Cuban historian at Sao Paulo Forum warns about two centuries of the Monroe Doctrine

The XXVI Meeting of the Sao Paulo Forum, which is closing its curtains, reactivated alerts by learning about aspects of the Monroe Doctrine, two centuries after its departure as a narrative of U.S. interventions.

“In December 1823, President James Monroe announced in a message to Congress the doctrine that would define the essence of U.S. foreign policy towards Latin America and the Caribbean, summarized in the idea “America for the Americans,” said Cuban historian Elier Ramirez, deputy director of the Fidel Castro Center.

This principle, he pointed out, justified the rejection of any new European attempt to interfere or extend its system of government to the American continent, as a danger to the “peace and security” of the North American nation, concealing its expansionist and hegemonic interests, particularly at that time towards Cuba and Mexico”.

According to Ramirez, the Monroe Doctrine served Washington to declare itself unilaterally and as if it were a divine right, protector of the American continent, letting the rest of the world know where its zone of influence, expansion and predominance resided.

In the 26th edition of the mechanism of coordination of progressive forces of the region, he referred to how this theory would have numerous updates and corollaries from North American governments, and was created only to be defined, interpreted and applied at the convenience of the United States.

He considered that “it is very illustrative in today’s light, when we continue to see the Yankee obsession in relation to Cuba, that in the context of the proclamation of the Monroe Doctrine, the interests of U.S. domination over Cuba were especially gravitating”.

The doctrine was also complemented by the so-called theory of the Ripe Fruit, formulated by John Quincy Adams in 1823, in which Cuba was compared to a fruit.

Metaphorically, Ramirez pointed out that just as there were laws of physical gravitation, there were laws of politics and, for such reasons, there was no other destiny for Cuba than to fall into U.S. hands, it was only necessary to wait for the right moment for that fruit to be ripe in order to fulfill that inevitable end.

“The resistance and achievements of the Cuban Revolution, its example of independence and absolute sovereignty at the very gates of the U.S. empire, was an inadmissible reality for the true hegemonic purposes under which the Monroe Doctrine was inspired,” said the historian.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *