Podcast Summary:

Exchanges | Goldman Sachs
Episode: Implications of an “Americas First” Foreign Policy
Date: February 3, 2026
Host: Allison Nathan
Guests:

• Hal Brands (Professor of Global Affairs, Johns Hopkins SAIS)
• Mauricio Claver-Carone (Former Special Envoy for Latin America; Managing Partner, Latin America Real Assets Opportunity Fund)

Episode Overview

This episode explores the newly-asserted "Don Row Doctrine," President Trump's 2026 reimagining of the classic Monroe Doctrine, which emphasizes concentrated U.S. power and influence in the Western Hemisphere. The conversation explores motivations behind this more forceful U.S. posture, scrutinizes implications for Latin America, examines foreign policy calculations for rivals such as China and Russia, and highlights implications and risks for investors and global order.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Origins and Motivations Behind the “Don Row Doctrine”

[00:05–03:34]

• Structural and Personal Drivers:
  Hal Brands argues there are both enduring structural and President Trump–specific motivations for the U.S. to reassert primacy in the Western Hemisphere, especially in a period of global uncertainty.

  • The U.S. historically strengthens its regional position during times of global upheaval (World Wars, Cold War).
  • President Trump’s personal focus on tangible sovereignty, security, territorial control, and resources is unparalleled.
  • The Trump administration's energetic intervention in Venezuela exemplifies a broad campaign, including diplomatic, economic, and military pressure across Latin America.

  “Trump himself is very focused on this because he seeks a variety of benefits in the Western Hemisphere from control of additional resources to control of additional territory... focused on tangible threats to American sovereignty and security.”
  — Hal Brands, 02:17

• Comparison to Monroe Doctrine:

  • The Don Row Doctrine revives aspects of U.S. power projection from the late 19th and early 20th centuries, including open talk of resource control, territory acquisition, and unapologetic interventionism.

  “Much less apologetic about the desire to control the resources of weaker countries, much more willing to talk about outright acquisition of territory... Trump would feel quite at home if he were presiding over some of the US interventions in Latin America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.”
  — Hal Brands, 05:09

2. Trump’s Rationale and Management Approach

[06:14–09:23]

• “Americas First” is Born from “America First”: Mauricio Claver-Carone stresses this regional focus is personally driven by Trump, not advisors.

  • Trump sees regional preeminence as the essential first step toward global leadership.
  • Views Latin America as the region with greatest immediate impact on U.S. life—security, migration, drugs.
  • Critical reflection on the U.S. military’s global posture, e.g., absence of Navy presence in the Caribbean—an area Trump sought to correct.

  “There’s not a region in the world that impacts the United States more on a daily basis than Latin America and the Caribbean.”
  — Mauricio Claver-Carone, 06:49

• Shift from Frame-setting to Implementation:

  • First Trump term focused on setting frameworks, constrained by internal conflict over priorities.
  • Second term sees aligned leadership (e.g., Marco Rubio as Secretary of State and National Security Advisor), and is positioned for decisive action.

  “…the big difference the second time around is also the team. There’s no competing interest... all agree.”
  — Mauricio Claver-Carone, 08:38

3. Ultimate U.S. Goals for Regional Influence

[09:23–11:59]

• Security & Energy:

  • The doctrine defines security (including narcotics, terrorism, energy) as intertwined, requiring U.S. leadership.
  • Points to energy security as crucial—connecting high energy costs to migration and instability in Central America and the Caribbean.

  “The Achilles heel of the Caribbean particularly is energy. Those countries have a pressing need for energy. And by the way, so does Central America... One of the biggest drivers, frankly, of migration… has been the high cost of energy.”
  — Mauricio Claver-Carone, 09:44

• Resource Control and Neo-mercantilism:

  • U.S. involvement aims at diverting countries away from nationalist, ideological economic models, toward practical, business-focused partnerships with American firms (Guyana cited as a model).

4. Reconciling “America First” with Foreign Engagement

[11:59–13:31]

• U.S. efforts in Latin America framed as practical partnerships, not nation-building.

• Alliances cross ideological boundaries; emphasis is on stable, business-oriented relations that reinforce U.S. security and economic leadership.

  “There is no entanglement. We don’t have boots on the ground in Venezuela. At the end of the day, it is not nation building... these are about partnerships, practical partnerships between nations…”
  — Mauricio Claver-Carone, 12:10

5. The Future of U.S. Action in Latin America

[13:31–15:10]

• Upcoming elections in Colombia and Brazil seen as pivotal; U.S. hopes for pro-American, pragmatic partnerships regardless of ideological lean.

• Modernization of trade and business relationships, with strategic sectors (energy, infrastructure) as priorities, seeking to reduce Chinese influence in the region.

  “There’s an opportunity now with our friends and allies throughout the region to really reconfigure what those partnerships look like... modernizing those... to US investment, equity, putting the flag, making partnerships and deals...”
  — Mauricio Claver-Carone, 14:18

6. Implications for Latin America, China, and Russia

[15:10–18:15]

• Hard Power and Rival Response:

  • U.S. action signals to anti-American regimes (esp. Cuba) that alignment with China/Russia will provoke pressure, though Brands doubts large-scale U.S. military interventions.
  • China’s influence—entrenched through trade, tech, infrastructure—will persist; Beijing expected to play a patient, long-game, while the U.S. asserts hard power when necessary.

  “To some degree, Moscow and Beijing have run up forward against the reality of US hard power in the Western Hemisphere... but Beijing is going to play the long game.”
  — Hal Brands, 16:43

7. The Greenland Gambit and Global Order

[18:15–22:06]

• The Trump administration’s efforts to gain control of Greenland are both a hemispheric and global challenge, provoking alarm among NATO allies and testing the norm against changing territorial status quo.

• U.S. coercive ambitions in Greenland are likened to Chinese and Russian revisionism.

  “If you have a situation in which the US is also seeking to redraw borders... you have a world in which the three most powerful countries are all violently or coercively disrupting the territorial status quo... could be deeply corrosive to the international order that has prevailed since 1945.”
  — Hal Brands, 19:35

• Strategic Overstretch Risks:

  • Shifting military resources to the region may create vulnerabilities elsewhere, benefiting U.S. adversaries.

8. Macro Risks for Investors and Companies

[22:56–25:14]

• Brands stresses "mega risk": a formational shift away from U.S.-led global order could result in:

  • Proliferation of nuclear weapons
  • Retreat of democratic values
  • Greater maritime disorder, threatening global trade
  • Challenges to U.S. dollar dominance

  “If the United States ever decides that it wants to play a fundamentally different role in the world, the world order is going to change fundamentally... the prospect of a fundamental shift in US foreign policy is more real now than it has been at any time, I think, in the last 70 years.”
  — Hal Brands, 23:04

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Trump’s Vision for the Hemisphere:
  “The president's view is always, listen, there's not a region in the world that impacts the United States more on a daily basis than Latin America and the Caribbean.”
  — Mauricio Claver-Carone, [06:47]

• Comparative Global Risks:
  “If you have a situation in which the US is also seeking to redraw borders... that's something we haven't seen since the 1930s, and that could be deeply corrosive to the international order that has prevailed since 1945.”
  — Hal Brands, [19:41]

• On Strategic Resource Shifts:
  “If we’re seeing an intensification of US military activity in the Western Hemisphere that is going to pull resources away from other regions... that’s not the worst thing for other U.S. adversaries.”
  — Hal Brands, [21:36]

• Defining the Mega-Risk:
  “The mega risk that I keep my eye on is basically a fundamental shift in the US approach to global policy because I think that will fundamentally shift the way that the world works in a number of different respects.”
  — Hal Brands, [23:29]

Important Timestamps & Corresponding Topics

| Timestamp | Topic | Speaker(s) | |-----------|-------|------------| | [01:16] | Roots of the Don Row Doctrine | Allison Nathan, Hal Brands | | [03:43] | Oil vs. Broader Motivations in Venezuela | Hal Brands | | [06:17] | Trump's regional thinking | Mauricio Claver-Carone | | [09:23] | Energy & Security as U.S. Priorities | Mauricio Claver-Carone | | [13:35] | Future Moves: Trade Deals & Strategic Presence | Mauricio Claver-Carone | | [15:18] | Threats to Anti-American Regimes | Hal Brands | | [16:43] | China/Russia Response to U.S. Actions | Hal Brands | | [18:27] | Greenland and NATO/EU Anxiety | Hal Brands | | [22:56] | Investor Macro Risk Assessment | Hal Brands |

Conclusion

The “Don Row Doctrine” marks a revived, unapologetic push for hard U.S. power and economic influence across the Americas, motivated by Trump’s worldview and execution by a now unified team. While it aims to reestablish U.S. primacy, especially vis-à-vis China and Russia, it may also signal the erosion of long-standing global norms—raising profound risks for global order, international markets, and investor certainty.