The Tribune

with Charlie Harper

A hypothetical dialogue between James Monroe and Yan Jiarong might be intriguing. It might also shed some light on what’s happening with gradually increasing intensity to our south and east.

Monroe, the fifth president of the United States (1817-25), was the last of the so-called ‘founding fathers’ of the American republic to serve as president. His tenure was not especially distinguished, but one particular foreign policy proclamation has lived on for over 200 years.

That’s the Monroe Doctrine, a United States foreign policy position first enunciated in 1823 that opposed European colonialism in the Western Hemisphere. Its basic thesis is that any intervention in the political affairs of the Americas by foreign powers is a potentially hostile act against the United States.

During the past two centuries, American presidents have intermittently referred to the Monroe Doctrine when they have in mind some kind of intervention in the internal affairs of another nation in the Western Hemisphere – South America, Central America, or the Caribbean.

Back in the early 19th Century, the Monroe Doctrine aimed to discourage European adventurism in the Western Hemisphere, and its primary intended addressee was the UK. The British, still stinging after losing their lucrative American colonies not so long before, were busy with maintenance and development of the world’s largest empire and were known to be eyeing potential alternative targets in America’s back yard.

The US was in no practical position to enforce the Monroe Doctrine when it was promulgated. Now, we will see if and how that has changed.

That’s where Yan Jiarong comes in. She’s the Chinese ambassador to The Bahamas. Here’s some of what she had to say in The Tribune earlier this week:

“The Bahamians who have visited China recognised broad potential for cooperation in direct trade, new energy vehicles, food security, digital economy, and disaster prevention and mitigation. Both China and The Bahamas firmly support multilateralism, uphold international trade order and rules, and share aligned goals in promoting sustainable development and jointly addressing global challenges.

“China will advance deep reforms and high-standard opening up with greater intensity, focusing on the following major objectives: high-quality development; scientific and technological self-reliance and strength; deepening reform; cultural and ethical progress; improvements of livelihood; green growth.”

Most observers now acknowledge that although Russia remains a formidable adversary to the US, their biggest rival is China. Moving aggressively during the first quarter of this century, Beijing has become the second overall leading trade partner with Latin America, and is South America’s top trading partner and a major source of both foreign direct investment and energy and infrastructure lending, including through its massive “Belt and Road Initiative.” 

“China’s role in Latin America and the Caribbean has grown rapidly since the turn of the century, promising economic opportunity but also raising concerns over Beijing’s influence,” according to the prestigious American Council of Foreign Relations. “China’s state firms are major investors in the region’s energy, infrastructure, and space industry.”

To many observers, that’s the context for what’s going on these days with the US and Venezuela. While Nicolas Maduro remains in charge in Caracas, his leading opponent just won the Nobel Peace Prize, and the US is actively building up its military presence in and south of Puerto Rico. The death toll from its bombing of civilian watercraft has now reached an estimated 83 persons. And now that the USS Gerald R Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, has arrived on station in the region, we can anticipate more sabre rattling and menacing language from US president Donald Trump.

China and Russia have both been outspoken in support of Venezuela recently, with Russia reportedly supplying some military assistance and China focusing on economic aid. But the growing antipathy between Maduro and Trump presents an occasion for both Russia and China to flex their diplomatic muscles, potentially embarrassing the US and opportunistically stirring things up in our hemisphere.

America’s political, economic and military position is exponentially different now than it was 200 years ago under James Monroe, and few would argue that the US lacks the means to enforce the Monroe Doctrine. Indeed, Trump’s increasing attention to the Western Hemisphere has led pundits to refer to his regional policy as the ‘Don-roe Doctrine.’

Nonetheless, we and our regional neighbours would do well to heed the Chinese ambassador’s recent letter to The Tribune. The Chinese seem to be here to stay, and their ambitions in this region foretell a continuing dialectic with the US that could either place us in an uncomfortable position between these two global titans, give us some tactical leverage that could invite support from both giants to our benefit, or both.

We should all wish for diplomatic strategies from this and future Bahamian governments that will lead us to navigate the continuing rivalry between the US and China for our nation’s benefit.

It might just be the most important challenge facing our present and future leaders.

Meanwhile, back in Washington, Trump is, well, carrying on being Trump. He hosted a gala dinner at the White House this week to celebrate the first visit to Washington since his first term in 2018 of Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman, colloquially known as ‘MBS.’

For many years, observers have pored over the guest lists for such glitzy state visits for clues about who’s on the rise in the US president’s favour. There’s not much mystery on that score this time. Some of the guests included the leaders of Qualcomm; General Motors; Bechtel worldwide construction giant; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals; Open AI; Apple; General Electric Aerospace; Dell Computer Technologies; Ford Motor Company; Citigroup; Nvidia; Honeywell; IBM; Tesla; Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company; General Dynamics; Boeing; Cisco Systems; Goldman Sachs; Charles Schwab; Advanced Micro Devices; Lockheed Martin; Caterpillar; Northrop Grumman; Chevron, and Zoom. Oracle was represented by the founder’s son.

That must be one of the most impressive gatherings of American tycoons ever from the worlds of tech, automotive, financial services, military/industrial complex, big pharma, and oil. This is a collection of oligarchs that comprehensively surpasses any group Vladimir Putin could ever dream of.

There has been and will long continue to be intense speculation over the relationship between Trump as the unchallenged head of the US government and this group of industry titans whose companies must collectively represent a net worth that exceeds the gross domestic product of almost every nation on earth.

Who needs whom more?

With Trump’s control of the mighty, diversified engine that is the US government--especially its military and law enforcement components--seemingly unchallenged, at least for now, it’s tempting to give the edge to the American chief executive.

One wonders what goes on in the minds of such individuals during occasions such as the Saudi state dinner. Or in the minds of the American generals and admirals summoned from around the world to a session with Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth in Virginia not long ago.

Do they figure that Trump will be gone and off the world stage soon enough in the long arc of their careers or the business development histories of their corporations? Are they seduced by the access and dazzling business and career prospects dangled before them if only they will bow down and comply with the president’s whims?

Do they wonder what the US might look like in three years if they, collectively and individually, fail to stand up for what they believe is right for their country? It’s reasonable to imagine that each of these luminaries must be deeply conflicted, no matter their politics or economic situation.

This morning, Trump is doubtless revelling in what appears to be a major diplomatic success, as the UN Security Council has endorsed a Gaza peace and development plan, with Russia and China abstaining. Government leaders within and outside the Middle East are no doubt wondering if Trump has somehow uncovered the beginnings of a solution to the world’s most obdurately vexing international problem.

At the same time, however, the overwhelming Congressional approval of legislation requiring the release of the ‘Epstein papers’ appears to threaten Trump’s political hegemony just as he may be solidifying his leadership credentials in other areas of the world order.

What a devilishly complex, unpredictable, iconoclastic, and yet possibly positively transformative figure this president continues to be!