On January 3, 2026, US forces captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. They cited a new “Donroe Doctrine” as justification. This policy updates the 1823 Monroe Doctrine. It asserts US primacy in the Western Hemisphere to exclude foreign adversaries. Legally, this framework mirrors the 15th-century “Doctrine of Discovery.” That doctrine granted European powers title to land based on superior “civilization” and religious authority. Both doctrines rely on the premise that one dominant power holds the ultimate right to determine sovereignty over a specific region. This analysis examines the legal lineage from Papal Bulls to the current US intervention in Caracas.
The United States has asserted a unilateral right to remove the head of a sovereign nation. It grounds the action in a modernized interpretation of hemispheric security. The January 3 extraction of Nicolás Maduro establishes the “Donroe Doctrine” (a blend of the Monroe Doctrine and executive prerogative) as the operative legal framework for US policy in Latin America. This move signals that the US views the Western Hemisphere not just as a zone of influence. It views the region as a jurisdiction where its security interests supersede local sovereignty.
The arrest of a sitting head of state is a rare escalation in international law. By explicitly referencing the Monroe Doctrine, the administration is not just conducting a police action. It is reviving a 200-year-old claim to regional dominance. Understanding the legal roots of this claim is necessary for predicting future US interventions in the region.
What is the legal foundation of the Doctrine of Discovery?
The Doctrine of Discovery originated in 15th-century Papal Bulls (specifically Inter Caetera (May 4, 1493). It established a religious and legal justification for European domination of the “New World.” The core tenets were:
-
Christian Primacy: Christian nations held superior title to land over non-Christian or “heathen” inhabitants.
-
Exclusive Title: The first European nation to “discover” land held the sole right to buy it from indigenous peoples. This excluded other European powers.
-
Diminished Sovereignty: Indigenous nations retained occupancy rights. However, they lost full sovereignty and the right to sell land to anyone but the “discovering” power.
This was not just church theory. It became US law. In the 1823 Supreme Court case Johnson v. M’Intosh, Chief Justice John Marshall codified this doctrine. He ruled that the “discovery” of America by Europeans gave the US government the ultimate title to the land. This reduced Native American tribes to “domestic dependent nations.”
How does the Monroe Doctrine relate to the Doctrine of Discovery?
The Monroe Doctrine (1823) was the geopolitical successor to the Doctrine of Discovery. The Doctrine of Discovery managed competition between European powers based on religious authority. The Monroe Doctrine managed competition based on republican authority.
-
Exclusion of Outsiders: The Papal Bulls excluded rival nations from claimed lands. Monroe excluded European monarchies from the Western Hemisphere.
-
Unilateral Jurisdiction: The US declared itself the protector of the hemisphere. This implied that it (and only it) had the right to intervene in the affairs of its neighbors to prevent “foreign” meddling.
-
The Roosevelt Corollary (1904): This addition explicitly claimed the US right to exercise “international police power” in Latin America. It effectively treated the region as a protectorate. This mimics the “dependent nations” status of tribes under Johnson v. M’Intosh.
What constitutes the ‘Donroe Doctrine’ in Venezuela?
The “Donroe Doctrine” functions as a modern “Trump Corollary.” It redefines the threat from “European colonization” to “foreign adversarial influence” (specifically China, Russia, and Iran) and “criminal regimes.”
-
The Operation: US forces conducted a raid to extract Maduro and his wife, an attorney who had represented his Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez. They transported them to New York to face narco-terrorism charges.
-
The Justification: The administration argues that a “criminal enterprise” running a state forfeits its sovereignty. The presence of non-hemispheric actors like Russian military advisors violates the US sphere of influence.
-
The Precedent: This moves beyond sanctions. It asserts the US right to physically remove a leader who threatens regional stability. It bypasses the UN Security Council and relies solely on US domestic law and hemispheric primacy.
Is the ‘Donroe Doctrine’ a ‘redo’ of the Doctrine of Discovery?
Yes. Both doctrines rely on a hierarchy of sovereignty where one power holds “ultimate title.”
-
Then: The Doctrine of Discovery claimed that “civilized” Christian nations had a right to dominate “uncivilized” non-Christians.
-
Now: The Donroe Doctrine implies that “democratic” or US-aligned nations have a right to intervene in “rogue” or “criminal” states. In both cases, the dominant power defines the criteria for legitimacy. The “Donroe” framework treats Latin American sovereignty as conditional. It is valid only so long as it aligns with US security interests and excludes US rivals. It is a reassertion of the “Right of Discovery.” The US claims the Western Hemisphere as its exclusive domain where its rules supervene local law.
What happens next?
-
Legal Proceedings: Maduro faces trial in the Southern District of New York. Expect his defense to claim sovereign immunity. The courts must weigh this against the “narco-terrorism” exception.
-
Regional Reaction: Allies like Argentina have celebrated the move. Rivals will likely increase asymmetric attacks.
-
Oil Markets: US energy companies are expected to enter Venezuela to “stabilize” production. Legal battles over asset ownership (CITGO vs. PDVSA) will intensify.
Sources
-
“Discovery doctrine.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 05 Jan. 2026.
-
“How the Monroe Doctrine factors into the U.S. arrest of Venezuela’s Maduro.” PBS NewsHour, 06 Jan. 2026.
-
“Monroe to Donroe: A ‘dead’ doctrine’s revival for current operations.” Military Times, 05 Jan. 2026.
-
“U.S. Action in Venezuela and Its Strategic Implications.” ClearanceJobs, 05 Jan. 2026.
-
“Venezuelans Have a Right to Regain Their Freedom.” Cato Institute, 25 Oct. 2024.
Like, Share, and Subscribe Stay ahead of the headlines. Subscribe to ReligiousLiberty.TV for breaking news, legal analysis, and exclusive case updates that the mainstream media often misses. Subscribers get access to breaking news and case information.
Disclaimers This article was assisted by AI. This does not constitute legal advice. Readers are encouraged to talk to licensed attorneys about their particular situations.
Tags Venezuela, Monroe Doctrine, Doctrine of Discovery, International Law, Nicolas Maduro