December 2, 2023 marked 200 years since US President James Monroe’s famous words to Congress: “America for the Americans”. To remember that anniversary, the Network in Defense of Humanity (REDH) organized an international forum “Bolivar versus Monroe, against imperialism, fascism and neocolonialism, within the framework of 200 years of anti-imperialism”, in Caracas, Venezuela, from November 30 to December 2, 2023.
Over the three days of the conference, intellectuals and politicians from all over the continent spoke about the legacy of the Monroe Doctrine today and the ongoing struggle against US imperialism. Many speakers highlighted the global movement against Israel’s genocide in Gaza as a central element in today’s struggle against imperialism.
Bolívar vs. Monroe
In the opening panel of the conference, Venezuelan historian Pedro Calzadilla contrasted the Bolivarian and Monroe doctrines in their origins. The Monroe doctrine was a direct response to the formation of a liberated “Gran Colombia” led by Bolivar (1783 – 1830). They were two projects, two models of country and republic, of continent, of humanity, which have remained opposed in the last 200 years of history,” said Calzadilla.
There were numerous historical notes on the origins of the conflict between Bolivarianism and Monroism. The integrationist and geopolitical project promoted by Francisco Miranda, for whom since 1788 had already promoted the idea of the independence of the Spanish-American colonies, was inseparable from the idea of integration. He proposed that once independence was achieved, the creation of a unified nation, a single independent Spanish-American state, to be called Colombia, should be undertaken.
James Monroe, by then US ambassador to France and Great Britain, warned his government about Miranda’s plans: “We cannot allow General Miranda to develop a vast nation on the American continent (…)”.[1]
When Bolivar met Miranda in London in 1810, Bolivar understood that political independence alone was not enough to guarantee the well-being of the South American nations; he understood that it was essential to create great States that could participate in the international concert on equal terms with the great powers.
But in contrast to the Colombia project with its geopolitical strategy of integration, welfare and emancipation, summarized in the slogan “South America for the South Americans”, the United States appears with its geopolitical plan of hegemony, expansion and interference summarized in the sentence “all America for the Americans”. Thus, it could be said that the Monroe Doctrine is, to a large extent, the geopolitical response of the United States to the plans of liberation, integration and prosperity that Bolivar as president of the Republic of Colombia raised.[2]
Chilean mayor and communist Daniel Jadue pointed out that both the Monroe Doctrine and Bolivarianism emerged during the rise of capitalism. The Monroe doctrine translates the tendency to monopoly, which starts from the national state as a superstructure in capitalism. Bolivar countered this tendency with a call for unity and integration among the countries of the continent.
The construction of US supremacy
The young American republic of the “13 colonies”, in 1776 a narrow strip on the east coast of the North American continent, soon began its territorial expansion. In 1803 it bought Louisiana from France. This was followed by the purchase of Florida from Spain in 1821. In the following years it annexed most of what was then Mexico. First Texas (1836), then the territories that would later become California, New Mexico, Arizona and Nevada (1848).
Monroe Doctrine was expanded in 1845 with the idea of Manifest Destiny, an ideology based on the absolute supremacy of white Americans and their consequent right to subjugate all “inferior” peoples. Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez pointed out that the southern states, which used to belong to Mexico, today account for 25% of the US GDP, equivalent in size to 4.5 times the GDP of present-day Mexico.
Rafael Correa explained that, at the beginning of the 20th century, the United States continued to insist on its right to hegemony, through President Theodore Roosevelt’s statement, which said, in summary, the following: “if American interests are in danger in a Latin American country, because that country has behaved badly (…) the United States has the right to invade it”.
The Monroe Doctrine has been complemented and reinforced by other concepts over the years. It is still determined to dominate the continent politically and economically. Salvadoran lawyer and former FMLN guerrilla commander Nidia Díaz and Venezuelan historian Humberto González summarize the military interventions, coups d’état and dictatorships organized by the United States since 1823. They include more than 180 troop landings and more than 34 direct military interventions.[3]
Professor Steve Elmer (USA) pointed out that, although Democrat John Kerry claimed in 2013 that his party had renounced the Monroe Doctrine, there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats in that regard. Today, it is NATO that is being used as an instrument of domination by the US.
Chávez and Latin American unity
When Hugo Chávez became president of Venezuela in February 1999, he inherited a country with a population completely impoverished by decades of neocolonialism and neoliberalism. He wanted to change that situation and did so by returning to the ideas of Bolívar and taking measures to the detriment of the exploiters, read: the US multinationals. Sergio Rodríguez Gelfenstein (Venezuela) developed it in his contribution how this in turn provoked imperialist aggression.[4]
In the year 2000, a few months after the arrival of Hugo Chávez to the presidency, a commission of ultra-conservative US experts elaborated version 4 of the Santa Fe documents. These documents, 1-4, provided a basis for imperialist intervention, explained in more detail at the forum by Argentine lawyer Claudia Rocca.
Santa Fe 4 was clearly intended to curb the integrationist impulse of President Hugo Chávez, under the accusation that “[Chávez] seeks, relying on Bolivarianism, the formation of a Gran Colombia (Venezuela, Colombia, Panama and Ecuador), probably as a socialist republic”.
Santa Fe 4 was followed by the 2002 coup d’état against Chávez and the lockout at the end of the same year, which set the stage for a succession of continuous aggression by the United States. The most notorious attempt for domination was the US-led proposal in 2005 for an economic free trade area in the Americas, with the acronym ALCA in Spanish.
But the ALCA was buried that same year under the leadership of Hugo Chavez at the IV Summit of the Americas (excluding Cuba) in Mar del Plata, Argentina. Meanwhile, as an alternative, Chavez had conceived a Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, with the acronym ALBA, alba means the dawn in Spanish, based on exchange between countries and mutual solidarity.
Over the years, Chávez’s Bolivarian integrationism had been sustained by an anti-imperialist vision, which permeated his work of building Latin American and Caribbean alliances. When he defined the objectives of the nascent Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in 2011, he declared that it should be “a protective shield against interference (…) even a defensive wall against imperial madness”.
He also conceived CELAC as “the most important project of political, economic, cultural and social unity in our contemporary history”. Any hint of acceptance of the Monroe Doctrine and its influence as the basis for the integration project in the region was thus eliminated forever.
On March 8, 2015, President Barack Obama signed an executive order declaring Venezuela an “exceptional and extraordinary threat” to the national security of the United States.
This created a legal basis to launch a permanent process of aggression against Venezuela that has not stopped to this day. This decree was renewed annually under the administrations of Donald Trump and Joe Biden. The ghost of the Monroe Doctrine and Pan-Americanism continues to haunt Bolivar’s homeland. Two hundred years later, the enemy seems to remain the same.
Battle of ideas
The Venezuelan Minister of Defense, Vladimir Padrino López, stressed the need for the battle of ideas: “Ideas create a counterforce against the coercion exercised today by imperialism. Ideas are a force that generates emotion and movement. Today they have become a force that can confront the Monroe Doctrine.”
Padrino López also highlighted the work of Hugo Chávez in the promotion of the doctrine of Bolivarianism against imperialism: “He put Bolivarianism and anti-imperialism at the center of the movement of struggle against imperialism. This is reflected in the Venezuelan Constitution, but also in the radical option for a Bolivarian and anti-imperialist army. The key is to sensibilize both the population and the army. It is a first step to overcome Monroism.”
Palestine and imperialist logic
The second day of the forum began with the reading of a declaration[5] of the Network in Defense of Humanity on the genocide of the Palestinian people. It was presented by REDH international coordinator Sergio Arria (Venezuela) and read by Irene León and Paula Klachko, respective coordinators of the Ecuadorian and Argentinean chapters of REDH.
The REDH as a whole was represented on the podium by founding members Carmen Bohórquez (Venezuela) and Héctor Díaz Polanco (Mexico), coordinator of the Cuban chapter José Ernesto Novaez and secretary Ariana López, by João Pedro Stedile of Brazil and Daniel Jadue of Chile, and by the coordinators of the newly created chapters of Catalonia and Belgium, Isabel Chacón and Katrien Demuynck.
The declaration is a denunciation of the 75 years of occupation and colonization of Palestine led by Zionism. It highlights the hidden geostrategic interests behind the conflict, especially for the United States and the West. In the declaration, the REDH calls for the severance of diplomatic relations and other ties with Israel as a sign of rejection of genocide.
The REDH has also demanded that the UN Security Council address the demand for a permanent ceasefire and an end to the occupation. REDH stresses that the media must assume the responsibility to provide unbiased information without criminalizing the right to resistance, which is a right of nations. Finally, in defense of humanity, the REDH calls for greater solidarity with the Palestinian people.
The world is shifting, resistance is the order of the day.
The Bolivar versus Monroe Forum did not limit itself to noting the persistence of imperialism. It also outlined paths of resistance.
Daniel Jadue advocated not to discard the old recipes of the left, but to study and update them. Humberto González of Venezuela cited the previous defeats of imperialism in Cuba, Vietnam and Afghanistan. They can be arrogant and strong, but not invincible. Cenen Aguilar from Panama pointed out that the world order is changing. Although the US bombed and militarily invaded Panama in 1989, 10 years later the US flag was lowered at the local Southern Command base.
Jorge Elías Caro from Colombia highlighted the strength of the Indigenous Latin American population. With 45 million, they represent 14% of the population. They preserve their languages and cultures. Despite 200 years of imperialism, they do not allow themselves to be dominated. They are a beacon of resistance.
João Stedile of the Landless Rural Workers’ Movement of Brazil (MST) stated that imperialism is in decline due to the insoluble crisis of capitalism. He pointed out that reformism is no longer the order of the day, it is time for structural change. We must learn from history that the strength of the struggle lies in the masses. If we manage to organize and politically educate people at the grassroots, we will be able to get capitalism out.
Irene León from REDH Ecuador, highlighted ALBA’s trajectory as an anti-systemic initiative. “They are the minority, we are more and we can change things”. Finally, Fernando Buen Abad of REDH Mexico, highlighted “We need a revolution within communication in terms of content, starting from the struggle of the peoples. In this way we will be able to initiate a great wave of awareness.”
Katrien Demuynck is the coordinator of the Network in Defense of Humanity – Belgian chapter.
Isabel Chacón is a member of the Network in Defense of Humanity Catalonia- Països Catalans chapter and part of the Candidatura d’Unitat Popular (CUP).
—–
[1] José Gregorio Linares, “Bolivarianismo versus Monroísmo. Contrapunteo entre la dignidad y el Injerencismo”, Centro de Estudios Simón Bolívar, 2020, pp. 19-27.
[2] Ídem, pág. 27.
[3] An incomplete review is available at https://www.granma.cu/mundo/2019-04-30/la-historia-de-las-intervenciones-de-estados-unidos-en-america-latina-y-el-caribe-30-04-2019-16-04-08
