– Andrey Rezchikov, Vzglyad –
The era ushered in with Donald Trump’s presidency has been dubbed the “Donro Doctrine.” The term echoes the “Monroe Doctrine,” which established U.S. leadership in the Western Hemisphere nearly 200 years ago. In the American press, the “Donro Doctrine” refers to Trump’s ambitions concerning Canada, Greenland and the Panama Canal. Experts believe Russia should take note of this new doctrine, as it signals a fundamental shift in the principles of geopolitics.
This week, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov agreed that the era of national populism and expansionism brought about by Trump’s presidency could indeed be called the “Donro Doctrine.” According to him, Trump’s rise to power marked the beginning of a new chapter in U.S. foreign policy.
Ryabkov likened the “Donro Doctrine” to the Monroe Doctrine, articulated in 1823 by President James Monroe. The Monroe Doctrine justified U.S. leadership in the Western Hemisphere, as well as expansionism and interference in the domestic affairs of other nations. The U.S. formally announced its abandonment of the Monroe Doctrine in 2013, when then-Secretary of State John Kerry referred to it as a mistake.
The term “Donro Doctrine” was first introduced earlier this year by the New York Post. The publication’s cover described Trump’s threats to use economic pressure to turn Canada into the 51st state, purchase Greenland and regain control of the Panama Canal — originally built by the U.S. but sold during President Jimmy Carter’s administration.
It seems the “Donro Doctrine” has been well-received by Donald Trump himself, as he shared the New York Post front page with millions of his followers on social media platforms Truth Social and Facebook.
Ryabkov also remarked that the “Donro Doctrine” could encompass forceful geopolitics without humanitarian or gender components. The deputy minister expressed the opinion that Trump’s presidency might open a small window of opportunity for Russia-U.S. relations. “Compared to the hopelessness of the previous administration, there is, albeit small, a window of opportunity,” Ryabkov stated.
According to Ryabkov, the upcoming period in Russia-U.S. relations will involve a high degree of unpredictability. “I believe we will face an increased pace of change and challenges in international relations,” he concluded.
Experts believe that the “Donro Doctrine” is not only a clever play on words but also a new reality that other global players will have to contend with. At the same time, Russia— with its own sphere of interests in Eurasia— must create a counterbalance to the “Donro Doctrine.”
“The new doctrine speaks to America’s declared rights to absolutely everything it finds interesting. The ‘Donro Doctrine’ resonates with the MAGA (Make America Great Again) policy,” noted Raphael Ordoukhanyan, an Americanist political scientist and doctor of political science.
Now, it seems we must prepare to live not by the norms of international law, but “by the rules of the game.” “International law no longer exists; only doctrines, markers, delineations, and everything associated with them remain. This is an entirely criminal worldview —taking what one wants by force, whether financial, military or economic. This is Trump delineating spheres of interest, explicitly speaking about the annexation of certain territories,” explained Raphael Ordoukhanyan.
The Americanist Dmitry Drobnitsky agrees that Trump’s ambitions must be taken seriously. “It is clear that, one way or another, the world is returning to the concept of large regions. For the U.S. to become a true power — rather than a sponsor of global liberal democracy — it must have access to resources, trade routes and tools to maintain order in its immediate vicinity. In this sense, Trump’s statements about Canada, Greenland, Mexico and the Panama Canal are not populism, but geopolitics,” the expert believes.
“Today’s geopolitics are about trade routes, resources, zones of national interest and influence, and security,” Drobnitsky explained. “What Trump has outlined is the multipolar world in its raw form. In this world, America, in his view, is the greatest. If you want to trade with us — great. If not, here are 100% tariffs — survive as best you can. This approach can be condemned or evaluated rationally, but the reality is that we must accept these new conditions,” the political analyst noted.
“Russia, too, will have to account for the consequences of the ‘Donro Doctrine’ in its zones of traditional interest,” emphasized Ordoukhanyan. “Our country has been shaped over centuries, and it must be protected. Trump understands this, and he is acting accordingly in America’s case,” he argued.
At the same time, Drobnitsky doubts that the new U.S. administration will have a greater understanding of Russia’s position on protecting its spheres of influence. According to him, the main task is to change the foreign policy paradigm, as “UN-centricity” (reliance on UN institutions) is incompatible with multipolarity.
“Defending one’s positions is achieved through actions that don’t necessarily need to be forceful. This can include cultural and diplomatic influence or trade pressure. These tools are indispensable. The rhetoric of international law is ineffective when it comes to asserting one’s rights. Sovereign equality is recognized only for those prepared to defend their sovereignty,” Drobnitsky reminded.
One way or another, Trump is striving to maximize U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere, noted Stanislav Tkachenko, a professor at the Department of European Studies at the Faculty of International Relations at St. Petersburg State University and an expert at the Valdai Club. “He acts based on Washington’s political and economic interests,” the expert stated.
“The Panama Canal, Canada and Greenland are all part of a single region in which Trump seeks to fully ensure the unquestionable realization of American interests. It can be said that the Republican is attempting to establish a zone of guaranteed influence for the White House. In the context of growing competition among great powers, and this approach is logical,” Tkachenko concluded.
“Whether Trump will succeed in implementing such ambitious plans remains unclear. After all, the orbit described by the new U.S. president includes sovereign states accustomed to significant independence from the White House. It is likely that the Republican’s interests will only be partially satisfied,” Tkachenko speculated.
“But Trump’s attempt to delineate a zone of guaranteed influence is interesting. In this context, his comments about understanding Russia’s feelings regarding Kiev’s NATO membership are noteworthy. Yet, not long after, he threatened us with new sanctions if we refuse a deal on Ukraine. This raises the question: if Washington seeks exclusive rights to certain territories in the Western Hemisphere, can Moscow do the same with the post-Soviet space? And would this be subject to a potential deal?” the expert added.
“Of course, thinking on such a grand scale — clearly defining spheres of responsibility and influence — is very much in Trump’s style. However, understanding Russia and recognizing its interests are two entirely different things. Moreover, aside from Trump himself, there is the State Department and numerous elites who are far from keen on the idea of acknowledging such an expansive sphere of influence for Moscow,” Tkachenko concluded.
(Translated by NEPH from the Russian original)