National Interest

by Abdulla Al Junaid

    The White House’s focus on the Western Hemisphere could strain US military assets rather than focus them.

    President Donald Trump’s emerging “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine (also known as the “Donroe Doctrine”) promises to reassert US dominance across the Western Hemisphere, from Venezuela to Greenland. Still, it threatens to overextend America’s resources amid simultaneous challenges in the Pacific, the Middle East and the North Atlantic. By invoking 19th-century policy updated for 21st-century “peace through strength,” yet this 360-degree approach risks diluting US focus at a precarious moment before the 2026 midterms.

    At its core, the doctrine prioritizes the homeland and hemisphere, denying “non-Hemispheric competitors” any strategic assets in the region. Hence, the White House’s December 2025 National Security Strategy states: “After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere.”

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed this in a cable news interview, declaring the hemisphere “where we live” is off-limits to adversaries. And the recent operation in Venezuela was tied to this policy, sending a “far-reaching” message across Latin America, signaling that the United States won’t tolerate rival foothold regimes. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reinforced it, announcing, “The Monroe Doctrine is back and in full effect.”

This hemispheric lockdown extends northward; the strategy defines the region from the Aleutian Islands to Greenland and the Arctic to Antarctica, including the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. Trump’s past interest in acquiring Greenland, framed now as securing the North Atlantic, poses a unique test. Could he negotiate access with Denmark and NATO allies, preserving the alliance while bolstering US defenses

    The National Security Strategy and the Hague Commitment call on NATO members to reach 5 percent of GDP in defense spending, piling more pressure on Europe. Yet European allies are pushing back by deploying forces to Greenland in a “symbolic but clear” affirmation of sovereignty over any European territory, rejecting encroachments from foes or friends. This isn’t mere posturing; it underscores the resolve of NATO’s European members, potentially complicating US aims without a direct occupation.

    Such moves align with Trump’s January 7, 2026, executive order “Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting,” which bans stock buybacks and dividends for under-performing contractors to accelerate production of critical weapons. The policy demands “superior product, on time and on budget,” with remediation plans due in 15 days and new contract clauses restricting executive pay. It’s a bold revitalization of the defense industrial base, but implementation hinges on finite resources.

    The peril is that this doctrine stretches US capacity thin across theaters. The Pacific Rim demands focus against China, the Middle East simmers with instability and now the North Atlantic is emerging as a flashpoint amid Greenland tensions. Reasserting Monroe-style control in Latin America via operations like Venezuela’s diverts assets from these priorities. Europe’s Greenland deployment signals alliance friction rather than unity, risking a fractured NATO just as the strategy calls for collective burden-sharing and industrial revival.

    Over-extension could backfire spectacularly. The history of the Vietnam and Iraq Wars is a warning of how imperial sprawl drains US resolve. Trump’s team dismisses critics, with the State Department posting on X: “This is OUR Hemisphere.” But independent lawmakers call it “rank imperialism.” As midterms loom, polling fatigue from multi-front commitments could sink the administration into an “irrecoverable spin,” eroding the very strength and focus the doctrine touts.

    Maybe the smarter path would be more selective enforcement: secure hemispheric flanks, deter adversaries in the Western Hemisphere, forge diplomatic pacts with Denmark for access to Greenland, while husbanding resources for peer threats like China. Of course, the Trump administration is already halfway there with its public concerns about China’s port grabs in Peru and Panama and Russia’s Arctic probes. Moreover, its efforts to revitalize defense production capacity are overdue. But preaching hemispheric exclusivity while eyeing Greenland courts blowback.

    Europe’s stand proves that it can only be pushed so far and without prioritization, this 360-degree defense becomes a vulnerability rather than a shield. America thrives on focused might, not scattered ambition. The midterms demand proof this isn’t overreach in disguise.