec City in 2001 or the protests at the Toronto G7/G20 meeting in 2010.

Today in Mexico City’s La Jornada newspaper, Raúl Zibechi has a column in which he decries the “pyramids” of power we build within our progressive movements even as we denounce the pyramids of power in our capitalist “democracies.” He points to an event the Zapatistas will hold in San Cristóbal de Las Casas,  Chiapas, Dec. 26-30 this year. Zibechi and others will offer their “analyses on pyramids and on how histories are handled within the economic system, bad governments, laws and the judicial structure, resistance movements, the left and progressivism, human rights, the feminist struggle, and the arts.”

I can’t attend this year, but I will pay attention. As the new accord between Carney and the premier of Alberta showed this week, we can’t trust conventional power to make good choices on behalf of the people. We need to propose alternatives and press to make them reality.

Labour, development NGOs demand Canada condemn U.S. boat attacks in Caribbean

By Jim Hodgson 

Canadians need to call on their government to speak out against illegal U.S. airstrikes on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, say two coalitions in which I have participated for nearly three decades. 

Left: Calling on Canadians to act (Artwork by Harmeet Rehal); Right: AP news story on the 20th boat strike carried out by the United States since September. Another attack was reported a day later.

Common Frontiers and the Americas Policy Group sent a letter Nov. 13 to Foreign Minister Anita Anand, Trade Minister Maninder Sidhu, and Defence Minister David McGinty urging Canada to: 

  • Speak out publicly and condemn the unlawful attacks and extrajudicial killings of civilians in the Caribbean and Pacific by the U.S. military;

  • Contribute to the promotion of peace and security in the region and join efforts to press the Trump administration to respect national sovereignty and uphold the rule of law;

  • Suspend participation in Operation CARIBBE to avoid the risk of Canadian complicity; and

  • Adhere to Canada’s obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty by removing regulatory exemptions that allow loopholes for the export of arms to the U.S. without oversight or human rights risk assessment.

Just a day earlier, Anand had told reporters that it was not her job to determine if the United States has breached international law when striking alleged drug boats in the Caribbean Sea. 

“As Canada’s foreign minister, I hold responsibility for Canada’s compliance with international law—we are always seeking to comply with international law,” Anand said. “Regarding the question that you asked, I would say it is within the purview of U.S. authorities to make that determination.”

Her comment was soundly criticized by international law experts, including Ketty Nivyabandi, secretary-general of Amnesty International Canada’s English section. She told Hill Times that international law only works if it is upheld by all states. 

“It is a collective responsibility to uphold international law. It is not up to a country to focus on itself and decide whether or not it is applying international law—in that case, nobody would,” she said. “What the United States is doing is truly making a mockery of international law. It is normalizing what are, in effect, extrajudicial killings.”

The attacks take place amidst months of arrests and deportations of Venezuelans in the United States; false allegations of Venezuelan state collusion with a criminal gang called Tren de Aragua; massive U.S. movement of troops and warships into the Caribbean; and conjecture about what the Trump regime intends to do. On Nov. 13, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth posted on social media: “President Trump ordered action—and the Department of War is delivering. Today, I’m announcing Operation SOUTHERN SPEAR.”

Former CBC News correspondent Dan Rather cited the Washington Post in calling it the biggest military presence in the Caribbean in decades. And he added: 

… a curious build-up if the stated goal is simply drug interdiction. Another explanation would be Trump wagging the dog, creating a diversion by manufacturing a crisis that he can then fix and allowing him to flex and crow about taking down the leader of a small country. Or it could be just about commandeering Venezuela’s oil.

Here below, from the Venezuela Solidarity Network, are some reasons to help stop a potential U.S. war against Venezuela:

Please write to your own Member of Parliament to express your views.

Join actions across Canada for the No War on Venezuela Days of Action, November 15-23:

📍VANCOUVER, BC
Rally & Info Tabling
Friday, November 21, 5:00pm
Vancouver Art Gallery – Robson Street Side
Organized by Fire This Time Movement for Social Justice 

📍OTTAWA, ON
Saturday, November 22, 3:30pm
U.S. Embassy – York and Sussex
Organized by Alba Movimientos Ottawa

📍WINNIPEG, MB
Sunday, November 23, 1:00pm
River and Osborne
Sponsored by Peace Alliance Winnipeg, Manitoba-Cuba Solidarity Committee, United in Action, Communist Party of Canada – Manitoba & Araucaria

The Canada-Wide Peace and Justice Network (CWPJN) encourages members and all antiwar and peace organizations to register their actions at https://unac.notowar.net/no-war-on-venezuela-action-registration and with the CWPJN at canadapeaceandjustice@gmail.com
For updates visit: tinyurl.com/Hands-Off-Venezuela