§  Why does Trump want Greenland.?

§  What is the Donroe Doctrine.?

§  Will Trump invade Colombia.?

§  What is Trump’s foreign policy.?

§  Is Cuba ready to collapse.?

§  How did US capture Maduro.?

§  What countries will Trump target.?

§  Does Trump violate international law.?

§  How strong are Mexico cartels.?

§  What happened to Venezuela.?

SAK, United States: The capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in a dramatic overnight military raid marks far more than the toppling of a single authoritarian regime. It represents the opening act of what President Donald Trump has explicitly branded as a new era of American dominance in the Western Hemisphere—one he audaciously calls the “Donroe Doctrine.” In barely 48 hours after the Venezuela operation, Trump has shifted from celebrating one military victory to telegraphing an aggressive agenda that spans the Caribbean, Central America, the Arctic and the Middle East.

Speaking from his Mar-a-Lago estate and from Air Force One, Trump has methodically named nations he views as potential next targets. When asked directly whether the United States might conduct an operation against Colombia, Trump responded with a chilling ambiguity: “It sounds good to me.” He described Cuba as already “ready to fall.” He invoked national security concerns to justify seizing Greenland from its rightful sovereign owner, Denmark. He warned Iran of severe military consequences if anti-government protesters face increased violence. He demanded Mexico “get its act together” on drugs or face unspecified consequences.

This rapid-fire sequence of threats represents a fundamental restructuring of American foreign policy around a doctrine of unilateral action and hemispheric supremacy. Understanding which countries face the greatest risk requires examining Trump’s specific statements, the geopolitical factors that make certain nations vulnerable and the administration’s documented strategic vision.

The Donroe Doctrine: A 21st-Century Power Grab

Trump’s “Donroe Doctrine” is not merely a witty rebranding of the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine. It represents something more ambitious and aggressive. The original Monroe Doctrine, articulated in 1823, declared that European powers should not intervene in the Western Hemisphere. It established American hegemony through a policy of exclusion—keeping competing powers out.

The Donroe Doctrine inverts that logic. Rather than simply preventing rival powers from gaining influence, Trump’s doctrine asserts the right to actively control resources, reorder governments and dominate the entire Western Hemisphere according to American preferences. Trump himself explained this explicitly: “The Monroe Doctrine is significant but we have truly surpassed it, significantly. American supremacy in the Western Hemisphere will no longer be doubted.”

The administration’s National Security Strategy, released in December 2025, formalizes this approach with explicit language about a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine. The document states the US aims to “restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere” and create “a Hemisphere that remains free of hostile foreign incursion or ownership of key assets.” Translated from strategic jargon, this means: American companies will control valuable resources, American military force will determine political outcomes and any nation that resists will face potentially violent consequences.

This doctrine represents a departure from previous Republican administrations’ interventionist policies. Even President George W. Bush, who invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, at least publicly justified these interventions through the language of promoting democracy and fighting terrorism. Trump makes no such pretenses. He frankly declares his interest in Venezuela’s oil, discusses acquiring Greenland’s rare earth minerals and threatens military action against nations he dislikes based on his personal assessment of their leaders.

═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Career Opportunity: Career Opportunity: Hiring Marketing Manager | High-Commission Field Sales | Web & App Development

═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Greenland: The Arctic Territory Trump Wants to Annex

Among Trump’s various threats, perhaps none seems more audacious than his repeated insistence that the United States should acquire Greenland from Denmark. The vast Arctic island, home to approximately 57,000 people and covering roughly 836,000 square miles, sits roughly 2,000 miles northeast of the United States mainland.

Trump’s interest in Greenland is not new—he first publicly discussed acquiring it during his first term. However, his renewed focus on the territory carries particular significance given his successful military action in Venezuela and his explicit doctrine of seizing territory deemed strategically valuable.

Trump’s justification for pursuing Greenland rests on three primary claims, all of which demand scrutiny. First, he argues the territory is “surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships,” presenting it as a critical location from which to counter rival powers’ Arctic ambitions. Second, he emphasizes Greenland’s vast reserves of rare earth elements—minerals crucial for manufacturing smartphones, electric vehicles and military hardware. Currently, China controls approximately 70% of global rare earth mineral production, a fact that deeply concerns Trump and defense planners. Third, he notes that as Arctic sea ice melts due to climate change, new shipping routes will open in the Arctic, making control of Greenland strategically important for access to these routes.

These arguments, while containing kernels of legitimate strategic concern, mask Trump’s fundamental goal: expanding American territory through military-backed threats against an unwilling ally.

Denmark, through both its Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen, has explicitly rejected Trump’s overtures. Nielsen stated: “No more pressure. No more insinuations. No more fantasies of annexation. We are open to dialogue. We are open to discussions. But this must happen through the proper channels and with respect for international law.” Frederiksen emphasized that Denmark, a NATO ally that already grants the United States significant military access through existing agreements, is not for sale.

Yet Trump’s track record of following through on aggressive threats—as demonstrated by the Venezuela operation—suggests that Greenland remains in genuine danger. The question is not whether Trump wants Greenland but whether he will eventually attempt to seize it by force, perhaps through a combination of economic coercion, military intimidation or covert operations designed to destabilize Danish authority over the territory.

Colombia: The Neighbor Under Threat

Colombia occupies a particularly vulnerable position in Trump’s new world order. The South American nation possesses vast oil reserves, substantial deposits of precious metals including gold, platinum, emeralds and silver and plays a central role in the region’s most powerful criminal enterprises, particularly cocaine trafficking.

Trump has repeatedly and aggressively attacked Colombia’s leftist president, Gustavo Petro. During recent remarks from Air Force One, Trump declared that Petro was “making cocaine and sending it to the United States,” adding that the Colombian president was “not going to be doing it for very long.” When directly asked whether the United States would conduct a military operation against Colombia similar to the Venezuela action, Trump responded: “It sounds good to me.”

The United States has historically maintained close military ties with Colombia, investing hundreds of millions of dollars annually in military assistance and training dedicated to counternarcotics operations. American military advisers work alongside Colombian forces and intelligence sharing between the nations is extensive. However, Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric and threats suggest he intends to overturn this alliance if Petro refuses to bow to American demands.

Colombia presents a strategic dilemma for Trump. Unlike Venezuela, where Maduro had become deeply isolated and the military’s loyalty was questionable, Colombia has stronger state institutions and a professional military with established relationships to American counterparts. A direct military intervention in Colombia would trigger enormous international backlash, damage America’s standing among Latin American nations that have already begun questioning the Venezuela operation and potentially create a prolonged insurgency.

Yet Trump’s willingness to threaten Colombia, combined with his demonstrated appetite for military action, indicates that Colombia should expect continued pressure, coercive economic measures and the possibility of special operations raids if Trump determines such actions serve his interests.

Iran: The Eternal Adversary Facing Renewed Threats

While Iran technically falls outside the geographic scope of the Monroe Doctrine and Donroe Doctrine, Trump has issued explicit threats against the Islamic Republic, particularly regarding its treatment of anti-government protesters currently demonstrating against economic collapse.

Trump warned Iran that if authorities continue killing peaceful protesters, the United States “will come to their rescue” and is “locked and loaded and ready to go.” These statements follow Trump’s previous strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025, which destroyed three nuclear sites and marked the most significant direct American military action against Iran in decades.

Iran’s current turmoil—triggered by economic crisis and currency collapse—creates what Trump views as an opportunity. Mass anti-government protests represent the largest demonstrations since 2022 and involve chanting against Iran’s theocracy itself. Trump appears to be signaling willingness to provide support to protest movements or to strike additional Iranian targets if he determines such actions serve American interests.

The intersection of Trump’s Iran policy with his broader Donroe Doctrine suggests potential future escalation. Israel, which Trump has cultivated as a close ally, has also been preparing for potential new strikes against Iran in 2026, according to reporting from meetings between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Mar-a-Lago. The combination of Trump’s “locked and loaded” rhetoric and Netanyahu’s preparations suggests Iran faces genuine risks of renewed military strikes.

Cuba: Waiting for Collapse

Trump has assessed Cuba with a confidence bordering on dismissal. “I don’t think we need any action,” he stated. “Cuba is ready to fall. It looks like it’s going down.” He added: “Cuba now has no income. They got all their income from Venezuela, from Venezuelan oil.”

Trump’s analysis contains factual accuracy. Venezuela supplies approximately 30% of Cuba’s oil and the collapse of the Maduro regime threatens Cuba’s energy security and economic survival. With Maduro gone, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel faces a legitimacy crisis and mounting economic pressure. American sanctions, in place since the early 1960s, have devastated Cuba’s economy and prevented access to American trade and investment.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is the son of Cuban immigrants and has long advocated for regime change in Cuba, has signaled that the Maduro capture should serve as a warning to Cuban leadership. “If I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned,” Rubio stated, adding: “When the president speaks, you should take him seriously.”

The implication is clear: if Cuba’s government shows signs of instability or if Trump determines that regime change serves his interests, military action may follow. For now, Trump is content to allow economic pressure and the loss of Venezuelan oil supplies to do the work of destabilization. But the message to Cuba’s leadership is unmistakable.

Mexico: Domestic Pressure and Border Threats

Mexico occupies a unique position in Trump’s regional calculations. Unlike Venezuela, which Trump has invaded or Greenland, which he wishes to annex, Mexico is a directly adjacent sovereign nation whose internal politics carry enormous implications for American border security and drug trafficking patterns.

Trump has repeatedly demanded that Mexico do more to stop the flow of cocaine and other narcotics into the United States, accusing Mexican cartels of being “very strong” and saying drugs are “pouring through Mexico.” He has vaguely threatened that “we’re gonna have to do something,” without specifying what actions the administration might take.

Trump’s first act upon returning to office in January 2025 was to sign an executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America”—a symbolic assertion of dominance over territory Mexico considers part of its maritime zone. This act, seemingly trivial, carries profound symbolic meaning about Trump’s view of Mexican sovereignty.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has publicly rejected any American military action on Mexican soil, declaring that such intervention would violate Mexican sovereignty. However, Trump’s demonstrated willingness to conduct military operations without formal international authorization or consent (as demonstrated in Venezuela) means Mexico cannot assume Sheinbaum’s words will deter Trump if he determines military action serves his purposes.

The threat to Mexico differs qualitatively from threats to other nations because of geographic proximity and the deep integration of Mexican and American economies and security structures. A military conflict with Mexico would create humanitarian catastrophe along the American border and destabilize North America’s entire geopolitical order. Yet Trump’s rhetoric suggests he is willing to consider military options if he determines Mexico’s government is not sufficiently cooperative on drug trafficking suppression.

Broader Implications: The Unraveling of The International System

Trump’s Donroe Doctrine signals a fundamental challenge to the international system that has governed global relations since the end of World War II. That system, often called the “rules-based international order,” is premised on the principle that all nations possess equal sovereignty, that territorial conquest is prohibited, that military force should be authorized through international institutions like the United Nations and that international law constrains even powerful nations.

Trump’s explicit rejection of these principles—captured in his willingness to invade Venezuela, threaten to seize Greenland and suggest military action against Colombia—represents a return to 19th-century great-power politics, where might determines right and powerful nations dominate weaker ones according to their interests rather than according to law.

This has profound consequences beyond the Americas. China watches Trump’s actions in Venezuela and contemplates similar operations against Taiwan. Russia observes American military adventurism in the Caribbean and considers its options in Ukraine and beyond. NATO allies question whether American commitments to defend them remain credible if Trump is willing to threaten a NATO member like Denmark over Greenland.

Strategic analysts from institutions like Chatham House and the European Council on Foreign Relations have expressed deep concern. They note that Trump’s approach to Venezuela “reinforces fears that Washington is increasingly open to reordering the international system along great-power lines,” potentially triggering cascading crises as other powers respond to perceived opportunities or threats created by American aggression.

Counter-Arguments and Strategic Rationales

Trump administration officials argue that these threats and actions serve legitimate strategic purposes. They contend that Venezuelan oil should benefit American companies and workers rather than fund a dictatorship. They argue that controlling Greenland’s rare earth minerals would reduce American dependence on China. They claim that stronger American military presence in the region will suppress drug trafficking and migration.

These arguments deserve serious consideration. Venezuela’s oil reserves are genuinely enormous—approximately 303 billion barrels, the world’s largest proven reserves. American companies and the American military could benefit from access to these resources. Rare earth minerals are genuinely critical for advanced technology and American overreliance on Chinese supplies creates strategic vulnerabilities. Drug trafficking and migration from Central America do impose substantial costs on the United States.

However, these legitimate strategic interests do not justify the methods Trump is pursuing. Democratic governance, international law and respect for sovereignty are not incompatible with pursuing American strategic interests. Previous administrations, including Republicans, pursued American interests while maintaining commitment to the rules-based international system.

Trump’s approach differs fundamentally. By openly declaring his intent to seize territory, by threatening military action against multiple nations, by acting without formal congressional authorization (in the case of Venezuela) and by rejecting diplomatic constraints, Trump is pursuing American interests through methods that destabilize the international system and encourage other powers to pursue their own interests through similar means.

═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

READ MORE: Strong Earthquake Rocks Western Japan: MULTIPLE AFTERSHOCKS TRIGGER CONCERNS

═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

What Comes Next: Predictions and Uncertainties

Predicting Trump’s next moves carries genuine difficulty. His administration has demonstrated willingness to act rapidly and forcefully but also displays inconsistency and susceptibility to distraction. Trump’s attention span, as multiple observers have noted, tends to shift toward whatever generates maximum media attention.

Based on available evidence, the most likely trajectory appears to be:

Short term (next 3-6 months): Consolidation of American control over Venezuela’s government and oil resources through puppet governance and economic coercion. Continued diplomatic and economic pressure on Colombia, with possible deployment of special operations forces under the guise of counternarcotics assistance. Escalating rhetoric toward Iran, with possible additional military strikes if anti-government protests intensify. Economic and political pressure on Cuba designed to trigger regime collapse without requiring direct American military intervention.

Medium term (6-18 months): Potential escalation toward Mexico if Trump determines the government is insufficiently cooperative on drug trafficking. Possible covert operations or military pressure designed to destabilize Danish authority over Greenland, potentially under the guise of protecting American security interests or supporting independence movements within the territory.

Longer term (18+ months): Depending on whether Trump’s Greenland acquisition efforts succeed and on shifts in global geopolitics, possible expansion of the Donroe Doctrine to other regions. Potential military confrontation with China over Taiwan. Continued pressure on NATO allies to increase military spending and accept American dominance within the alliance.

International Responses and Resistance

Trump’s doctrine has triggered significant international backlash. Denmark has explicitly rejected any notion of selling or ceding Greenland. Colombia, Mexico and Cuba have all protested American threats and asserted their sovereignty. European allies have expressed alarm about American willingness to threaten NATO members and disregard international law.

However, this international resistance faces significant constraints. Most nations cannot match American military power. Economic sanctions Trump might impose could devastate smaller economies. And Trump has demonstrated willingness to act despite international opposition, as evidenced by the Venezuela operation proceeding despite global criticism.

Yet resistance is not futile. Greenland’s population, while small, has shown strong opposition to American annexation. Denmark’s government, backed by other NATO allies, has stated it will not cooperate with American seizure attempts. Colombia’s government, while weakened by Trump’s threats, retains institutional capacity to resist. Cuba and Venezuela, while economically devastated, possess populations that have historically resisted American domination.

Conclusion: A World Transformed

The capture of Nicolás Maduro and Trump’s subsequent threats against multiple nations mark a transformative moment in international relations. The world has not witnessed American aggression of this scale and explicitness since the Cold War era and even then American administrations maintained at least nominal commitment to democratic principles and international law.

Trump’s Donroe Doctrine represents a conscious rejection of these constraints in favor of a doctrine of raw power and national interest. Which nations face the greatest risk—Greenland, Colombia, Iran, Cuba and Mexico—are now essentially hostages to Trump’s whims and strategic calculations. Whether he actually follows through on these threats depends on factors including the resistance he faces, the domestic political costs of military action, the counsel of advisers and his own mercurial decision-making process.

For now, the world watches and waits. Those nations in Trump’s stated sights attempt to calculate how to respond to threats of military action from the world’s most powerful military. And the international system that has governed global relations since 1945 faces its greatest stress since the Cold War’s end.

Call to Action (CTA)

For in-depth analysis of geopolitical developments, U.S. foreign policy shifts and international security implications, Follow and share The Daily Hints. We provide comprehensive coverage of how Trump’s doctrine affects global stability, American alliances and regional security. Stay informed about the transforming international system.

Follow The Daily Hints on Social Media,

      §  Facebook

      §  Instagram

      §  Threads

      §  WhatsApp

      §  YouTube

      §  Twitter

      §  Email ID

From West Bengal District’s News to Kolkata News, Other States News to Whole India News, International News, Entertainment News to Sports News, Science News to Technology News and all other news updates, follow and Support our news portal @TheDailyHints.