Foreign

“New Monroe Doctrine” never needed in today’s world

Published

4 months ago

January 26, 2026

By Huan Yuping, People’s Daily

A series of recent actions taken by the United States against Venezuela—from military strikes and forcible capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, to open declarations of intent to “run” Venezuela and gain control over its oil resources—have laid bare the underlying logic of domination and power politics that define the so-called “new Monroe Doctrine.”

These measures not only constitute a blatant violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty, but also challenge and undermine the international law and basic norms governing international relations enshrined in the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

The “new Monroe Doctrine” is by no means a novel concept. Rather, it represents the continuation and a dangerous escalation of the United States’ traditional hegemonic policy in the contemporary era.

An article published on the website of Spain’s El País observed, “By intervening in Venezuela, Washington is reviving the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine,” noting that the U.S. approach amounts to a “gunboat diplomacy 2.0.”

At the end of 2025, the White House released the 2025 National Security Strategy, explicitly stating: “After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland and our access to key geographies throughout the region.”

Recent actions, including military action against Venezuela, threats directed towards Latin American countries like Cuba, and overt territorial ambitions expressed toward Greenland, a Danish territory, have given the international community a clearer picture of the trajectory of U.S. policy and heightened concerns over the regional and global consequences that this “new Monroe Doctrine” may bring.

What exactly does the “new Monroe Doctrine” entail? The United States’ own words and deeds provide a stark answer.

Its objective is to be ensuring that the Western Hemisphere becomes what U.S. politicians have termed “our hemisphere,” subordinating territories, resources, and sea lanes of regional countries to U.S. interests, and aligning their domestic and foreign policies with the United States’ will.

The United States is discarding all pretenses and openly relying on brute-force methods, including military strikes, intimidation and coercion, economic pressure, and efforts to instigate regime change. Guided by doctrines prioritizing “might makes right” and “America First,” the United States demonstrates a willingness to pursue its self-serving interests with minimal restraint.

What will the “new Monroe Doctrine” bring to the region? History offers a clear warning.

“All the way back to 1823, James Monroe established the Monroe Doctrine. You are a part of it now, you are a part of that legacy.” A U.S. politician recently declared. This amounts to an open admission that today’s United States is inheriting and perpetuating a historical tradition of intervention and exploition that once caused immense suffering to the peoples of Latin America.

From seizing more than half of Mexico’s territory in 1848, to occupying Haiti with troops in 1915, to invading the Dominican Republic, Grenada, and Panama during the Cold War, the record is long and grim. As The Guardian has pointed out, “Almost every country in the region has experienced some form of U.S. intervention, overt or covert.”

Historically, Monroe Doctrine implementation reduced Latin America to a long-term “strategic backyard,” a “supplier of raw materials,” a “dumping ground for goods,” and a “cultural colony” of the United States. The development trajectories of Latin American countries were repeatedly disrupted, and their peoples endured extensive suffering.

As Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano revealed in his book Open Veins of Latin America, this pattern of “externalized development” remains a recurring script: the underground wealth of other nations must fuel the U.S. hegemony.

II.

When assessing the current situation, a U.S. scholar has asserted that Venezuela has become a springboard for the 21st-century Monroe Doctrine.

As the United States reasserts the Western Hemisphere as a foreign policy priority, Latin America and the Caribbean are likely to face potential disruptions to peace, stability, and development, with regional autonomy significantly constrained.

The United States has justified its increased military presence in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific as part of its efforts to combat “narco-terrorism,” yet its recent escalation to direct military action against Venezuela highlights a troubling pattern of manufacturing security crises in the region. Such interventions pose a significant threat to the Latin American people’s pursuit of peaceful lives. Through overt interference in the internal affairs of Latin American nations, the United States has intensified political divisions, creating serious risks to the region’s political stability.

By imposing asset seizures and tariffs, the United States is siphoning development resources from the entire region northward, depriving regional countries of their right to independent development and severely impacting local economies and livelihoods.

By stoking confrontation between so-called “pro-U.S.” and “autonomous” camps in the region, the United States undermines regional unity and self-reliance, obstructing regional integration eventually.

The harm caused by the “new Monroe Doctrine” extends far beyond Latin America. Following the U.S. military action against Venezuela, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that such actions had set a “dangerous precedent.”

At its core, the doctrine represents a fundamental clash between hegemony and justice, “spheres of influence” and sovereign equality, and unilateral dominance and mutual respect. It directly contradicts the international law and basic norms governing international relations, violates the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and the foundation of international relations, and threatens to undermine fairness and justice on a global scale.

When the UN Security Council convened an emergency meeting on the U.S. military action against Venezuela, U.S. politicians responded that “they didn’t care what the UN says,” bluntly exposing the United States’ contempt for the UN, for multilateralism, and for the international order.

Undermining international norms endangers all nations. Hegemony, by its nature, does not restrains itself. By openly placing brute force above justice, it breeds insecurity and instability across the world.

Indeed, the expansionist ambitions and predatory mindset now on display in the United States reflect a striking sense of being “out of sync with the times,” alarming and unsettling the global community.

Some analysts pointed out that the “new Monroe Doctrine” is not a revivial but a “dangerous escalation.” The Washington Post has warned that if such barbaric behavior becomes normalized, the consequences would be disastrous, with “might makes right” becoming the sole rule.

III.

The world does not need a “new Monroe Doctrine,” and history will inevitably consign it to the dustbin.

The UN Charter clearly states that “The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members,” and that “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the UN.”

In today’s international relations, sovereign equality is the prerequisite for peaceful coexistence, while the rule of international law is the fundamental safeguard and the backbone of fairness and justice. These most basic principles underpin the long-term peace and stability of the world and must be jointly upheld by the international community.

In response to the U.S. action against Venezuela and the rising “new Monroe Doctrine,” the strongest and broadest consensus within the international community is to defend the international law and basic norms governing international relations, and to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

Voices from around the world have noted that “the United States is willing to disregard long-established international legal principles to achieve its own goals,” that it “poses a serious threat to the international order established after World War II,” and that it has “effectively erased the very existence of international law.”

The “new Monroe Doctrine” and the global condemnation it has received act as a mirror, reflecting both the limits of hegemonic powers’ global expansion and their reckless use of localized force. It also underscores the ongoing shift toward a multipolar world and the democratization of international relations—along with the inevitable twists and turns along this path.

Temporary advantage lies in power, but lasting victory lies in justice. History moves forward, and justice will ultimately prevail over brute force. In the face of hegemony, the international community must firmly stand on the right side of history, jointly safeguard international fairness and justice, and ensure that righteousness prevails and the world remains upright and bright.

Foreign

Sanxingdui Museum transforms ancient relics into interactive experiences

Published

1 week ago

May 31, 2026

Our Reporter

By Song Haoxin, People’s Daily

What if museum visitors could truly interact with cultural relics rather than merely observe them through glass displays? At the Sanxingdui Museum in southwest China’s Sichuan province, a specially designed interactive hall is revolutionizing cultural engagement.

Within this 1,300-square-meter space, nearly every exhibit invites touch, operation, or participation. Visitors immerse themselves in installations inspired by the ancient Shu civilization, blending education with entertainment.

By trying on replicas of headwear on bronze statues discovered in Sanxingdui Ruins, for example, visitors can not only take photos of themselves but also learn about the symbolic meanings behind different headpieces.

Guests can don replicas of bronze statue headwear from the Sanxingdui Ruins, learning their symbolic meanings while capturing photos. Augmented reality allows dancing alongside virtual Sanxingdui figures for social media sharing. A creation zone even enables “time travel” to experience ancient bronze-casting and construction techniques.

These innovations transform traditional museum visits, offering deeper cultural understanding through hands-on interaction. “This hall emerged from extensive brainstorming,” explained Zhu Yarong, deputy director of the management committee of the Sanxingdui Ruins site.

“We’re transitioning from passive relic viewing to interactive engagement, bridging the gap between audiences and history.”

Previously, museum experiences were largely one-directional with limited engagement. Visitors viewed relics through display cases, usually stopping mainly to take photographs, with relatively limited forms of engagement. By liberating artifacts from display cases into interactive settings, Sanxingdui is pioneering a shift from didactic presentation to open cultural dialogue.

Traditional exhibition spaces remain popular, while digital innovations attract growing interest. A VR project employs digital twin technology to recreate 1:1 scale excavation sites — complete with protective shelters and cabins — placing visitors at the archaeological forefront.

Another project, Heaven and Earth Echoes — Sanxingdui Panoramic Sound and Vision Digital Art Theater, features an interactive panoramic LED dome with a diameter of 20 meters and a resolution approaching 16K. The massive dome creates a deeply immersive atmosphere. By waving digital torches in their hands, visitors can trigger sacred birds to circle above them across the dome, experiencing the ancient Shu civilization through an interplay of sound and imagery.

“The digital technology made me feel as if I were racing across the Mamu River. That sense of traveling through time was incredible,” said Hao Yong, a tourist from southwest China’s Chongqing municipality who came specifically to experience a virtual reality program.

From passive observation to active participation, Sanxingdui Museum continues introducing new interactive experiences that transform cultural relics into living carriers of dialogue and engagement, helping keep the sparks of Chinese civilization alive for new generations.

Foreign

A living testimony about MKA: The Aondoakaa that I know Written By Brahms Tor-Ikuan

Published

3 weeks ago

May 19, 2026

milcah

My people of Benue State,

I am not speaking to you today as a politician. I am speaking as a brother whose family was held up by Chief Mike Kaase Aondoakaa, MKA, when we had no one else to hold onto.

My elder brother, Verem Ukaa-Ikuan, was not just my blood. He was a very dear and close friend to Chief MKA. When my brother fell ill and was diagnosed with liver damage caused by poisoning, MKA didn’t treat it as someone else’s problem. He took it on as his own.

He worked closely with Verem during his time as Attorney General of the Federation, and when the sickness came, he moved immediately. Searches were conducted, and Apollo Hospital in India was earmarked for a liver transplant. Every travel arrangement was made personally by Chief MKA.

But we hit a wall. Verem was too weak to fly a long commercial flight. Only an air ambulance could get him to India alive. At that time, there was only one functional air ambulance in the entire country, owned by Julius Berger. It was completely out of reach for even the most high-profile citizens.

Chief MKA went all out. He did not give excuses. He did not delay. He used every connection and every ounce of influence he had to secure that air ambulance for my brother.

On the day it was secured, Barr. Terna Yaji, his Senior Special Assistant, called me a few minutes after 6pm. He told us to prepare Verem for departure and take him to Makurdi airport very early the following morning. I informed him, my brother passed on at exactly 6 o’clock a few minutes ago. I told Barr. Terna Yaji, and I saw a devastated MKA.

During the burial, Chief MKA was out of the country on national assignment. He was pained that he could not be there physically. His entire team, led by the late Onov Tyuulugh, represented him fully. And his message to us at the burial has never left me:

“If death were law, as the Attorney General, a law would have been made no matter what to ensure Verem will just not die but live forever.”

That is who Mike Kaase Aondoakaa is when nobody is watching. He does not abandon his people. He does not forget. He stood with our family then, and he has stood with us till date.

Now he is asking for the chance to govern Benue State.

Benue needs a governor with a heart like that. A governor who fights for you even when there’s no political gain. A governor who sees you as family, not as a vote.

I am standing with Chief Mike Kaase Aondoakaa for Governor of Benue State.
For compassion that moves to action.
For loyalty that does not fade.
For leadership that proves itself in the darkest hour.

Join me. Let us give Benue a leader who has already shown what he will do for us.

God bless Chief Mike Kaase Aondoakaa.
God bless Benue State.

Brahms Tor-Ikuan, a beneficiary of MKA’s benevolence writes from Makurdi

Foreign

China-U.S. relations cannot return to past, but can move toward better future

Published

3 weeks ago

May 16, 2026

Our Reporter

By Guo Jiping

At the invitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping, U.S. President Donald Trump will pay a state visit to China from May 13 to 15.

After many twists and turns, China-U.S. relations have arrived at a new historical juncture. The year 2026 carries special significance for both countries. China is embarking on its 15th Five-Year Plan period (2026-2030), while the United States celebrates its 250th anniversary.

Amidst increasing global uncertainty and volatility, the international community looks to Beijing, hopeful that this high-level engagement will offer clarity and stability for the future trajectory of China-U.S. relations.

Observers note that over the past decade, the relationship has weathered two significant periods of strain. The first began in 2018 with the U.S. initiation of trade tariffs against China. Stabilization was achieved only after extensive dialogue and complex interactions spanning several years. The second period of tension occurred more recently in 2025. Remarkably, the cycle from rising friction to renewed stability unfolded within just a few months this time.

The progression from years-long to months-long stabilization cycles, and from repetitive friction-dialogue patterns towards clearer strategic direction and consensus-building, reflects China’s consistent approach: readiness to negotiate combined with firm adherence to principles and clear boundaries. China’s demonstrated resilience has garnered international respect and created conditions conducive to resolving differences through dialogue.

Today, China-U.S. dialogue occurs on a more equitable basis. Communication is increasingly pragmatic, with clearer articulation of respective bottom lines. This resilience suggests the potential for a new, more stable chapter in the relationship.

Head-of-state diplomacy plays an irreplaceable strategic guiding role. Last year, when a wave of tariff tensions rattled the world, the two presidents steered China-U.S. economic and trade ties back on course.

Under the guidance of the consensus reached by the two presidents, the teams from both sides have so far held six rounds of consultations and are currently engaged in a new round of talks.

Since the meeting between the two heads of state in Busan last October, China-U.S. relations have generally maintained a stable and improving momentum — a trend widely welcomed by both peoples and the international community.

The strategic guidance provided by the two heads of state helps identify “dangerous reefs” ahead in China-U.S. relations. The Taiwan question is the most important and most sensitive issue at the very core of China-U.S. relations, and it concerns the political foundation of bilateral ties.

Xi has repeatedly elaborated China’s principled position on the Taiwan question to Trump, emphasizing that Taiwan is China’s territory, and China must safeguard its own sovereignty and territorial integrity, and will never allow Taiwan to be separated. Clearly defining principles and bottom lines is precisely the responsible approach needed to prevent serious risks in China-U.S. relations.

The aspiration of the Chinese and American business communities to deepen ties and cooperation has never changed. At present, more than 7,000 Chinese-funded enterprises operate in the United States, while about 80,000 American-invested enterprises are active in China.

These firm choices made at the forefront of the market clearly and powerfully demonstrate the true nature of China-U.S. economic and trade relations: mutual benefit and win-win cooperation.

As China enters the 15th Five-Year Plan period, its commitment to high-quality development and high-standard opening up will create broader incremental space for China-U.S. cooperation.

The will of the people stands as a profound and enduring force shaping the trajectory of China-U.S. relations. Whether at those pivotal moments when China and the United States seized every moment to break the ice, or when bilateral relations slid to a low ebb, the sincere aspiration of the two peoples for mutual understanding and friendship has never changed.

As exchanges deepen and produce tangible results, perceptions are improving positively. More Americans are actively participating in fostering people-to-people friendship, contributing greater rationality and constructive perspectives to the relationship.

In the face of profound changes unseen in a century, China and the United States, as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and the world’s two largest economies, shoulder even greater responsibilities. Promoting global development, safeguarding peace and security, and improving global governance all require cooperation between the two countries.

This year, China will host the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting and the U.S. will host the G20 Summit. Whether the two sides can demonstrate the vision and responsibility expected of major countries, and deliver more tangible benefits to the world, bears directly on the well-being of both peoples and the future of humanity.

China-U.S. relations cannot return to the past, but they can move toward a better future. Both sides should proceed from a sense of responsibility to history, to the people, and to the world, and explore ways to build a strategic, constructive, and stable China-U.S. relationship featuring mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation.