Odd Lots: Greg Grandin on How the Monroe Doctrine Became the Donroe Doctrine
Podcast: Odd Lots (Bloomberg)
Hosts: Joe Weisenthal & Tracy Alloway
Guest: Greg Grandin, Professor of History at Yale
Date: January 9, 2026
Episode Overview
This episode explores the historical trajectory and contemporary implications of the Monroe Doctrine, focusing on its latest reinterpretation—the so-called "Donroe Doctrine" during the Trump administration. Joe and Tracy are joined by historian Greg Grandin to unpack how the U.S.'s assertion of hemispheric dominance has shifted over time, why Latin America is frequently the focal point for U.S. power, and what the latest developments in Venezuela reveal about American foreign policy.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
The Subjectivity and Elasticity of Historical Narratives (00:33–02:24)
- Tracy reflects on how U.S. historical events are perceived differently abroad, illustrating the subjectivity of history.
- The Monroe Doctrine's reinterpretation—now being colloquially called the "Donroe Doctrine"—serves as a lens for current U.S.–Latin America dynamics, especially regarding Venezuela.
- Joe stresses the unprecedented arrest of a foreign head of state by the U.S., questioning the state of "international law."
The Origins and Evolution of the Monroe Doctrine (05:44–12:09)
- Greg Grandin explains the doctrine’s obscure beginnings:
- It was not legally ratified, but emerged from Monroe’s 1823 State of the Union, during Latin America's wars of independence.
- The doctrine had multiple, sometimes contradictory aspects:
- Anti-colonial stance: warning European powers against interference
- Fraternity with Latin America: loose invocation of shared “interests and ideals”
- U.S. discretion: assertion that the U.S. would judge events in the hemisphere based on their impact on “peace and happiness.”
- Different U.S. factions—expansionists (Jefferson), isolationists (Adams), mercantilists (Henry Clay)—used the doctrine for their own visions.
- Over time, politicians and diplomats elevated these remarks into a “doctrine.” It slipped into customary law, illustrating how power shapes what becomes international law.
"What makes a doctrine a doctrine and who gets to enforce it? It really is just a question of power."
— Greg Grandin (11:49)
The Geopolitics of U.S. Hegemony in the Hemisphere (12:09–17:22)
- The prototype for U.S. overseas power projection was Latin America—“the U.S. literally gobbled up Latin America on its way to the Pacific” (13:30).
- Each time America faced global setbacks, it turned back to assert dominance in its hemisphere:
- Post-Great Depression
- Post-Vietnam
- After the War on Terror and the 2008 financial crisis
- The Monroe Doctrine gradually expanded:
- Grover Cleveland (1895): Declared U.S. absolute sovereignty over the hemisphere (16:10).
- Theodore Roosevelt (1904): Roosevelt Corollary granted "international police power" to stop "chronic wrongdoing."
"Roosevelt expands the Monroe Doctrine into a kind of standing universal police warrant..."
— Greg Grandin (17:08)
Reversals and Exceptions—FDR's Good Neighbor Policy (17:52–21:16)
- Franklin D. Roosevelt reversed precedent in 1933: Renounced interventionist rights, recognizing Latin American sovereignty.
- This shift built goodwill during WWII and underpinned a united front against fascism.
- Latin America’s unity in response to U.S. power contrasts the U.S. approach of conquest and expansion.
Grappling with International Law (21:16–25:53)
- Grandin takes a realist view: International law is an arena for moral and normative argument, but ultimately, power decides exceptions.
- The idea that international law is not absolute, but gives weaker states moral ground in disputes.
- Instances like the Drago Doctrine show how legal principles can be tools for both weaker nations and great powers.
"The strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must. The conceit that there is such a thing as international law that is somehow transcendent of power relations... might just be a conceit, but it still at least creates terms on which nations could deal with each other."
— Greg Grandin (22:37)
The Goals Behind U.S. Moves in Venezuela (25:53–32:16)
- The Trump administration’s strategies are described as both an extension of old patterns and uniquely “Trumpist”:
- No attempt to create a new worldview or stable coalition
- “One and done” actions, lacking overarching narrative
- Explicitly transactional: Trump talks openly of taking Venezuelan oil
- Compare to past leaders (FDR, Reagan), who justified intervention with broader ideologies
- Trump’s lack of larger principle marks a break from the past, exemplified by his transactional approach.
"He's demanding tribute. Right. Just trying to turn Venezuela into a vassal state. And I think that speaks to the moral emptiness of him and his political movement."
— Greg Grandin (30:59)
Precedents—and What’s Unprecedented—About Trumpism (32:16–37:12)
- Precedent: U.S. arrest of Manuel Noriega (Panama, 1989) and forced removal of Aristide (Haiti, 2005).
- What’s new: Open calls for economic tribute, lack of long-term planning, and overtly transactional approach (“as you go”), rather than building state institutions or multilateral projects.
- There’s no desire for “boots on the ground” or nation building—a reaction to the failures of Iraq/Afghanistan interventions—but still a wish to exercise raw power.
"What is unprecedented is this idea that we are just going to accept oil tribute from Venezuela... working it out on an as you go basis. It doesn't seem like they have a clear plan."
— Greg Grandin (36:50)
Timestamps for Key Segments
- 00:33–02:24 – Introduction & subjective history
- 05:44–12:09 – The origins and contradictions of the Monroe Doctrine
- 13:03–17:22 – U.S. hemispheric power and the Doctrine’s expansion
- 17:52–21:16 – FDR’s reversal and Latin American sovereignty
- 21:16–25:53 – Power, international law, and the Drago Doctrine
- 25:53–32:16 – Trump’s policy in Venezuela and lack of ideological narrative
- 32:16–37:12 – Precedents for arresting foreign leaders & what is new in Trump’s approach
Notable Quotes
-
"It wasn't much of anything... but Latin Americans did like it. They read it as a kind of amicus brief for their own anti-colonialism."
— Greg Grandin (10:36) -
"The United States places sanctions on Venezuela. That's not international law... It's just unilateral U.S. projections of its power."
— Greg Grandin (36:05) -
"The Monroe Doctrine, it makes sense that Trump, as the standard bearer of today's iteration of America first nationalism, would latch on to the Monroe Doctrine as a kind of substitute for liberal internationalism."
— Greg Grandin (31:48) -
"We still want to show that we're tough... The way they solve the problem is by these one offs—one bombing run in Iran, arrest a foreign leader. Is there any precedent for that or does this feel like uncharted territory?"
— Joe Weisenthal (32:54)
Takeaways & Final Reflections
- The Monroe Doctrine has never been a fixed policy; its meanings and uses have shifted to fit each era's needs and ambitions.
- Trump’s “Donroe Doctrine” is marked more by its lack of philosophical pretense and its blunt use of American power—an open embrace of transactional, America First nationalism.
- The episode underlines a historical pattern: when the U.S. feels global weakness, it turns to assert dominance closer to home, often in Latin America.
- Unlike previous iterations, today’s policy seems less interested in constructing durable coalitions or narratives, and more focused on short-term assertions of power and demanding tribute.
- The conversation challenges listeners to question the legitimacy of international law and how much of what is claimed as “doctrine” is built on narratives sustained by power more than principle.
Recommended For:
Anyone interested in the intersection of history, international relations, and contemporary geopolitics—especially those seeking to understand the evolving logic behind U.S. engagement in Latin America and the global ramifications of the Monroe Doctrine's latest revival.
