The Monroe Doctrine was a US foreign policy introduced in 1823 that stated the Americas should be free from future European colonization and that the US would view any European power's attempt to oppress or control independent countries in North or South America as hostile to the US. It was influenced by Britain and helped establish the US-UK special relationship by aligning their interests. While initially the doctrine strengthened newly independent Latin American countries, later extensions like the Roosevelt Corollary were criticized for enabling US imperialism in the region through military intervention.

1. THE MONROE
DOCTRINE
Kristi Short

2. JAMES MONROE
 Fifth President of the US
 Last President to have the status
of Founding Father.
 Held the roles of Secretary of
War and Secretary of State as well
as Governor of Virginia.
 Helped negotiate the Louisiana
Purchase.

3. PRESIDENT
 Elected President March 4th
1817, Monroe won the election
with over 80 percent of the
electoral college vote.
 In 1821 he was unanimously re-
elected which is reflected by the
term “Era of Good Feelings”
that is attached to his presidency.

4. A SILLY VIDEO

5. ERA OF GOOD FEELINGS
 During the First Party system there was a bitter division between
the Democratic-Republican and the Federalist Parties.
 One of Monroe’s main goals was to get rid of the infighting by
consolidating the parties with the hope of eliminating the party
system all together.
 In fact the Federalist party was going the way of the dinosaurs
after the Hartford Convention which made Monroe’s job much easier.

6. DE-FEDERALIZATION
Monroe’s plan had three main steps:
1. He restated his conviction that the
Federalist party would install a
monarch at the first opportunity.
2. He refused to allow a token
Federalist in his cabinet.
3. Tried to merge former Federalists
with the Republican party.

7.  Monroe exploited the fact that the NEGLECTING THE
Federalist party had been dealt a fatal blow PLANTS
and consistently neglected it until it died like Monroe used a carefully planned approach to
a house plant. The Federalist Party simply the process of de-Federalization. He was very
sure to never make any comment that could be
ceased to exist to Monroe; he did not so
considered partisan.
much as reference them or publicly Despite the obvious systematic removal of
acknowledge them in any speech or Federalists, when face to face Monroe remained
comment. likeable and reassuring promising nothing at all
but leaving them with quiet good feelings. A
 He never attacked the party publicly or name that tags his administration as the general
privately but made sure no Federalist held an feeling of the public due to the surging feeling
office of any power or acquired any of nationalism after the war of 1812, but is also
meant ironically due to the bitter feelings of
government funding.
Federalists and resentments building under the
surface.

8. THE MONROE
DOCTRINE
December 2nd, 1823

9. A B R I E F I N T RO D U C T I O N T O T H E
M O N RO E D O C T R I N E

10. MONROE DOCTRINE
The Monroe doctrine is one of the great
landmarks of US foreign policy. It has remain
largely unchanged for two hundred years.
Monroe first stated the idea during his seventh
state of the union address after economic
conditions in Spain allowed most South
American countries to declare their
independence.
The Monroe Doctrine was actually written by
John Adams and heavily influenced by British
Foreign Minister George Canning. The British
interest was commercial in nature wanting to
keep lines of trade open in South America.

11. HISTORY
The Monroe Doctrine is said to be the result of the Napoleonic
Wars and the fear that certain European countries would once
again turn to monarchies as a system of government.
One such cause for concern was the Holy Alliance; composed
of Prussia, Austria and Russia it’s goal was the defense of
monarchial systems from revolution (particularly the French
Revolution). This defense included military support of Spain in
re-establishing rule over its South American colonies who were
in the process of declaring independence.

12. THE HOLY ALLIANCE
Formed in Paris in 1815 and signed by
Tsar Alexander I of Russia, Francis I of
Austria and Fredrick William III of
Prussia while negotiating the second
Peace of Paris.
The alliance wished to promote
Christian values throughout Europe and
uphold the monarchies instated in each.
Eventually signed by nearly all European
powers except Britain, the Ottoman
Emperor and the Pope; it had little effect
on European politics.

13. PROVOCATION
The main act provoking Monroe’s statement of doctrine
was the Russian Ukase of 1821.
The Russian Ukase (proclamation) was declared September
4th 1821, and was an attempt by Russia to claim Alaska as a
territory. The proclamation stated that landing on any
territory of Russia in the North West was prohibited and
sailing within 100 miles as well.
"all foreign vessels not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging
to Russia, [...] but also to approach them within less than one
hundred miles.“
The Ukase was only enforced on one occasion in 1822
when American ship “The Pearl” was taken on a trip from
Boston to Sitka.
The entire matter was cleared up, including a similar
incident with British Columbia with the Russo-American
Treaty if 1824 and the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1825.

14. STATEMENT
The key concepts of the Monroe doctrine can be summarized by the
first statement introducing the intent as follows.
“The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights
and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the
free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth
not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.”

15. INTERPRETATION
This introduction to the Monroe doctrine
simply states that the US deems it an
appropriate time to declare that North and
South America are off limits to
colonization.
The justification is that the US declaration
of independence had been maintained and
was relatively stable. Since many South
American nations were also declaring
independence the US determined the time
was right to declare the Western hemisphere
off limits to European powers.

16. SECOND STATEMENT
The intent of the doctrine and it’s relationship to US foreign policy is
expanded on in the following statement:
“We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and
those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any
portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety.
With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not
interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it,
and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged,
we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them,
or controlling in any other manner their destiny,
by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation
of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.”

17. E X PA N D E D I N T E R P R E TAT I O N
The second statement of the Monroe doctrine expands on how the
previous statement should be interpreted.
“We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and
those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any
portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety.”
This statement is simply a friendly notice that any attempt by
European powers to colonize in the Western Hemisphere would be
interpreted as a threat to US interests and sovereignty.

18. “With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered
and shall not interfere.”
The above statement is an appeal to European powers to remember that
(technically) the US had not intervened in European politics and to
consider affording the US that same consideration. This statement is also
to be interpreted as a promise that US will not intervene in European
politics.
“But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it,
and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged,
we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them,
or controlling in any other manner their destiny, […] “
The doctrine goes on to state it will not interfere in the politics of South
America. The statement also acts as a public acknowledgement of the
validity of those countries declarations for independence.

19. I M M E D I AT E E F F E C T O F T H E
M O N RO E D O C T R I N E
At the time of Monroe’s declaration the US did not have an army or navy
capable of enforcing the doctrine. However, the doctrine was in the best
interests of Britain; and although written by Adams was largely influenced
by the British Foreign Minister Canning.
The British were in the process of developing laissez-faire trade in
opposition to Spanish mercantilism. Britain absorbed the Monroe doctrine
into the Pax Britannica and enforced the policy with the Royal Navy.
This action is viewed as the beginning of the Special Relationship between
the US and Britain. A relationship maintained over one hundred years and
whose success is reflected in the UK proposal to the US of the creation
of the League of Nations.

20. S O U T H A M E R I C A N R E AC T I O N
The effect of the Monroe doctrine on South American
governments was met with gratitude by countries declaring
independence.
However, these countries were aware that without British
intervention US efforts were sentimental at best.
It was Britain that protected the independence and sovereignty
of these new nations not the Monroe doctrine.

21. EXTENDING THE
MONROE DOCTRINE
 December 2nd, 1845 Polk used the Monroe
doctrine to support his case for manifest
destiny.
 1842, Tyler applies the doctrine to Hawaii in
what would later be viewed a bad move.
 1852, the Monroe doctrine was used in an
attempt to force Spain out of Cuba.
 1862, Napoleon III invades Mexico the US
sees this as a violation of the doctrine but
due to involvement in the Civil War can do
nothing about it.
 In the 1870’s Grant attempts to replace
European influence with the US in Latin
America.

22. U S I N T E RV E N T I O N I N L AT I N
AMERICA

23. T H E RO O S E V E LT C O RO L L A RY
 The Roosevelt corollary was added to the Monroe doctrine in 1904.
 This corollary gave the US justification to act in cases where a Latin
American country was unable to pay debts or was deemed “unruly”.
 The corollary states that the US has the right to interfere in
disagreements between Latin America and European powers as an
arbitrator.
 The corollary is considered now a step back from the intent of the
Monroe doctrine.

24. CRITICISM
The Roosevelt corollary meant that the
US had the right to use military force in
Latin America. This was cited as
justification for intervention in
Cuba, Haiti and the Dominican Republic
and speaks to American Imperialist
sentiment at the time. The corollary was
later reversed by the Clarke
Memorandum stating that the US need
no such justification in order to
intervene in Latin American politics.

25. CRITICISM
The Monroe doctrine on its own is innocent enough merely stating
that the US has the right to protect the sovereignty of independent
nations in the Western Hemisphere.
The Corollary is marked by the intention of replacing European
interests in Latin America with American which a huge step back in
US diplomatic policy.

26. COYNE & DAVIES
While the Monroe doctrine was civil and well mannered the
Roosevelt doctrine still cause problems to this day. Remarked upon
in Christopher Coyne and Stephen Davies article on nation
building argues that
“[…] a foreign policy modeled on the Roosevelt Corollary leads to negative
consequences both in national security terms and in terms of its effect on
domestic politics.”

27. NOAM CHOMSKY
Argues that the Roosevelt Corollary embodies the threat of
American Imperialism to Latin America.
He states that the Corollary indicates that the US would not
only defend Latin America but would use its influence to
obtain concessions for US industry and corporations. This is
reflected in the exportation of Coca extract to only one US
company and illegal to everyone else including natives.

28. CONCLUSION
In Latin America the attitude towards the Roosevelt Corollary and the Monroe doctrine
came to be known by the phrase
“America for Americans” indicating the growing resentment in the lower Western
Hemisphere with North American involvement.
There have been recent rumors that the US has not scaled back its efforts with
involvement and could be involved in a US Embassy attempt in Venezuela to fund anti-
Chavez groups in the area.
In my opinion this indicates the entitled attitudes of US politicians to consistently
undermine the sovereignty and efforts at democracy in Latin American countries,
particularly Peru, Bolivia and Venezuela. In fact it is my further opinion that since the
presidency of Monroe every attempt has been made to undermine the original intent of
the doctrine including the Clark Memorandum.

29. THE END
This has been Kristi Short LAST Power Point Presentation
at Santa Fe College!
In case you are wondering about certain biases expressed in
the contents of this power point I would like it known that
my opinions are based on my living experiences as a child in
Bolivia.
I have absolutely no problem with the original intent of the
Monroe doctrine. But I think overall it was a bad move and
perhaps unnecessary.