Justification for Interference? The Role of the Monroe Doctrine in the Stigmatization and Legitimation of Intervention in the US Foreign Policy in the 19th and Early 20th Centuries

Despite the growing academic attention to the problem of interference in internal affairs, rhetorical techniques the state uses to legitimize interventions in the eyes of foreign counterparties, remain somewhat understudied in the Russian IR studies. In this regard, the case of the Monroe Doctrine, a landmark ideological construct in the history of international relations and US foreign policy, provides a unique framework for an in-depth study of the practices of legitimization and stigmatization of interventions. The paper examines the role of the doctrine in denouncing the interference of European powers in the domestic affairs of Latin American countries and justifying US actions in the region. The author outlines a set of issues related to legitimizing, both externally and internally, the actions of the state in the international arena. It is shown that the appeal to national interests suitable for solving the problems of domestic political legitimization, turns out to be ineffective in justifying interventions in the eyes of the international community and therefore gives way to references to established traditions and historical narratives. The paper examines the historical background of the 1823 presidential address and the ways how the US foreign policy establishment appealed to it later on, both to promote the idea of the inadmissibility of European interference in the affairs of the countries of the Western Hemisphere, and, subsequently, to justify American interventionism. Special attention is paid to the so-called Roosevelt Corollary, since it allows one to better understand the specifics of the US leaders’ perception of the Monroe Doctrine and to separate them from the distortions and stereotypes formed during the ensuing public debates and uncritically replicated in many academic studies. The author concludes that, though the Monroe Doctrine is regarded as a cornerstone of US foreign policy, in fact it played a limited role in both diplomatic justification and stigmatization of interventions. In this regard, it is more appropriate to consider it as a rhetorical asset rather than a strict guiding principle. In general, the case of the Monroe Doctrine reveals the situational conditionality of the practices legitimizing interventions, resulting in their limited persuasiveness. The latter seems to be almost inevitable given the constitutive importance of the institution of sovereignty for the maintenance of international society.

1. Bartenev V.I. 2018. Vmeshatel’stvo vo vnutrennie dela: spor o definitsii [Intervention in the domestic affairs: Questioning definitions]. Lomonosov World Politics Journal, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 79–108. (In Russ.)

2. Bolkhovitinov N.N. 1959. Doktrina Monro (proiskhozhdenie i kharakter) [Monroe Doctrine (Origins and character)]. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo IMO Publ. (In Russ.)

3. Veber M. 1990. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Selected writings]. Moscow, Progress Publ. (In Russ.)

4. Ivkina L.A. 2015. Pod dulom oruzhiya: kak Kube byla navyazana ‘popravka Platta’ (1901–1902) [Under the gun of weapons: How the Platt Amendment was imposed on Cuba (1901–1902)]. Latinoamerikanskii istoricheskii al’manakh, no. 15, pp. 253–269. (In Russ.)

5. Istomin I.A. 2023. Inostrannoe vmeshatel’stvo vo vnutrennie dela: problematizatsiya sushchnostno neopredelimogo kontsepta [Foreign interference in internal affairs: Deconstruction of an essentially indeterminate concept]. Polis. Political Studies, no. 2, pp. 120–137. DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2023.02.09. (In Russ.)

6. Iserov A.A. 2011. SShA i bor’ba Latinskoi Ameriki za nezavisimost’, 1815–1830 [USA and Latin America’s struggle for independence, 1815–1830]. Moscow, Universitet Dmitriya Pozharskogo Publ. (In Russ.)

7. Karpovich O.G., Manoilo A.V. 2015. Tsvetnye revolyutsii. Teoriya i praktika demontazha sovremennykh politicheskikh rezhimov [Colour revolutions. Theory and practice of dismantling modern political regimes]. Moscow, YuNITI-DANA, Zakon i parvo Publ. (In Russ.)

8. Kolmogorova A.V. 2018. Legitimatsiya kak sotsiopoliticheskii fenomen i ob’’ekt diskurs-analiza [Legitimation as a societal phenomenon and as an object of discourse analysis]. Political Linguistics, no. 1 (67), pp. 33–40. DOI: 10.26170/pl18-01-03. (In Russ.)

9. Martens F.F. 2008. Sovremennoe mezhdunarodnoe pravo tsivilizovannykh narodov [Contemporary international law of civilized peoples]. In 2 vols. Vol. 1. Moscow, Zertsalo Publ. (In Russ.)

10. Martynov B.F. 2022. Doktrina Monro kak volya i predstavlenie Soedinennykh Shtatov Ameriki [The Monroe Doctrine as the will and representation of the United States of America]. The International Affairs, no. 11, pp. 46–57. (In Russ.)

11. Mikhalev Yu.A., Zvoshchik E.V. 2018. Znachenie doktriny Monro v formirovanii amerikanskoi strategicheskoi kul’tury [The importance of the Monroe Doctrine in the formation of the American strategic culture]. Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities, no. 1 (794), pp. 52–59. (In Russ.)

12. Pechatnov V.O., Manykin A.S. 2012. Istoriya vneshnei politiki SShA [History of US foreign policy]. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya Publ. (In Russ.)

13. Piresh M.K., Nasimentu L.G. 2020. Doktrina Monro 2.0 i trekhstoronnie otnosheniya SShA, Kitaya i Latinskoi Ameriki [The Monroe Doctrine 2.0 and U.S. — China — Latin America trilateral relations]. International Organisations Research Journal, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 202–222. DOI: 10.17323/1996-7845-2020-03-08. (In Russ.)

14. Troyanovskaya M.O. 2010. Diskussii po voprosam vneshnei politiki v SShA (1775−1823) [Discussing foreign policy in the United States (1775–1823)]. Moscow, Ves’ mir Publ. (In Russ.)

15. Troyanovskaya M.O. 2014. Doktrina Monro v sovremennykh issledovaniyakh [The Monroe Doctrine in contemporary scholarship]. Istoriya: Elektronnyi nauchno-obrazovatel’nyi zhurnal, no. 7, pp. 24. (In Russ.)

16. Troyanskii M.G., Karpovich O.G. 2020. Politika SShA v Latinskoi Amerike: doktrina Monro 3.0 [US policy in Latin America: Monroe Doctrine 3.0]. Vestnik Diplomaticheskoi akademii MID Rossii. Rossiya i mir, no. 2 (24), pp. 176–188. (In Russ.)

17. Shikhov V.A. 2017. Doktrina Monro: soderzhanie i formirovanie printsipov [Monro Doctrine: Content and formation of principles]. Mezhdunarodnyi nauchno-issledovatel’skii zhurnal, no. 12–2 (66), pp. 120–123. DOI: 10.23670/IRJ.2017.66.034. (In Russ.)

18. Aloupi N. 2015. The right to non-intervention and non-interference. Cambridge International Law Journal, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 566–587. DOI: 10.7574/cjicl.04.03.566.

19. Ammon H. 1981. The Monroe Doctrine: Domestic politics or national decision? Diplomatic History, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 53–70.

20. Bailey T.A. 1933. The Lodge corollary to the Monroe Doctrine. Political Science Quarterly, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 220–239. DOI: 10.2307/2143347.

21. Bancroft F. 1896. The French in Mexico and the Monroe Doctrine. Political Science Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 30–43. DOI: 10.2307/2139600.

22. Beetham D. 1991. The legitimation of power. Basingstoke, London, Macmillan Education Ltd.

23. Bryne A. 2020. The Monroe Doctrine and United States national security in the early twentieth century. Cham, Palgrave Macmillan.

24. Bull H. 1977. The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics. New York, Columbia University Press.

25. Buzan B. 2004. From international to world society? English school theory and the social structure of globalisation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

26. Carr E.H. 1946. The twenty years’ crisis 1919–1939. An introduction to the study of international relations. London, Macmillan.

27. Clark I. 2005. Legitimacy in international society. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

28. Correa J.S. 2014. Colombia y la Doctrina Monroe: El caso del Ferrocarril de Panamá y las intervenciones estadounidenses en el istmo. Memorias: Revista Digital de Historia y Arqueologia Desde el Caribe, vol. 2, no. 22, pp. 107–132.

29. Damrosch L.F. 1989. Politics across borders: Nonintervention and non-forcible influence over domestic affairs. American Journal of International Law, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 1–50. DOI: 10.2307/2202789.

30. De Armond L. 1951. Justo Sierra O’Reilly and Yucatecan-United States Relations, 1847–1848. The Hispanic American Historical Review, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 420–436.

31. Finnemore M. 2004. The purpose of intervention: Changing beliefs about the use of force. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.

32. Fitz C. 2023. The Monroe Doctrine and the indigenous Americas. Diplomatic History. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/dh/advance-article-pdf/doi/10.1093/dh/dhad048/50928148/dhad048.pdf?guestAccessKey=95ad61f3-4a44-4a0d-9eb7-7c0cd4c1b9b2 (accessed: 25.09.2023). DOI: 10.1093/dh/dhad048.

33. Fry J.A. 2019. Lincoln, Seward, and US foreign relations in the Civil War era. Lexington, University Press of Kentucky.

34. Gilderhus M.T. 2006. The Monroe Doctrine: Meanings and implications. Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 5–16. DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-5705.2006.00282.x.

35. Gobat M. 2005. Confronting the American dream: Nicaragua under US imperial rule. Durham, Duke University Press.

36. Gonzalez D.C. 2005. La politica exterior mexicana ante la nueva doctrina Monroe, 1904–1907. Mexico, Instituto Mora.

37. Grandin G. 2006. Empire’s workshop: Latin America, the United States, and the rise of the new imperialism. New York, Henry Holt and Company.

38. Guzmán R.M. 1982. La Doctrina Monroe, el destino manifiesto y la expansión de Estados Unidos sobre América Latina. El caso de México. Revista Estudios, no. 4, pp. 117–141.

39. Hurd I. 1999. Legitimacy and authority in international politics. International Organization, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 379–408. DOI: 10.1162/002081899550913.

40. Jeffery R. 2005. Tradition as invention: The ‘traditions tradition’ and the history of ideas in international relations. Millennium, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 57–84. DOI: 10.1177/03058298050340011101.

41. Kavanagh J. et al. 2019. Characteristics of successful U.S. military interventions. Santa Monica, RAND Corporation. Available at: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR3000/RR3062/RAND_RR3062.pdf (accessed: 15.09.2023).

42. Kinzer S. 2007. Overthrow: America’s century of regime change from Hawaii to Iraq. New York, Times Books.

43. Kissinger H. 2015. World order. New York, Penguin Books.

44. Klafter C.E. 1984. United States involvement in the Falkland Islands crisis of 1831–1833. Journal of the Early Republic, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 395–420.

45. Krasner S.D. 1999. Sovereignty: Organized hypocrisy. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

46. Kushi S., Toft M.D. 2023. Introducing the military intervention project: A new dataset on US military interventions, 1776–2019. Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 752–779.

47. LaFeber W. 1986. The evolution of the Monroe Doctrine from Monroe to Reagan. In: Gardner L.C. (ed.). Redefining the past: Essays in diplomatic history in honor of William Appleman Williams. Corvallis, Oregon State University Press, pp. 121–142.

48. LaFeber W. 1963. The new empire: An interpretation of American expansion, 1860–1898. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.

49. Lake D.A. 2011. Hierarchy in international relations. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.

50. Larson D.W., Shevchenko A. 2019. Quest for status: Chinese and Russian foreign policy. New Haven, Yale University Press.

51. Meyer H.H.B. (ed.). 1919. List of references on the Monroe Doctrine. Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office.

52. Logan J.A. 1961. No transfer: An American security principle. New Haven, Yale University Press.

53. Maass M. 2009. Catalyst for the Roosevelt corollary: Arbitrating the 1902–1903 Venezuela crisis and its impact on the development of the Roosevelt corollary to the Monroe Doctrine. Diplomacy & Statecraft, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 383–402. DOI: 10.1080/09592290903293738.

54. Maisch C.J. 2000. The Falkland/Malvinas Islands clash of 1831–32: US and British diplomacy in the South Atlantic. Diplomatic History, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 185–209.

55. Manning W.R. et al. 1914. Statements, interpretations, and applications of the Monroe Doctrine and of more or less allied doctrines, from 1823 to 1845. Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at its annual meeting (1907–1917), vol. 8, pp. 34–118.

56. Mariano M. 2015. Identity, alterity, and the ‘growing plant’ of Monroeism in US foreign policy ideology. In: Cullinane M.P., Ryan D. (eds.). US foreign policy and the other. Oxford, New York, Berghahn Books, pp. 58–78.

57. Mariano M. 2013. L’America nell’ ‘Occidente’. Storia della dottrina Monroe, 1823–1963. Roma, Carocci editore.

58. May E.R. 1975. The making of the Monroe Doctrine. Cambridge, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

59. McGregor S. 2021. Seward’s Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, 1863–1866. The International History Review, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 981–1000. DOI: 10.1080/07075332.2020.1856167.

60. McGuinness A. 2008. Path of empire: Panama and the California gold rush. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.

61. McPherson A.L. 2014. The invaded: How Latin Americans and their allies fought and ended US occupations. Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press.

62. Moore J.B. 1895. The Monroe Doctrine: Its origin and meaning. New York, Evening Post Publishing Company.

63. Moore J.B. 1896. The Monroe Doctrine. Political Science Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–29. DOI: 10.2307/2139599.

64. Munro D.G. 1964. Intervention and dollar diplomacy in the Caribbean, 1900–1921. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

65. Murphy G. 2005. Hemispheric imaginings: The Monroe Doctrine and narratives of US empire. Durham, Duke University Press.

66. Niemann H., Schillinger H. 2017. Contestation ‘all the way down’? The grammar of contestation in norm research. Review of International Studies, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 29–49. DOI: 10.1017/S0260210516000188.

67. Owen J.M. 2002. The foreign imposition of domestic institutions. International Organization, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 375–409. DOI: 10.1162/002081802320005513.

68. Parsons L.H. 2009. The birth of modern politics: Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, and the election of 1828. Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press.

69. Perkins D. 1963. A history of the Monroe Doctrine. Boston, Little, Brown.

70. Pocock J.G.A. 1968. Time, institutions and action: An essay on traditions and their understanding. In: King P., Parekh B.C. (eds.). Politics and experience: Essays presented to Professor Michael Oakeshott on the occasion of his retirement. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 209–238.

71. Putnam R.D. 1988. Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 427–460.

72. Renshon J. 2017. Fighting for status: Hierarchy and conflict in world politics. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

73. Risse T. 2000. ‘Let’s argue!’: Communicative action in world politics. International Organization, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 1–39. DOI: 10.1162/002081800551109.

74. Rossi C.R. 2019. Whiggish international law: Elihu Root, the Monroe Doctrine, and international law in the Americas. Leiden, Boston, Brill, Nijhoff.

75. Sánchez Padilla A. 2016. ¿En defensa de la Doctrina Monroe? Los desencuentros en América Latina entre España y Estados Unidos (1880–1890). Historia Crítica, no. 62, pp. 13–33. DOI: 10.7440/histcrit62.2016.01.

76. Sexton J. 2011. The Monroe Doctrine: Empire and nation in nineteenth-century America. New York, Hill and Wang.

77. Smith G. 1994. The last years of the Monroe Doctrine, 1945–1993. New York, Hill and Wang.

78. Paul T.V., Larson D.W., Wohlforth W.C. (eds.). 2014. Status in world politics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

79. Tatum E.H. 1936. The United States and Europe, 1815–1823: A study in the background of the Monroe Doctrine. Berkeley, University of California Press.

80. Teixeira C.G.P. 2014. Uma política para o continente-reinterpretando a Doutrina Monroe. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 115–132. DOI: 10.1590/0034-7329201400307.

81. Thompson J.M. 2015. Theodore Roosevelt and the politics of the Roose velt corollary. Diplomacy & Statecraft, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 571–590. DOI: 10.1080/09592296.2015.1096658.

82. State Department. 1965. The United States reaffirms the Monroe Doctrine. In: Dozer D.M. (ed.). The Monroe Doctrine: Its modern significance. New York, Knopf, рр. 185–187.

83. Valone S.J. 1995. ‘Weakness offers temptation’: William H. Seward and the reassertion of the Monroe Doctrine. Diplomatic History, vol. 19, no. 4, P. 583–599.

84. Veeser C. 2003. Inventing dollar diplomacy: The gilded-age origins of the Roosevelt corollary to the Monroe Doctrine. Diplomatic History, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 301–326. DOI: 10.1111/1467-7709.00355.

85. Vincent R.J. 2015. Nonintervention and international order. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

86. Weber C. 1995. Simulating sovereignty: Intervention, the state, and symbolic exchange. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

87. Wendt A. 1999. Social theory of international politics. Cambridge, New York, Cambridge University Press.

88. Whitaker A.P. 1954. The origin of the Western hemisphere idea. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 98, no. 5, pp. 323–326.

89. Wiener A. 2014. A theory of contestation. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer.

90. Williams J. 1996. Nothing succeeds like success? Legitimacy and international relations. In: Holden B. (ed.). The ethical dimensions of global change. London, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 40–67.