美国不能再像1823年那样统治西半球
正文翻译
On December 10, 2025, Coast Guard personnel fast-roped from Navy helicopters onto the deck of an oil tanker in international waters near Venezuela, seizing what the Trump administration called the Skipper, a vessel allegedly involved in sanctions evasion. Attorney General Pam Bondi declared the operation targeted networks financing terrorism and rogue regimes, while President Trump casually remarked about the confiscated oil: “We keep it, I guess.”
The Venezuelan government responded by calling the seizure an act of international piracy, arguing that Washington’s true motives had finally been exposed—not restricting migration, not clamping down on drug trafficking, not promoting democracy, but making an attempt to acquire Venezuela’s vast petroleum reserves.
2025年12月10日，美国海岸警卫队人员从海军直升机上通过速降绳降落在委内瑞拉附近国际水域一艘油轮的甲板上，扣押了被特朗普政府称为“船长号”的船只。据称该船参与了逃避制裁的活动。司法部长帕姆·邦迪宣称，此次行动针对的是为恐怖主义和非法政权提供资金的网络。而特朗普总统在谈及被没收的石油时则轻描淡写地表示：“我想，我们留着吧。”
委内瑞拉政府对此回应称，此次扣押行为是国际海盗行径，并指出华盛顿的真实动机终于暴露——不是为了限制移民，不是为了打击贩毒，不是为了促进民主，而是为了试图攫取委内瑞拉丰富的石油储备。
This brazen maritime interdiction represents merely the latest escalation in a pressure campaign that has already claimed dozens of lives. Reuters documented that the United States acknowledged at least five strikes on vessels near Venezuela, with several dozen people killed in these operations.
The administration and geopolitical strategists sympathetic to Trump invoke the Monroe Doctrine to justify this escalation. Yet this appeal obscures a fundamental reality: Venezuela’s current alignment with extra-hemispheric adversaries such as Russia, China, and Iran represents not unprovoked aggression but a predictable response to decades of American economic warfare and destabilization efforts.
这次明目张胆的海上拦截行动，仅仅是已造成数十人丧生的施压行动的最新升级。路透社记录显示，美国承认在委内瑞拉附近海域对船只进行了至少五次打击，这些行动已导致数十人死亡。
特朗普政府及其同情他的地缘战略家援引门罗主义为此次升级辩护。然而，这种诉求掩盖了一个根本现实：委内瑞拉当前与俄罗斯、中国和伊朗等域外对手的结盟，并非无端挑衅，而是对美国长达数十年的经济战争与破坏稳定行动的可预见的回应。
The irony is stark. Washington officials warn about foreign powers gaining influence in America’s backyard, seemingly oblivious to how their own interventionist policies pushed Caracas into precisely these arrangements. The more aggressively the United States confronts Russia, China, and Iran globally, the more these powers deepen cooperation with Venezuela. What American policymakers fear as a new Cuban Missile Crisis is rapidly becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, manufactured not by adversaries’ ambitions but by Washington’s own imperial overstretch.
讽刺意味是如此鲜明。华盛顿官员警告外国势力在美国"后院"扩大影响力，却似乎忽略了正是他们自己的干预政策将加拉加斯推向了这些结盟。美国在全球范围内对俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的对抗越激进，这些国家与委内瑞拉的合作就越深入。美国政策制定者所担忧的"新古巴导弹危机"，正迅速成为一个自我实现的预言——而这并非由对手的野心造就，而是华盛顿自身帝国扩张过度所导致的。
The Anatomy of American Intervention
To understand Venezuela’s current strategic partnerships, one must first grasp the systematic campaign that preceded them. Since 2005, Washington has imposed 12 distinct rounds of sanctions, creating one of the most comprehensive economic warfare campaigns in the Western Hemisphere. The United States currently maintains 431 sanction designations on Venezuelan individuals and entities, having sanctioned 81 individuals and 46 entities.
美国干预的解剖
要理解委内瑞拉当前的战略伙伴关系，首先必须了解此前实施的系统性行动。自2005年起，华盛顿已实施了12轮不同的制裁，这构成了西半球最全面的经济战行动之一。目前，美国对委内瑞拉的个人和实体保持着431项制裁指定，共制裁了81名个人和46个实体。
The humanitarian toll has been catastrophic. The 2017 financial sanctions and 2019-2020 oil bans strangled Venezuela’s export capacity, worsening the humanitarian crisis and triggering a mass migration exodus from the country. John Bolton candidly admitted these sanctions aimed at driving PDVSA’s production as low as possible to crash Maduro’s regime. When Western capital markets vanished under threat of secondary sanctions, Venezuela turned to nations willing to defy American financial hegemony—creating a de facto balancing coalition against Washington.
人道主义的代价是灾难性的。2017年的金融制裁与2019-2020年的石油禁令扼杀了委内瑞拉的出口能力，加剧了人道主义危机并引发了该国大规模人口外流。约翰·博尔顿曾坦承，这些制裁旨在将委内瑞拉国家石油公司的产量压至最低，从而推翻马杜罗政权。当西方资本市场在二级制裁的威胁下消失后，委内瑞拉转向了那些敢于挑战美国金融霸权的国家——这事实上形成了一个与华盛顿抗衡的平衡联盟。
The Architecture of Counter-Alignment
The strategic partnerships Venezuela has forged tell the story of a nation increasingly cut off from Western commerce and forced to build alternative networks. Most significantly, Russia signed a comprehensive 10-year strategic partnership with Venezuela in May 2025, ratified in October 2025, covering more than 350 bilateral agreements on security, defense, and technology. Russian cargo aircraft have recently been landing in Caracas with additional military supplies. In October 2025, Maduro requested Russian assistance enhancing air defenses, restoring Su-30 aircraft, and acquiring missiles.
反制联盟的架构
委内瑞拉建立的战略伙伴关系，讲述了一个逐渐与西方商业体系割裂、被迫构建替代网络的故事。其中最值得关注的是，俄罗斯于2025年5月与委内瑞拉签署了为期十年的全面战略伙伴关系协议，并于2025年10月获得批准，涵盖超过350项涉及安全、防务和技术的双边协议。近期，俄罗斯货运飞机已搭载额外军事物资降落在加拉加斯。2025年10月，马杜罗请求俄罗斯协助加强防空系统、修复苏-30战机并获得导弹支持。
Iranian cooperation has had an underrated impact. Tehran has provided assistance in drone technology development and sanctions evasion assistance that has helped Venezuela maintain some petroleum exports despite American interdiction efforts. Perhaps most consequential is China’s economic engagement through the oil-for-loans program, through which Beijing has extended approximately $68 billion in financing since 2007. Venezuela commits to supply China National Petroleum Corporation with minimum daily shipments ranging from 230,000 to 800,000 barrels depending on price fluctuations to service debt obligations.
伊朗的合作产生了被低估的影响。德黑兰在无人机技术发展和规避制裁方面提供了援助，帮助委内瑞拉在美国的封锁下维持了部分石油出口。
或许最具深远影响的是中国的经济参与——通过“石油换贷款”计划，自2007年以来北京已提供了约680亿美元的融资。委内瑞拉承诺向中国石油天然气集团公司每日供应最低23万至80万桶石油（具体数量随价格波动），以履行其偿债义务。
These arrangements represent far more than economic convenience. They constitute a deliberate strategy by Russia, China, and Iran to establish positions within the Western Hemisphere that complicate American military planning and force Washington to divert resources from Eurasian theaters.
这些安排远不止于经济便利。它们构成了俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的一项深思熟虑的战略，旨在西半球确立其存在，以此干扰美国的军事计划，并迫使华盛顿从欧亚战区转移资源。
The Self-Inflicting Spiral
The dynamic at work possesses a terrible logic. As the United States escalates pressure on Russia over Ukraine, Beijing over Taiwan, and Tehran over its nuclear program, these powers find common cause supporting governments that challenge American hegemony. Venezuela serves as an ideal candidate—geographically positioned to concern Washington, possessing valuable energy resources, and already alienated by American sanctions.
自我强化的螺旋
这种运作的动态遵循着一种可悲的逻辑。随着美国在乌克兰问题上对俄罗斯、在台湾（地区）问题上对中国、在核计划问题上对伊朗不断施压，这些国家找到了共同的目标：支持那些挑战美国霸权的政府。委内瑞拉是一个理想的候选者——其地理位置令华盛顿担忧，拥有宝贵的能源资源，且已因美国制裁而被疏远。
The more aggressively Washington pursues “maximum pressure“ campaigns globally, the more incentive adversarial powers have to create pressure points within America’s traditional sphere of influence. Russian strategic planners understand that military cooperation with Venezuela forces the Pentagon to consider Caribbean scenarios alongside European contingencies. Chinese economists recognize Venezuelan oil sales provide energy security and opportunities to expand yuan-denominated trade. Iranian officials appreciate that technological cooperation with Caracas creates additional complexity for already-stretched American intelligence services.
华盛顿在全球推行“极限施压”行动越是激进，对手国家在其传统势力范围内制造压力点的动机就越强。俄罗斯的战略规划者明白，与委内瑞拉的军事合作迫使五角大楼在考虑欧洲突发状况的同时，也必须兼顾加勒比地区的局势。中国经济学家认识到，委内瑞拉的石油销售不仅保障能源安全，也为扩大人民币贸易结算提供了机遇。伊朗官员则清楚，与加拉加斯的技术合作为本已捉襟见肘的美国情报机构增添了新的复杂性。
This creates precisely the nightmare scenario that Monroe Doctrine invocations supposedly prevent: hostile powers establishing military and intelligence presence near American territory. Yet this outcome stems not from Venezuelan aggression but from Washington’s economic warfare that left Caracas no choice but to seek alternative partnerships. The Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 that officials fear is materializing because American policy created conditions making such development rational from Venezuela’s perspective.
这恰恰构成了门罗主义宣称要防止的噩梦情景：敌对势力在美国领土附近建立军事和情报存在。然而，这一结果并非源于委内瑞拉的挑衅，而是源于华盛顿的经济战——这种政策迫使加拉加斯别无选择，只能寻求替代伙伴关系。官员们所恐惧的“古巴导弹危机2.0”正在成为现实，正是因为美国的政策创造了条件，使得从委内瑞拉视角来看，这样的发展是合理的。
Understanding the Monroe Doctrine
President James Monroe articulated the doctrine in his December 2, 1823 State of the unx Address, declaring the Western Hemisphere closed off to future European colonization. Yet from inception, the doctrine represented more aspiration than capability. The United States lacked military strength to enforce it—Britain effectively enforced the doctrine through Royal Navy supremacy throughout the 19th century.
理解门罗主义
詹姆斯·门罗总统在1823年12月2日的国情咨文中阐述了这一主义，宣布西半球不再对欧洲未来的殖民活动开放。然而，从诞生之初起，该主义更多是一种愿景而非实际能力。美国当时缺乏强制执行它的军事力量——整个19世纪，英国皇家海军的霸权实际上在维护着这一主义。
British Foreign Minister George Canning proposed a joint Anglo-American declaration, but Secretary of State John Quincy Adams obxted, arguing it would be undignified for America to come in “as a cockboat in the wake of the British man-of-war.” Monroe issued a unilateral declaration while Britain provided actual enforcement. Britain had compelling reasons: its industrializing economy needed markets in Latin America, and the doctrine aligned with the British’s informal empire of maintaining economic dominance without shouldering the direct costs of colonialism in the New World.
英国外交大臣乔治·坎宁曾提议英美联合发表声明，但美国国务卿约翰·昆西·亚当斯表示反对，认为美国若以“尾随英国军舰的小船”姿态加入将有失尊严。门罗最终发布了单方面声明，而英国则提供了实际执行力量。英国有充分的理由这样做：其工业化经济需要拉丁美洲的市场，且该主义符合英国“非正式帝国”的战略——即在维持经济主导地位的同时，无需承担在新大陆殖民的直接成本。
When European powers violated the doctrine, America’s response revealed its impotence. In 1833, Britain seized the Falkland Islands—Andrew Jackson protested but did nothing. From 1838-1850, France and Britain blockaded Argentina but no American action followed. In 1861, Spain reannexed the Dominican Republic while America fought its Civil War. Most significantly, Napoleon III invaded Mexico in 1862, installing Maximilian as Emperor. Washington was unable to intervene until after the Civil War ended.
当欧洲列强违背该主义时，美国的反应暴露了其无力。1833年，英国占领福克兰群岛——安德鲁·杰克逊提出抗议但未采取行动。1838年至1850年间，法国和英国封锁阿根廷，美国亦未作出回应。1861年，西班牙重新吞并多米尼加共和国，而当时美国正忙于内战。最重要的是，拿破仑三世于1862年入侵墨西哥，扶植马克西米利安为帝。华盛顿直到内战结束后才得以干预。
The doctrine transformed at the century’s turn. The Venezuela crisis of 1902-1903 prompted Theodore Roosevelt to announce the Roosevelt Corollary, transforming the Monroe Doctrine from defensive shield into offensive sword justifying American intervention throughout Latin America. During the Cold War, it justified opposing Soviet influence. In the 1980s, Reagan’s version committed America to aiding anti-Marxist insurgencies, with Nicaragua as a primary target.
该主义在世纪之交发生转变。1902-1903年的委内瑞拉危机促使西奥多·罗斯福宣布推出"罗斯福推论"，将门罗主义从防御性盾牌转变为进攻性利剑，为美国在整个拉丁美洲的干预行为正名。冷战期间，它成为美国对抗苏联影响力的理由。到了1980年代，里根版本的主义要求美国援助反马克思主义的叛乱活动，尼加拉瓜成为主要目标。
The Contemporary Perversion
Indeed, the Monroe Doctrine’s explicit revival in policy toward Venezuela under Trump marks a return to great power politics. In March 2019, then.National Security Advisor John Bolton declared that in this administration, America was not afraid to use the word Monroe Doctrine. Bolton invoked the doctrine while discussing potential intervention to convince Maduro to resign, telling CNN that America had opposed external threats in the Western Hemisphere since Monroe’s time, and it was time to resurrect it.
当代的扭曲
事实上，特朗普执政期间对委内瑞拉政策中门罗主义的明确复兴，标志着大国政治的回归。2019年3月，时任国家安全顾问约翰·博尔顿宣称，在本届政府领导下，美国"毫不避讳使用门罗主义这个词"。博尔顿在讨论为说服马杜罗下台可能进行的干预时援引了该主义，他对美国有线电视新闻网表示，美国自门罗时代以来始终反对西半球的外部威胁，现在是时候重振这一传统了。
Bolton frxd the doctrine as justification for opposing foreign interference in Venezuela, particularly from Russia, China, Cuba, and Iran. He referenced the “Troika of Tyranny” of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, emphasizing that the heavy Cuban presence with thousands of security officials in Venezuela was the sort of thing the United States found unacceptable. In April 2019, Bolton told Bay of Pigs veterans that the Monroe Doctrine was alive and well.
博尔顿将该主义作为反对外国干涉委内瑞拉（特别是来自俄罗斯、中国、古巴和伊朗的干涉）的理由。他提及古巴、尼加拉瓜和委内瑞拉构成的"暴政三巨头"，强调古巴在委内瑞拉派驻数千名安全人员的存在是美国绝不可接受的行为。2019年4月，博尔顿对猪湾事件老兵宣称，门罗主义"依然充满活力且运作良好"。
This represents an inversion of the doctrine’s purported purpose. The original emerged when the United States was a relatively weak power with limited international ambitions. Today’s invocation comes from a nation maintaining nearly 800 military installations across more than 70 countries, waging wars across multiple continents simultaneously. The United States has transformed from a republic with restrained foreign policy ambitions into a global consumer imperium projecting military power into every corner of the planet.
这标志着该主义宣称的初衷已被颠覆。最初的主义诞生于美国国力相对薄弱、国际野心有限的时期。而如今的援引者，却是一个在超过70个国家维持近800个军事基地、同时在多个大洲进行战争的国家。美国已从一个外交政策克制的共和国，转变为一个将军事力量投射到全球每个角落的全球性消费帝国。
Distinguishing Legitimate from Illegitimate Doctrine Applications
Here lies the crucial distinction that current policy utterly fails to make. The Monroe Doctrine retains legitimacy when establishing clear red lines against genuine security threats—specifically, preventing extra-hemispheric powers like Russia and China from establishing military bases in the Western Hemisphere. This represents a defensible national security interest aligned with the doctrine’s original defensive purpose. No American administration should tolerate Russian or Chinese military installations in Cuba, Venezuela, or elsewhere in the Americas that could threaten American territory or project power against the United States.
区分正当与非正当的主义运用
当前政策完全未能把握的关键区别正在于此。门罗主义在针对真实安全威胁划定明确红线时——具体而言，即防止俄罗斯和中国等域外大国在西半球建立军事基地——仍具有正当性。这代表着一种可辩护的国家安全利益，与该主义最初的防御目的相一致。任何美国政府都不应容忍俄罗斯或中国在古巴、委内瑞拉或美洲其他地区建立可能威胁美国领土或向美国投射力量的军事设施。
Such a baseline security policy differs fundamentally from the universalist foreign policy currently pursued. Establishing a red line against foreign military bases is one thing; pursuing comprehensive regime change, social engineering, and economic strangulation abroad is quite another. The former represents a legitimate security concern; the latter represents an unrealistic project of imperial domination that systematically undermines the very security interests it claims to defend.
这样一条底线安全政策与当前奉行的普遍主义外交政策有着本质区别。划定红线禁止外国军事基地是一回事；而在海外推行全面的政权更迭、社会改造和经济扼杀则完全是另一回事。前者是正当的安全关切；而后者则是一个不切实际的帝国统治计划，它系统地损害了其声称要捍卫的安全利益本身。
The goal should be benign hegemony, wherein the United States maintain sufficient influence in the Western Hemisphere to prevent hostile military threats while respecting the sovereignty and agency of Latin American nations to develop their own political and economic systems. This means accepting that some governments in the region will not align with American preferences, will pursue economic relationships with China, or will maintain diplomatic ties with Russia and Iran. So long as these relationships do not extend to hosting foreign military bases or allowing power projection capabilities against the United States, they fall within the legitimate sphere of sovereign decision-making. More importantly, the United States would also reduce its military footprint abroad by closing its hundreds of foreign military bases and bringing back the over 170,000 active-duty troops stationed abroad. From there, the United States can build a national security strategy focused on protecting the border and protecting shipping lanes in the Western Hemisphere.
目标应当是良性的主导地位，即美国在西半球保持足够影响力以防止敌对军事威胁，同时尊重拉丁美洲各国的主权和自主权，允许它们发展自身的政治和经济体系。这意味着接受该地区部分政府不会遵循美国的偏好、将与中国建立经济联系，或与俄罗斯及伊朗保持外交关系。只要这些关系不涉及允许外国建立军事基地或部署针对美国的武力投送能力，它们就属于主权决策的合法范畴。更重要的是，美国也应通过关闭其数百个海外军事基地、撤回超过17万名驻外现役军人来缩减海外军事存在。在此基础上，美国可以构建一个专注于保护本土边境及西半球航运航道的国家安全战略。
Current policy is still stuck on maintaining American primacy, consequences be damned. Washington pursues regime change and comprehensive sanctions against Venezuela not because Caracas hosts Russian military bases—though American policy is creating incentives for precisely that outcome—but because the country possesses vast oil reserves and Venezuela’s government challenges American preferences and maintains relationships with American adversaries. The result is a self-defeating spiral where economic warfare pushes Venezuela into the arms of Russia, China, and Iran, creating the very military threats that would legitimately trigger actions in line with the Monroe Doctrine.
If Washington continues down this path, it may soon face a geopolitical crisis of its own making, one born not in Caracas or Moscow but in the blind corners of its own imperial ambition.
现行政策仍固守于维持美国的主导地位，而不计后果。华盛顿对委内瑞拉推行政权更迭和全面制裁，并非因为加拉加斯设有俄罗斯军事基地（尽管美国的政策正在诱使这一结果发生），而是因为该国拥有巨大的石油储量，且委内瑞拉政府挑战了美国的偏好并与美国的对手保持关系。其结果是一个自我挫败的恶性循环：经济战将委内瑞拉推向俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的怀抱，从而恰恰催生了那些本可正当触发门罗主义行动的军事威胁。
如果华盛顿继续沿着这条道路走下去，它可能很快会面临一场由其自身造成的地缘政治危机——这场危机并非源于加拉加斯或莫斯科，而是源于其自身帝国野心中盲目的角落。
（完）
On December 10, 2025, Coast Guard personnel fast-roped from Navy helicopters onto the deck of an oil tanker in international waters near Venezuela, seizing what the Trump administration called the Skipper, a vessel allegedly involved in sanctions evasion. Attorney General Pam Bondi declared the operation targeted networks financing terrorism and rogue regimes, while President Trump casually remarked about the confiscated oil: “We keep it, I guess.”
The Venezuelan government responded by calling the seizure an act of international piracy, arguing that Washington’s true motives had finally been exposed—not restricting migration, not clamping down on drug trafficking, not promoting democracy, but making an attempt to acquire Venezuela’s vast petroleum reserves.
2025年12月10日，美国海岸警卫队人员从海军直升机上通过速降绳降落在委内瑞拉附近国际水域一艘油轮的甲板上，扣押了被特朗普政府称为“船长号”的船只。据称该船参与了逃避制裁的活动。司法部长帕姆·邦迪宣称，此次行动针对的是为恐怖主义和非法政权提供资金的网络。而特朗普总统在谈及被没收的石油时则轻描淡写地表示：“我想，我们留着吧。”
委内瑞拉政府对此回应称，此次扣押行为是国际海盗行径，并指出华盛顿的真实动机终于暴露——不是为了限制移民，不是为了打击贩毒，不是为了促进民主，而是为了试图攫取委内瑞拉丰富的石油储备。
This brazen maritime interdiction represents merely the latest escalation in a pressure campaign that has already claimed dozens of lives. Reuters documented that the United States acknowledged at least five strikes on vessels near Venezuela, with several dozen people killed in these operations.
The administration and geopolitical strategists sympathetic to Trump invoke the Monroe Doctrine to justify this escalation. Yet this appeal obscures a fundamental reality: Venezuela’s current alignment with extra-hemispheric adversaries such as Russia, China, and Iran represents not unprovoked aggression but a predictable response to decades of American economic warfare and destabilization efforts.
这次明目张胆的海上拦截行动，仅仅是已造成数十人丧生的施压行动的最新升级。路透社记录显示，美国承认在委内瑞拉附近海域对船只进行了至少五次打击，这些行动已导致数十人死亡。
特朗普政府及其同情他的地缘战略家援引门罗主义为此次升级辩护。然而，这种诉求掩盖了一个根本现实：委内瑞拉当前与俄罗斯、中国和伊朗等域外对手的结盟，并非无端挑衅，而是对美国长达数十年的经济战争与破坏稳定行动的可预见的回应。
The irony is stark. Washington officials warn about foreign powers gaining influence in America’s backyard, seemingly oblivious to how their own interventionist policies pushed Caracas into precisely these arrangements. The more aggressively the United States confronts Russia, China, and Iran globally, the more these powers deepen cooperation with Venezuela. What American policymakers fear as a new Cuban Missile Crisis is rapidly becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, manufactured not by adversaries’ ambitions but by Washington’s own imperial overstretch.
讽刺意味是如此鲜明。华盛顿官员警告外国势力在美国"后院"扩大影响力，却似乎忽略了正是他们自己的干预政策将加拉加斯推向了这些结盟。美国在全球范围内对俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的对抗越激进，这些国家与委内瑞拉的合作就越深入。美国政策制定者所担忧的"新古巴导弹危机"，正迅速成为一个自我实现的预言——而这并非由对手的野心造就，而是华盛顿自身帝国扩张过度所导致的。
The Anatomy of American Intervention
To understand Venezuela’s current strategic partnerships, one must first grasp the systematic campaign that preceded them. Since 2005, Washington has imposed 12 distinct rounds of sanctions, creating one of the most comprehensive economic warfare campaigns in the Western Hemisphere. The United States currently maintains 431 sanction designations on Venezuelan individuals and entities, having sanctioned 81 individuals and 46 entities.
美国干预的解剖
要理解委内瑞拉当前的战略伙伴关系，首先必须了解此前实施的系统性行动。自2005年起，华盛顿已实施了12轮不同的制裁，这构成了西半球最全面的经济战行动之一。目前，美国对委内瑞拉的个人和实体保持着431项制裁指定，共制裁了81名个人和46个实体。
The humanitarian toll has been catastrophic. The 2017 financial sanctions and 2019-2020 oil bans strangled Venezuela’s export capacity, worsening the humanitarian crisis and triggering a mass migration exodus from the country. John Bolton candidly admitted these sanctions aimed at driving PDVSA’s production as low as possible to crash Maduro’s regime. When Western capital markets vanished under threat of secondary sanctions, Venezuela turned to nations willing to defy American financial hegemony—creating a de facto balancing coalition against Washington.
人道主义的代价是灾难性的。2017年的金融制裁与2019-2020年的石油禁令扼杀了委内瑞拉的出口能力，加剧了人道主义危机并引发了该国大规模人口外流。约翰·博尔顿曾坦承，这些制裁旨在将委内瑞拉国家石油公司的产量压至最低，从而推翻马杜罗政权。当西方资本市场在二级制裁的威胁下消失后，委内瑞拉转向了那些敢于挑战美国金融霸权的国家——这事实上形成了一个与华盛顿抗衡的平衡联盟。
The Architecture of Counter-Alignment
The strategic partnerships Venezuela has forged tell the story of a nation increasingly cut off from Western commerce and forced to build alternative networks. Most significantly, Russia signed a comprehensive 10-year strategic partnership with Venezuela in May 2025, ratified in October 2025, covering more than 350 bilateral agreements on security, defense, and technology. Russian cargo aircraft have recently been landing in Caracas with additional military supplies. In October 2025, Maduro requested Russian assistance enhancing air defenses, restoring Su-30 aircraft, and acquiring missiles.
反制联盟的架构
委内瑞拉建立的战略伙伴关系，讲述了一个逐渐与西方商业体系割裂、被迫构建替代网络的故事。其中最值得关注的是，俄罗斯于2025年5月与委内瑞拉签署了为期十年的全面战略伙伴关系协议，并于2025年10月获得批准，涵盖超过350项涉及安全、防务和技术的双边协议。近期，俄罗斯货运飞机已搭载额外军事物资降落在加拉加斯。2025年10月，马杜罗请求俄罗斯协助加强防空系统、修复苏-30战机并获得导弹支持。
Iranian cooperation has had an underrated impact. Tehran has provided assistance in drone technology development and sanctions evasion assistance that has helped Venezuela maintain some petroleum exports despite American interdiction efforts. Perhaps most consequential is China’s economic engagement through the oil-for-loans program, through which Beijing has extended approximately $68 billion in financing since 2007. Venezuela commits to supply China National Petroleum Corporation with minimum daily shipments ranging from 230,000 to 800,000 barrels depending on price fluctuations to service debt obligations.
伊朗的合作产生了被低估的影响。德黑兰在无人机技术发展和规避制裁方面提供了援助，帮助委内瑞拉在美国的封锁下维持了部分石油出口。
或许最具深远影响的是中国的经济参与——通过“石油换贷款”计划，自2007年以来北京已提供了约680亿美元的融资。委内瑞拉承诺向中国石油天然气集团公司每日供应最低23万至80万桶石油（具体数量随价格波动），以履行其偿债义务。
These arrangements represent far more than economic convenience. They constitute a deliberate strategy by Russia, China, and Iran to establish positions within the Western Hemisphere that complicate American military planning and force Washington to divert resources from Eurasian theaters.
这些安排远不止于经济便利。它们构成了俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的一项深思熟虑的战略，旨在西半球确立其存在，以此干扰美国的军事计划，并迫使华盛顿从欧亚战区转移资源。
The Self-Inflicting Spiral
The dynamic at work possesses a terrible logic. As the United States escalates pressure on Russia over Ukraine, Beijing over Taiwan, and Tehran over its nuclear program, these powers find common cause supporting governments that challenge American hegemony. Venezuela serves as an ideal candidate—geographically positioned to concern Washington, possessing valuable energy resources, and already alienated by American sanctions.
自我强化的螺旋
这种运作的动态遵循着一种可悲的逻辑。随着美国在乌克兰问题上对俄罗斯、在台湾（地区）问题上对中国、在核计划问题上对伊朗不断施压，这些国家找到了共同的目标：支持那些挑战美国霸权的政府。委内瑞拉是一个理想的候选者——其地理位置令华盛顿担忧，拥有宝贵的能源资源，且已因美国制裁而被疏远。
The more aggressively Washington pursues “maximum pressure“ campaigns globally, the more incentive adversarial powers have to create pressure points within America’s traditional sphere of influence. Russian strategic planners understand that military cooperation with Venezuela forces the Pentagon to consider Caribbean scenarios alongside European contingencies. Chinese economists recognize Venezuelan oil sales provide energy security and opportunities to expand yuan-denominated trade. Iranian officials appreciate that technological cooperation with Caracas creates additional complexity for already-stretched American intelligence services.
华盛顿在全球推行“极限施压”行动越是激进，对手国家在其传统势力范围内制造压力点的动机就越强。俄罗斯的战略规划者明白，与委内瑞拉的军事合作迫使五角大楼在考虑欧洲突发状况的同时，也必须兼顾加勒比地区的局势。中国经济学家认识到，委内瑞拉的石油销售不仅保障能源安全，也为扩大人民币贸易结算提供了机遇。伊朗官员则清楚，与加拉加斯的技术合作为本已捉襟见肘的美国情报机构增添了新的复杂性。
This creates precisely the nightmare scenario that Monroe Doctrine invocations supposedly prevent: hostile powers establishing military and intelligence presence near American territory. Yet this outcome stems not from Venezuelan aggression but from Washington’s economic warfare that left Caracas no choice but to seek alternative partnerships. The Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 that officials fear is materializing because American policy created conditions making such development rational from Venezuela’s perspective.
这恰恰构成了门罗主义宣称要防止的噩梦情景：敌对势力在美国领土附近建立军事和情报存在。然而，这一结果并非源于委内瑞拉的挑衅，而是源于华盛顿的经济战——这种政策迫使加拉加斯别无选择，只能寻求替代伙伴关系。官员们所恐惧的“古巴导弹危机2.0”正在成为现实，正是因为美国的政策创造了条件，使得从委内瑞拉视角来看，这样的发展是合理的。
Understanding the Monroe Doctrine
President James Monroe articulated the doctrine in his December 2, 1823 State of the unx Address, declaring the Western Hemisphere closed off to future European colonization. Yet from inception, the doctrine represented more aspiration than capability. The United States lacked military strength to enforce it—Britain effectively enforced the doctrine through Royal Navy supremacy throughout the 19th century.
理解门罗主义
詹姆斯·门罗总统在1823年12月2日的国情咨文中阐述了这一主义，宣布西半球不再对欧洲未来的殖民活动开放。然而，从诞生之初起，该主义更多是一种愿景而非实际能力。美国当时缺乏强制执行它的军事力量——整个19世纪，英国皇家海军的霸权实际上在维护着这一主义。
British Foreign Minister George Canning proposed a joint Anglo-American declaration, but Secretary of State John Quincy Adams obxted, arguing it would be undignified for America to come in “as a cockboat in the wake of the British man-of-war.” Monroe issued a unilateral declaration while Britain provided actual enforcement. Britain had compelling reasons: its industrializing economy needed markets in Latin America, and the doctrine aligned with the British’s informal empire of maintaining economic dominance without shouldering the direct costs of colonialism in the New World.
英国外交大臣乔治·坎宁曾提议英美联合发表声明，但美国国务卿约翰·昆西·亚当斯表示反对，认为美国若以“尾随英国军舰的小船”姿态加入将有失尊严。门罗最终发布了单方面声明，而英国则提供了实际执行力量。英国有充分的理由这样做：其工业化经济需要拉丁美洲的市场，且该主义符合英国“非正式帝国”的战略——即在维持经济主导地位的同时，无需承担在新大陆殖民的直接成本。
When European powers violated the doctrine, America’s response revealed its impotence. In 1833, Britain seized the Falkland Islands—Andrew Jackson protested but did nothing. From 1838-1850, France and Britain blockaded Argentina but no American action followed. In 1861, Spain reannexed the Dominican Republic while America fought its Civil War. Most significantly, Napoleon III invaded Mexico in 1862, installing Maximilian as Emperor. Washington was unable to intervene until after the Civil War ended.
当欧洲列强违背该主义时，美国的反应暴露了其无力。1833年，英国占领福克兰群岛——安德鲁·杰克逊提出抗议但未采取行动。1838年至1850年间，法国和英国封锁阿根廷，美国亦未作出回应。1861年，西班牙重新吞并多米尼加共和国，而当时美国正忙于内战。最重要的是，拿破仑三世于1862年入侵墨西哥，扶植马克西米利安为帝。华盛顿直到内战结束后才得以干预。
The doctrine transformed at the century’s turn. The Venezuela crisis of 1902-1903 prompted Theodore Roosevelt to announce the Roosevelt Corollary, transforming the Monroe Doctrine from defensive shield into offensive sword justifying American intervention throughout Latin America. During the Cold War, it justified opposing Soviet influence. In the 1980s, Reagan’s version committed America to aiding anti-Marxist insurgencies, with Nicaragua as a primary target.
该主义在世纪之交发生转变。1902-1903年的委内瑞拉危机促使西奥多·罗斯福宣布推出"罗斯福推论"，将门罗主义从防御性盾牌转变为进攻性利剑，为美国在整个拉丁美洲的干预行为正名。冷战期间，它成为美国对抗苏联影响力的理由。到了1980年代，里根版本的主义要求美国援助反马克思主义的叛乱活动，尼加拉瓜成为主要目标。
The Contemporary Perversion
Indeed, the Monroe Doctrine’s explicit revival in policy toward Venezuela under Trump marks a return to great power politics. In March 2019, then.National Security Advisor John Bolton declared that in this administration, America was not afraid to use the word Monroe Doctrine. Bolton invoked the doctrine while discussing potential intervention to convince Maduro to resign, telling CNN that America had opposed external threats in the Western Hemisphere since Monroe’s time, and it was time to resurrect it.
当代的扭曲
事实上，特朗普执政期间对委内瑞拉政策中门罗主义的明确复兴，标志着大国政治的回归。2019年3月，时任国家安全顾问约翰·博尔顿宣称，在本届政府领导下，美国"毫不避讳使用门罗主义这个词"。博尔顿在讨论为说服马杜罗下台可能进行的干预时援引了该主义，他对美国有线电视新闻网表示，美国自门罗时代以来始终反对西半球的外部威胁，现在是时候重振这一传统了。
Bolton frxd the doctrine as justification for opposing foreign interference in Venezuela, particularly from Russia, China, Cuba, and Iran. He referenced the “Troika of Tyranny” of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, emphasizing that the heavy Cuban presence with thousands of security officials in Venezuela was the sort of thing the United States found unacceptable. In April 2019, Bolton told Bay of Pigs veterans that the Monroe Doctrine was alive and well.
博尔顿将该主义作为反对外国干涉委内瑞拉（特别是来自俄罗斯、中国、古巴和伊朗的干涉）的理由。他提及古巴、尼加拉瓜和委内瑞拉构成的"暴政三巨头"，强调古巴在委内瑞拉派驻数千名安全人员的存在是美国绝不可接受的行为。2019年4月，博尔顿对猪湾事件老兵宣称，门罗主义"依然充满活力且运作良好"。
This represents an inversion of the doctrine’s purported purpose. The original emerged when the United States was a relatively weak power with limited international ambitions. Today’s invocation comes from a nation maintaining nearly 800 military installations across more than 70 countries, waging wars across multiple continents simultaneously. The United States has transformed from a republic with restrained foreign policy ambitions into a global consumer imperium projecting military power into every corner of the planet.
这标志着该主义宣称的初衷已被颠覆。最初的主义诞生于美国国力相对薄弱、国际野心有限的时期。而如今的援引者，却是一个在超过70个国家维持近800个军事基地、同时在多个大洲进行战争的国家。美国已从一个外交政策克制的共和国，转变为一个将军事力量投射到全球每个角落的全球性消费帝国。
Distinguishing Legitimate from Illegitimate Doctrine Applications
Here lies the crucial distinction that current policy utterly fails to make. The Monroe Doctrine retains legitimacy when establishing clear red lines against genuine security threats—specifically, preventing extra-hemispheric powers like Russia and China from establishing military bases in the Western Hemisphere. This represents a defensible national security interest aligned with the doctrine’s original defensive purpose. No American administration should tolerate Russian or Chinese military installations in Cuba, Venezuela, or elsewhere in the Americas that could threaten American territory or project power against the United States.
区分正当与非正当的主义运用
当前政策完全未能把握的关键区别正在于此。门罗主义在针对真实安全威胁划定明确红线时——具体而言，即防止俄罗斯和中国等域外大国在西半球建立军事基地——仍具有正当性。这代表着一种可辩护的国家安全利益，与该主义最初的防御目的相一致。任何美国政府都不应容忍俄罗斯或中国在古巴、委内瑞拉或美洲其他地区建立可能威胁美国领土或向美国投射力量的军事设施。
Such a baseline security policy differs fundamentally from the universalist foreign policy currently pursued. Establishing a red line against foreign military bases is one thing; pursuing comprehensive regime change, social engineering, and economic strangulation abroad is quite another. The former represents a legitimate security concern; the latter represents an unrealistic project of imperial domination that systematically undermines the very security interests it claims to defend.
这样一条底线安全政策与当前奉行的普遍主义外交政策有着本质区别。划定红线禁止外国军事基地是一回事；而在海外推行全面的政权更迭、社会改造和经济扼杀则完全是另一回事。前者是正当的安全关切；而后者则是一个不切实际的帝国统治计划，它系统地损害了其声称要捍卫的安全利益本身。
The goal should be benign hegemony, wherein the United States maintain sufficient influence in the Western Hemisphere to prevent hostile military threats while respecting the sovereignty and agency of Latin American nations to develop their own political and economic systems. This means accepting that some governments in the region will not align with American preferences, will pursue economic relationships with China, or will maintain diplomatic ties with Russia and Iran. So long as these relationships do not extend to hosting foreign military bases or allowing power projection capabilities against the United States, they fall within the legitimate sphere of sovereign decision-making. More importantly, the United States would also reduce its military footprint abroad by closing its hundreds of foreign military bases and bringing back the over 170,000 active-duty troops stationed abroad. From there, the United States can build a national security strategy focused on protecting the border and protecting shipping lanes in the Western Hemisphere.
目标应当是良性的主导地位，即美国在西半球保持足够影响力以防止敌对军事威胁，同时尊重拉丁美洲各国的主权和自主权，允许它们发展自身的政治和经济体系。这意味着接受该地区部分政府不会遵循美国的偏好、将与中国建立经济联系，或与俄罗斯及伊朗保持外交关系。只要这些关系不涉及允许外国建立军事基地或部署针对美国的武力投送能力，它们就属于主权决策的合法范畴。更重要的是，美国也应通过关闭其数百个海外军事基地、撤回超过17万名驻外现役军人来缩减海外军事存在。在此基础上，美国可以构建一个专注于保护本土边境及西半球航运航道的国家安全战略。
Current policy is still stuck on maintaining American primacy, consequences be damned. Washington pursues regime change and comprehensive sanctions against Venezuela not because Caracas hosts Russian military bases—though American policy is creating incentives for precisely that outcome—but because the country possesses vast oil reserves and Venezuela’s government challenges American preferences and maintains relationships with American adversaries. The result is a self-defeating spiral where economic warfare pushes Venezuela into the arms of Russia, China, and Iran, creating the very military threats that would legitimately trigger actions in line with the Monroe Doctrine.
If Washington continues down this path, it may soon face a geopolitical crisis of its own making, one born not in Caracas or Moscow but in the blind corners of its own imperial ambition.
现行政策仍固守于维持美国的主导地位，而不计后果。华盛顿对委内瑞拉推行政权更迭和全面制裁，并非因为加拉加斯设有俄罗斯军事基地（尽管美国的政策正在诱使这一结果发生），而是因为该国拥有巨大的石油储量，且委内瑞拉政府挑战了美国的偏好并与美国的对手保持关系。其结果是一个自我挫败的恶性循环：经济战将委内瑞拉推向俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的怀抱，从而恰恰催生了那些本可正当触发门罗主义行动的军事威胁。
如果华盛顿继续沿着这条道路走下去，它可能很快会面临一场由其自身造成的地缘政治危机——这场危机并非源于加拉加斯或莫斯科，而是源于其自身帝国野心中盲目的角落。
（完）
评论翻译
On December 10, 2025, Coast Guard personnel fast-roped from Navy helicopters onto the deck of an oil tanker in international waters near Venezuela, seizing what the Trump administration called the Skipper, a vessel allegedly involved in sanctions evasion. Attorney General Pam Bondi declared the operation targeted networks financing terrorism and rogue regimes, while President Trump casually remarked about the confiscated oil: “We keep it, I guess.”
The Venezuelan government responded by calling the seizure an act of international piracy, arguing that Washington’s true motives had finally been exposed—not restricting migration, not clamping down on drug trafficking, not promoting democracy, but making an attempt to acquire Venezuela’s vast petroleum reserves.
2025年12月10日，美国海岸警卫队人员从海军直升机上通过速降绳降落在委内瑞拉附近国际水域一艘油轮的甲板上，扣押了被特朗普政府称为“船长号”的船只。据称该船参与了逃避制裁的活动。司法部长帕姆·邦迪宣称，此次行动针对的是为恐怖主义和非法政权提供资金的网络。而特朗普总统在谈及被没收的石油时则轻描淡写地表示：“我想，我们留着吧。”
委内瑞拉政府对此回应称，此次扣押行为是国际海盗行径，并指出华盛顿的真实动机终于暴露——不是为了限制移民，不是为了打击贩毒，不是为了促进民主，而是为了试图攫取委内瑞拉丰富的石油储备。
This brazen maritime interdiction represents merely the latest escalation in a pressure campaign that has already claimed dozens of lives. Reuters documented that the United States acknowledged at least five strikes on vessels near Venezuela, with several dozen people killed in these operations.
The administration and geopolitical strategists sympathetic to Trump invoke the Monroe Doctrine to justify this escalation. Yet this appeal obscures a fundamental reality: Venezuela’s current alignment with extra-hemispheric adversaries such as Russia, China, and Iran represents not unprovoked aggression but a predictable response to decades of American economic warfare and destabilization efforts.
这次明目张胆的海上拦截行动，仅仅是已造成数十人丧生的施压行动的最新升级。路透社记录显示，美国承认在委内瑞拉附近海域对船只进行了至少五次打击，这些行动已导致数十人死亡。
特朗普政府及其同情他的地缘战略家援引门罗主义为此次升级辩护。然而，这种诉求掩盖了一个根本现实：委内瑞拉当前与俄罗斯、中国和伊朗等域外对手的结盟，并非无端挑衅，而是对美国长达数十年的经济战争与破坏稳定行动的可预见的回应。
The irony is stark. Washington officials warn about foreign powers gaining influence in America’s backyard, seemingly oblivious to how their own interventionist policies pushed Caracas into precisely these arrangements. The more aggressively the United States confronts Russia, China, and Iran globally, the more these powers deepen cooperation with Venezuela. What American policymakers fear as a new Cuban Missile Crisis is rapidly becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, manufactured not by adversaries’ ambitions but by Washington’s own imperial overstretch.
讽刺意味是如此鲜明。华盛顿官员警告外国势力在美国"后院"扩大影响力，却似乎忽略了正是他们自己的干预政策将加拉加斯推向了这些结盟。美国在全球范围内对俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的对抗越激进，这些国家与委内瑞拉的合作就越深入。美国政策制定者所担忧的"新古巴导弹危机"，正迅速成为一个自我实现的预言——而这并非由对手的野心造就，而是华盛顿自身帝国扩张过度所导致的。
The Anatomy of American Intervention
To understand Venezuela’s current strategic partnerships, one must first grasp the systematic campaign that preceded them. Since 2005, Washington has imposed 12 distinct rounds of sanctions, creating one of the most comprehensive economic warfare campaigns in the Western Hemisphere. The United States currently maintains 431 sanction designations on Venezuelan individuals and entities, having sanctioned 81 individuals and 46 entities.
美国干预的解剖
要理解委内瑞拉当前的战略伙伴关系，首先必须了解此前实施的系统性行动。自2005年起，华盛顿已实施了12轮不同的制裁，这构成了西半球最全面的经济战行动之一。目前，美国对委内瑞拉的个人和实体保持着431项制裁指定，共制裁了81名个人和46个实体。
The humanitarian toll has been catastrophic. The 2017 financial sanctions and 2019-2020 oil bans strangled Venezuela’s export capacity, worsening the humanitarian crisis and triggering a mass migration exodus from the country. John Bolton candidly admitted these sanctions aimed at driving PDVSA’s production as low as possible to crash Maduro’s regime. When Western capital markets vanished under threat of secondary sanctions, Venezuela turned to nations willing to defy American financial hegemony—creating a de facto balancing coalition against Washington.
人道主义的代价是灾难性的。2017年的金融制裁与2019-2020年的石油禁令扼杀了委内瑞拉的出口能力，加剧了人道主义危机并引发了该国大规模人口外流。约翰·博尔顿曾坦承，这些制裁旨在将委内瑞拉国家石油公司的产量压至最低，从而推翻马杜罗政权。当西方资本市场在二级制裁的威胁下消失后，委内瑞拉转向了那些敢于挑战美国金融霸权的国家——这事实上形成了一个与华盛顿抗衡的平衡联盟。
The Architecture of Counter-Alignment
The strategic partnerships Venezuela has forged tell the story of a nation increasingly cut off from Western commerce and forced to build alternative networks. Most significantly, Russia signed a comprehensive 10-year strategic partnership with Venezuela in May 2025, ratified in October 2025, covering more than 350 bilateral agreements on security, defense, and technology. Russian cargo aircraft have recently been landing in Caracas with additional military supplies. In October 2025, Maduro requested Russian assistance enhancing air defenses, restoring Su-30 aircraft, and acquiring missiles.
反制联盟的架构
委内瑞拉建立的战略伙伴关系，讲述了一个逐渐与西方商业体系割裂、被迫构建替代网络的故事。其中最值得关注的是，俄罗斯于2025年5月与委内瑞拉签署了为期十年的全面战略伙伴关系协议，并于2025年10月获得批准，涵盖超过350项涉及安全、防务和技术的双边协议。近期，俄罗斯货运飞机已搭载额外军事物资降落在加拉加斯。2025年10月，马杜罗请求俄罗斯协助加强防空系统、修复苏-30战机并获得导弹支持。
Iranian cooperation has had an underrated impact. Tehran has provided assistance in drone technology development and sanctions evasion assistance that has helped Venezuela maintain some petroleum exports despite American interdiction efforts. Perhaps most consequential is China’s economic engagement through the oil-for-loans program, through which Beijing has extended approximately $68 billion in financing since 2007. Venezuela commits to supply China National Petroleum Corporation with minimum daily shipments ranging from 230,000 to 800,000 barrels depending on price fluctuations to service debt obligations.
伊朗的合作产生了被低估的影响。德黑兰在无人机技术发展和规避制裁方面提供了援助，帮助委内瑞拉在美国的封锁下维持了部分石油出口。
或许最具深远影响的是中国的经济参与——通过“石油换贷款”计划，自2007年以来北京已提供了约680亿美元的融资。委内瑞拉承诺向中国石油天然气集团公司每日供应最低23万至80万桶石油（具体数量随价格波动），以履行其偿债义务。
These arrangements represent far more than economic convenience. They constitute a deliberate strategy by Russia, China, and Iran to establish positions within the Western Hemisphere that complicate American military planning and force Washington to divert resources from Eurasian theaters.
这些安排远不止于经济便利。它们构成了俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的一项深思熟虑的战略，旨在西半球确立其存在，以此干扰美国的军事计划，并迫使华盛顿从欧亚战区转移资源。
The Self-Inflicting Spiral
The dynamic at work possesses a terrible logic. As the United States escalates pressure on Russia over Ukraine, Beijing over Taiwan, and Tehran over its nuclear program, these powers find common cause supporting governments that challenge American hegemony. Venezuela serves as an ideal candidate—geographically positioned to concern Washington, possessing valuable energy resources, and already alienated by American sanctions.
自我强化的螺旋
这种运作的动态遵循着一种可悲的逻辑。随着美国在乌克兰问题上对俄罗斯、在台湾（地区）问题上对中国、在核计划问题上对伊朗不断施压，这些国家找到了共同的目标：支持那些挑战美国霸权的政府。委内瑞拉是一个理想的候选者——其地理位置令华盛顿担忧，拥有宝贵的能源资源，且已因美国制裁而被疏远。
The more aggressively Washington pursues “maximum pressure“ campaigns globally, the more incentive adversarial powers have to create pressure points within America’s traditional sphere of influence. Russian strategic planners understand that military cooperation with Venezuela forces the Pentagon to consider Caribbean scenarios alongside European contingencies. Chinese economists recognize Venezuelan oil sales provide energy security and opportunities to expand yuan-denominated trade. Iranian officials appreciate that technological cooperation with Caracas creates additional complexity for already-stretched American intelligence services.
华盛顿在全球推行“极限施压”行动越是激进，对手国家在其传统势力范围内制造压力点的动机就越强。俄罗斯的战略规划者明白，与委内瑞拉的军事合作迫使五角大楼在考虑欧洲突发状况的同时，也必须兼顾加勒比地区的局势。中国经济学家认识到，委内瑞拉的石油销售不仅保障能源安全，也为扩大人民币贸易结算提供了机遇。伊朗官员则清楚，与加拉加斯的技术合作为本已捉襟见肘的美国情报机构增添了新的复杂性。
This creates precisely the nightmare scenario that Monroe Doctrine invocations supposedly prevent: hostile powers establishing military and intelligence presence near American territory. Yet this outcome stems not from Venezuelan aggression but from Washington’s economic warfare that left Caracas no choice but to seek alternative partnerships. The Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 that officials fear is materializing because American policy created conditions making such development rational from Venezuela’s perspective.
这恰恰构成了门罗主义宣称要防止的噩梦情景：敌对势力在美国领土附近建立军事和情报存在。然而，这一结果并非源于委内瑞拉的挑衅，而是源于华盛顿的经济战——这种政策迫使加拉加斯别无选择，只能寻求替代伙伴关系。官员们所恐惧的“古巴导弹危机2.0”正在成为现实，正是因为美国的政策创造了条件，使得从委内瑞拉视角来看，这样的发展是合理的。
Understanding the Monroe Doctrine
President James Monroe articulated the doctrine in his December 2, 1823 State of the unx Address, declaring the Western Hemisphere closed off to future European colonization. Yet from inception, the doctrine represented more aspiration than capability. The United States lacked military strength to enforce it—Britain effectively enforced the doctrine through Royal Navy supremacy throughout the 19th century.
理解门罗主义
詹姆斯·门罗总统在1823年12月2日的国情咨文中阐述了这一主义，宣布西半球不再对欧洲未来的殖民活动开放。然而，从诞生之初起，该主义更多是一种愿景而非实际能力。美国当时缺乏强制执行它的军事力量——整个19世纪，英国皇家海军的霸权实际上在维护着这一主义。
British Foreign Minister George Canning proposed a joint Anglo-American declaration, but Secretary of State John Quincy Adams obxted, arguing it would be undignified for America to come in “as a cockboat in the wake of the British man-of-war.” Monroe issued a unilateral declaration while Britain provided actual enforcement. Britain had compelling reasons: its industrializing economy needed markets in Latin America, and the doctrine aligned with the British’s informal empire of maintaining economic dominance without shouldering the direct costs of colonialism in the New World.
英国外交大臣乔治·坎宁曾提议英美联合发表声明，但美国国务卿约翰·昆西·亚当斯表示反对，认为美国若以“尾随英国军舰的小船”姿态加入将有失尊严。门罗最终发布了单方面声明，而英国则提供了实际执行力量。英国有充分的理由这样做：其工业化经济需要拉丁美洲的市场，且该主义符合英国“非正式帝国”的战略——即在维持经济主导地位的同时，无需承担在新大陆殖民的直接成本。
When European powers violated the doctrine, America’s response revealed its impotence. In 1833, Britain seized the Falkland Islands—Andrew Jackson protested but did nothing. From 1838-1850, France and Britain blockaded Argentina but no American action followed. In 1861, Spain reannexed the Dominican Republic while America fought its Civil War. Most significantly, Napoleon III invaded Mexico in 1862, installing Maximilian as Emperor. Washington was unable to intervene until after the Civil War ended.
当欧洲列强违背该主义时，美国的反应暴露了其无力。1833年，英国占领福克兰群岛——安德鲁·杰克逊提出抗议但未采取行动。1838年至1850年间，法国和英国封锁阿根廷，美国亦未作出回应。1861年，西班牙重新吞并多米尼加共和国，而当时美国正忙于内战。最重要的是，拿破仑三世于1862年入侵墨西哥，扶植马克西米利安为帝。华盛顿直到内战结束后才得以干预。
The doctrine transformed at the century’s turn. The Venezuela crisis of 1902-1903 prompted Theodore Roosevelt to announce the Roosevelt Corollary, transforming the Monroe Doctrine from defensive shield into offensive sword justifying American intervention throughout Latin America. During the Cold War, it justified opposing Soviet influence. In the 1980s, Reagan’s version committed America to aiding anti-Marxist insurgencies, with Nicaragua as a primary target.
该主义在世纪之交发生转变。1902-1903年的委内瑞拉危机促使西奥多·罗斯福宣布推出"罗斯福推论"，将门罗主义从防御性盾牌转变为进攻性利剑，为美国在整个拉丁美洲的干预行为正名。冷战期间，它成为美国对抗苏联影响力的理由。到了1980年代，里根版本的主义要求美国援助反马克思主义的叛乱活动，尼加拉瓜成为主要目标。
The Contemporary Perversion
Indeed, the Monroe Doctrine’s explicit revival in policy toward Venezuela under Trump marks a return to great power politics. In March 2019, then.National Security Advisor John Bolton declared that in this administration, America was not afraid to use the word Monroe Doctrine. Bolton invoked the doctrine while discussing potential intervention to convince Maduro to resign, telling CNN that America had opposed external threats in the Western Hemisphere since Monroe’s time, and it was time to resurrect it.
当代的扭曲
事实上，特朗普执政期间对委内瑞拉政策中门罗主义的明确复兴，标志着大国政治的回归。2019年3月，时任国家安全顾问约翰·博尔顿宣称，在本届政府领导下，美国"毫不避讳使用门罗主义这个词"。博尔顿在讨论为说服马杜罗下台可能进行的干预时援引了该主义，他对美国有线电视新闻网表示，美国自门罗时代以来始终反对西半球的外部威胁，现在是时候重振这一传统了。
Bolton frxd the doctrine as justification for opposing foreign interference in Venezuela, particularly from Russia, China, Cuba, and Iran. He referenced the “Troika of Tyranny” of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, emphasizing that the heavy Cuban presence with thousands of security officials in Venezuela was the sort of thing the United States found unacceptable. In April 2019, Bolton told Bay of Pigs veterans that the Monroe Doctrine was alive and well.
博尔顿将该主义作为反对外国干涉委内瑞拉（特别是来自俄罗斯、中国、古巴和伊朗的干涉）的理由。他提及古巴、尼加拉瓜和委内瑞拉构成的"暴政三巨头"，强调古巴在委内瑞拉派驻数千名安全人员的存在是美国绝不可接受的行为。2019年4月，博尔顿对猪湾事件老兵宣称，门罗主义"依然充满活力且运作良好"。
This represents an inversion of the doctrine’s purported purpose. The original emerged when the United States was a relatively weak power with limited international ambitions. Today’s invocation comes from a nation maintaining nearly 800 military installations across more than 70 countries, waging wars across multiple continents simultaneously. The United States has transformed from a republic with restrained foreign policy ambitions into a global consumer imperium projecting military power into every corner of the planet.
这标志着该主义宣称的初衷已被颠覆。最初的主义诞生于美国国力相对薄弱、国际野心有限的时期。而如今的援引者，却是一个在超过70个国家维持近800个军事基地、同时在多个大洲进行战争的国家。美国已从一个外交政策克制的共和国，转变为一个将军事力量投射到全球每个角落的全球性消费帝国。
Distinguishing Legitimate from Illegitimate Doctrine Applications
Here lies the crucial distinction that current policy utterly fails to make. The Monroe Doctrine retains legitimacy when establishing clear red lines against genuine security threats—specifically, preventing extra-hemispheric powers like Russia and China from establishing military bases in the Western Hemisphere. This represents a defensible national security interest aligned with the doctrine’s original defensive purpose. No American administration should tolerate Russian or Chinese military installations in Cuba, Venezuela, or elsewhere in the Americas that could threaten American territory or project power against the United States.
区分正当与非正当的主义运用
当前政策完全未能把握的关键区别正在于此。门罗主义在针对真实安全威胁划定明确红线时——具体而言，即防止俄罗斯和中国等域外大国在西半球建立军事基地——仍具有正当性。这代表着一种可辩护的国家安全利益，与该主义最初的防御目的相一致。任何美国政府都不应容忍俄罗斯或中国在古巴、委内瑞拉或美洲其他地区建立可能威胁美国领土或向美国投射力量的军事设施。
Such a baseline security policy differs fundamentally from the universalist foreign policy currently pursued. Establishing a red line against foreign military bases is one thing; pursuing comprehensive regime change, social engineering, and economic strangulation abroad is quite another. The former represents a legitimate security concern; the latter represents an unrealistic project of imperial domination that systematically undermines the very security interests it claims to defend.
这样一条底线安全政策与当前奉行的普遍主义外交政策有着本质区别。划定红线禁止外国军事基地是一回事；而在海外推行全面的政权更迭、社会改造和经济扼杀则完全是另一回事。前者是正当的安全关切；而后者则是一个不切实际的帝国统治计划，它系统地损害了其声称要捍卫的安全利益本身。
The goal should be benign hegemony, wherein the United States maintain sufficient influence in the Western Hemisphere to prevent hostile military threats while respecting the sovereignty and agency of Latin American nations to develop their own political and economic systems. This means accepting that some governments in the region will not align with American preferences, will pursue economic relationships with China, or will maintain diplomatic ties with Russia and Iran. So long as these relationships do not extend to hosting foreign military bases or allowing power projection capabilities against the United States, they fall within the legitimate sphere of sovereign decision-making. More importantly, the United States would also reduce its military footprint abroad by closing its hundreds of foreign military bases and bringing back the over 170,000 active-duty troops stationed abroad. From there, the United States can build a national security strategy focused on protecting the border and protecting shipping lanes in the Western Hemisphere.
目标应当是良性的主导地位，即美国在西半球保持足够影响力以防止敌对军事威胁，同时尊重拉丁美洲各国的主权和自主权，允许它们发展自身的政治和经济体系。这意味着接受该地区部分政府不会遵循美国的偏好、将与中国建立经济联系，或与俄罗斯及伊朗保持外交关系。只要这些关系不涉及允许外国建立军事基地或部署针对美国的武力投送能力，它们就属于主权决策的合法范畴。更重要的是，美国也应通过关闭其数百个海外军事基地、撤回超过17万名驻外现役军人来缩减海外军事存在。在此基础上，美国可以构建一个专注于保护本土边境及西半球航运航道的国家安全战略。
Current policy is still stuck on maintaining American primacy, consequences be damned. Washington pursues regime change and comprehensive sanctions against Venezuela not because Caracas hosts Russian military bases—though American policy is creating incentives for precisely that outcome—but because the country possesses vast oil reserves and Venezuela’s government challenges American preferences and maintains relationships with American adversaries. The result is a self-defeating spiral where economic warfare pushes Venezuela into the arms of Russia, China, and Iran, creating the very military threats that would legitimately trigger actions in line with the Monroe Doctrine.
If Washington continues down this path, it may soon face a geopolitical crisis of its own making, one born not in Caracas or Moscow but in the blind corners of its own imperial ambition.
现行政策仍固守于维持美国的主导地位，而不计后果。华盛顿对委内瑞拉推行政权更迭和全面制裁，并非因为加拉加斯设有俄罗斯军事基地（尽管美国的政策正在诱使这一结果发生），而是因为该国拥有巨大的石油储量，且委内瑞拉政府挑战了美国的偏好并与美国的对手保持关系。其结果是一个自我挫败的恶性循环：经济战将委内瑞拉推向俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的怀抱，从而恰恰催生了那些本可正当触发门罗主义行动的军事威胁。
如果华盛顿继续沿着这条道路走下去，它可能很快会面临一场由其自身造成的地缘政治危机——这场危机并非源于加拉加斯或莫斯科，而是源于其自身帝国野心中盲目的角落。
（完）
On December 10, 2025, Coast Guard personnel fast-roped from Navy helicopters onto the deck of an oil tanker in international waters near Venezuela, seizing what the Trump administration called the Skipper, a vessel allegedly involved in sanctions evasion. Attorney General Pam Bondi declared the operation targeted networks financing terrorism and rogue regimes, while President Trump casually remarked about the confiscated oil: “We keep it, I guess.”
The Venezuelan government responded by calling the seizure an act of international piracy, arguing that Washington’s true motives had finally been exposed—not restricting migration, not clamping down on drug trafficking, not promoting democracy, but making an attempt to acquire Venezuela’s vast petroleum reserves.
2025年12月10日，美国海岸警卫队人员从海军直升机上通过速降绳降落在委内瑞拉附近国际水域一艘油轮的甲板上，扣押了被特朗普政府称为“船长号”的船只。据称该船参与了逃避制裁的活动。司法部长帕姆·邦迪宣称，此次行动针对的是为恐怖主义和非法政权提供资金的网络。而特朗普总统在谈及被没收的石油时则轻描淡写地表示：“我想，我们留着吧。”
委内瑞拉政府对此回应称，此次扣押行为是国际海盗行径，并指出华盛顿的真实动机终于暴露——不是为了限制移民，不是为了打击贩毒，不是为了促进民主，而是为了试图攫取委内瑞拉丰富的石油储备。
This brazen maritime interdiction represents merely the latest escalation in a pressure campaign that has already claimed dozens of lives. Reuters documented that the United States acknowledged at least five strikes on vessels near Venezuela, with several dozen people killed in these operations.
The administration and geopolitical strategists sympathetic to Trump invoke the Monroe Doctrine to justify this escalation. Yet this appeal obscures a fundamental reality: Venezuela’s current alignment with extra-hemispheric adversaries such as Russia, China, and Iran represents not unprovoked aggression but a predictable response to decades of American economic warfare and destabilization efforts.
这次明目张胆的海上拦截行动，仅仅是已造成数十人丧生的施压行动的最新升级。路透社记录显示，美国承认在委内瑞拉附近海域对船只进行了至少五次打击，这些行动已导致数十人死亡。
特朗普政府及其同情他的地缘战略家援引门罗主义为此次升级辩护。然而，这种诉求掩盖了一个根本现实：委内瑞拉当前与俄罗斯、中国和伊朗等域外对手的结盟，并非无端挑衅，而是对美国长达数十年的经济战争与破坏稳定行动的可预见的回应。
The irony is stark. Washington officials warn about foreign powers gaining influence in America’s backyard, seemingly oblivious to how their own interventionist policies pushed Caracas into precisely these arrangements. The more aggressively the United States confronts Russia, China, and Iran globally, the more these powers deepen cooperation with Venezuela. What American policymakers fear as a new Cuban Missile Crisis is rapidly becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, manufactured not by adversaries’ ambitions but by Washington’s own imperial overstretch.
讽刺意味是如此鲜明。华盛顿官员警告外国势力在美国"后院"扩大影响力，却似乎忽略了正是他们自己的干预政策将加拉加斯推向了这些结盟。美国在全球范围内对俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的对抗越激进，这些国家与委内瑞拉的合作就越深入。美国政策制定者所担忧的"新古巴导弹危机"，正迅速成为一个自我实现的预言——而这并非由对手的野心造就，而是华盛顿自身帝国扩张过度所导致的。
The Anatomy of American Intervention
To understand Venezuela’s current strategic partnerships, one must first grasp the systematic campaign that preceded them. Since 2005, Washington has imposed 12 distinct rounds of sanctions, creating one of the most comprehensive economic warfare campaigns in the Western Hemisphere. The United States currently maintains 431 sanction designations on Venezuelan individuals and entities, having sanctioned 81 individuals and 46 entities.
美国干预的解剖
要理解委内瑞拉当前的战略伙伴关系，首先必须了解此前实施的系统性行动。自2005年起，华盛顿已实施了12轮不同的制裁，这构成了西半球最全面的经济战行动之一。目前，美国对委内瑞拉的个人和实体保持着431项制裁指定，共制裁了81名个人和46个实体。
The humanitarian toll has been catastrophic. The 2017 financial sanctions and 2019-2020 oil bans strangled Venezuela’s export capacity, worsening the humanitarian crisis and triggering a mass migration exodus from the country. John Bolton candidly admitted these sanctions aimed at driving PDVSA’s production as low as possible to crash Maduro’s regime. When Western capital markets vanished under threat of secondary sanctions, Venezuela turned to nations willing to defy American financial hegemony—creating a de facto balancing coalition against Washington.
人道主义的代价是灾难性的。2017年的金融制裁与2019-2020年的石油禁令扼杀了委内瑞拉的出口能力，加剧了人道主义危机并引发了该国大规模人口外流。约翰·博尔顿曾坦承，这些制裁旨在将委内瑞拉国家石油公司的产量压至最低，从而推翻马杜罗政权。当西方资本市场在二级制裁的威胁下消失后，委内瑞拉转向了那些敢于挑战美国金融霸权的国家——这事实上形成了一个与华盛顿抗衡的平衡联盟。
The Architecture of Counter-Alignment
The strategic partnerships Venezuela has forged tell the story of a nation increasingly cut off from Western commerce and forced to build alternative networks. Most significantly, Russia signed a comprehensive 10-year strategic partnership with Venezuela in May 2025, ratified in October 2025, covering more than 350 bilateral agreements on security, defense, and technology. Russian cargo aircraft have recently been landing in Caracas with additional military supplies. In October 2025, Maduro requested Russian assistance enhancing air defenses, restoring Su-30 aircraft, and acquiring missiles.
反制联盟的架构
委内瑞拉建立的战略伙伴关系，讲述了一个逐渐与西方商业体系割裂、被迫构建替代网络的故事。其中最值得关注的是，俄罗斯于2025年5月与委内瑞拉签署了为期十年的全面战略伙伴关系协议，并于2025年10月获得批准，涵盖超过350项涉及安全、防务和技术的双边协议。近期，俄罗斯货运飞机已搭载额外军事物资降落在加拉加斯。2025年10月，马杜罗请求俄罗斯协助加强防空系统、修复苏-30战机并获得导弹支持。
Iranian cooperation has had an underrated impact. Tehran has provided assistance in drone technology development and sanctions evasion assistance that has helped Venezuela maintain some petroleum exports despite American interdiction efforts. Perhaps most consequential is China’s economic engagement through the oil-for-loans program, through which Beijing has extended approximately $68 billion in financing since 2007. Venezuela commits to supply China National Petroleum Corporation with minimum daily shipments ranging from 230,000 to 800,000 barrels depending on price fluctuations to service debt obligations.
伊朗的合作产生了被低估的影响。德黑兰在无人机技术发展和规避制裁方面提供了援助，帮助委内瑞拉在美国的封锁下维持了部分石油出口。
或许最具深远影响的是中国的经济参与——通过“石油换贷款”计划，自2007年以来北京已提供了约680亿美元的融资。委内瑞拉承诺向中国石油天然气集团公司每日供应最低23万至80万桶石油（具体数量随价格波动），以履行其偿债义务。
These arrangements represent far more than economic convenience. They constitute a deliberate strategy by Russia, China, and Iran to establish positions within the Western Hemisphere that complicate American military planning and force Washington to divert resources from Eurasian theaters.
这些安排远不止于经济便利。它们构成了俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的一项深思熟虑的战略，旨在西半球确立其存在，以此干扰美国的军事计划，并迫使华盛顿从欧亚战区转移资源。
The Self-Inflicting Spiral
The dynamic at work possesses a terrible logic. As the United States escalates pressure on Russia over Ukraine, Beijing over Taiwan, and Tehran over its nuclear program, these powers find common cause supporting governments that challenge American hegemony. Venezuela serves as an ideal candidate—geographically positioned to concern Washington, possessing valuable energy resources, and already alienated by American sanctions.
自我强化的螺旋
这种运作的动态遵循着一种可悲的逻辑。随着美国在乌克兰问题上对俄罗斯、在台湾（地区）问题上对中国、在核计划问题上对伊朗不断施压，这些国家找到了共同的目标：支持那些挑战美国霸权的政府。委内瑞拉是一个理想的候选者——其地理位置令华盛顿担忧，拥有宝贵的能源资源，且已因美国制裁而被疏远。
The more aggressively Washington pursues “maximum pressure“ campaigns globally, the more incentive adversarial powers have to create pressure points within America’s traditional sphere of influence. Russian strategic planners understand that military cooperation with Venezuela forces the Pentagon to consider Caribbean scenarios alongside European contingencies. Chinese economists recognize Venezuelan oil sales provide energy security and opportunities to expand yuan-denominated trade. Iranian officials appreciate that technological cooperation with Caracas creates additional complexity for already-stretched American intelligence services.
华盛顿在全球推行“极限施压”行动越是激进，对手国家在其传统势力范围内制造压力点的动机就越强。俄罗斯的战略规划者明白，与委内瑞拉的军事合作迫使五角大楼在考虑欧洲突发状况的同时，也必须兼顾加勒比地区的局势。中国经济学家认识到，委内瑞拉的石油销售不仅保障能源安全，也为扩大人民币贸易结算提供了机遇。伊朗官员则清楚，与加拉加斯的技术合作为本已捉襟见肘的美国情报机构增添了新的复杂性。
This creates precisely the nightmare scenario that Monroe Doctrine invocations supposedly prevent: hostile powers establishing military and intelligence presence near American territory. Yet this outcome stems not from Venezuelan aggression but from Washington’s economic warfare that left Caracas no choice but to seek alternative partnerships. The Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 that officials fear is materializing because American policy created conditions making such development rational from Venezuela’s perspective.
这恰恰构成了门罗主义宣称要防止的噩梦情景：敌对势力在美国领土附近建立军事和情报存在。然而，这一结果并非源于委内瑞拉的挑衅，而是源于华盛顿的经济战——这种政策迫使加拉加斯别无选择，只能寻求替代伙伴关系。官员们所恐惧的“古巴导弹危机2.0”正在成为现实，正是因为美国的政策创造了条件，使得从委内瑞拉视角来看，这样的发展是合理的。
Understanding the Monroe Doctrine
President James Monroe articulated the doctrine in his December 2, 1823 State of the unx Address, declaring the Western Hemisphere closed off to future European colonization. Yet from inception, the doctrine represented more aspiration than capability. The United States lacked military strength to enforce it—Britain effectively enforced the doctrine through Royal Navy supremacy throughout the 19th century.
理解门罗主义
詹姆斯·门罗总统在1823年12月2日的国情咨文中阐述了这一主义，宣布西半球不再对欧洲未来的殖民活动开放。然而，从诞生之初起，该主义更多是一种愿景而非实际能力。美国当时缺乏强制执行它的军事力量——整个19世纪，英国皇家海军的霸权实际上在维护着这一主义。
British Foreign Minister George Canning proposed a joint Anglo-American declaration, but Secretary of State John Quincy Adams obxted, arguing it would be undignified for America to come in “as a cockboat in the wake of the British man-of-war.” Monroe issued a unilateral declaration while Britain provided actual enforcement. Britain had compelling reasons: its industrializing economy needed markets in Latin America, and the doctrine aligned with the British’s informal empire of maintaining economic dominance without shouldering the direct costs of colonialism in the New World.
英国外交大臣乔治·坎宁曾提议英美联合发表声明，但美国国务卿约翰·昆西·亚当斯表示反对，认为美国若以“尾随英国军舰的小船”姿态加入将有失尊严。门罗最终发布了单方面声明，而英国则提供了实际执行力量。英国有充分的理由这样做：其工业化经济需要拉丁美洲的市场，且该主义符合英国“非正式帝国”的战略——即在维持经济主导地位的同时，无需承担在新大陆殖民的直接成本。
When European powers violated the doctrine, America’s response revealed its impotence. In 1833, Britain seized the Falkland Islands—Andrew Jackson protested but did nothing. From 1838-1850, France and Britain blockaded Argentina but no American action followed. In 1861, Spain reannexed the Dominican Republic while America fought its Civil War. Most significantly, Napoleon III invaded Mexico in 1862, installing Maximilian as Emperor. Washington was unable to intervene until after the Civil War ended.
当欧洲列强违背该主义时，美国的反应暴露了其无力。1833年，英国占领福克兰群岛——安德鲁·杰克逊提出抗议但未采取行动。1838年至1850年间，法国和英国封锁阿根廷，美国亦未作出回应。1861年，西班牙重新吞并多米尼加共和国，而当时美国正忙于内战。最重要的是，拿破仑三世于1862年入侵墨西哥，扶植马克西米利安为帝。华盛顿直到内战结束后才得以干预。
The doctrine transformed at the century’s turn. The Venezuela crisis of 1902-1903 prompted Theodore Roosevelt to announce the Roosevelt Corollary, transforming the Monroe Doctrine from defensive shield into offensive sword justifying American intervention throughout Latin America. During the Cold War, it justified opposing Soviet influence. In the 1980s, Reagan’s version committed America to aiding anti-Marxist insurgencies, with Nicaragua as a primary target.
该主义在世纪之交发生转变。1902-1903年的委内瑞拉危机促使西奥多·罗斯福宣布推出"罗斯福推论"，将门罗主义从防御性盾牌转变为进攻性利剑，为美国在整个拉丁美洲的干预行为正名。冷战期间，它成为美国对抗苏联影响力的理由。到了1980年代，里根版本的主义要求美国援助反马克思主义的叛乱活动，尼加拉瓜成为主要目标。
The Contemporary Perversion
Indeed, the Monroe Doctrine’s explicit revival in policy toward Venezuela under Trump marks a return to great power politics. In March 2019, then.National Security Advisor John Bolton declared that in this administration, America was not afraid to use the word Monroe Doctrine. Bolton invoked the doctrine while discussing potential intervention to convince Maduro to resign, telling CNN that America had opposed external threats in the Western Hemisphere since Monroe’s time, and it was time to resurrect it.
当代的扭曲
事实上，特朗普执政期间对委内瑞拉政策中门罗主义的明确复兴，标志着大国政治的回归。2019年3月，时任国家安全顾问约翰·博尔顿宣称，在本届政府领导下，美国"毫不避讳使用门罗主义这个词"。博尔顿在讨论为说服马杜罗下台可能进行的干预时援引了该主义，他对美国有线电视新闻网表示，美国自门罗时代以来始终反对西半球的外部威胁，现在是时候重振这一传统了。
Bolton frxd the doctrine as justification for opposing foreign interference in Venezuela, particularly from Russia, China, Cuba, and Iran. He referenced the “Troika of Tyranny” of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, emphasizing that the heavy Cuban presence with thousands of security officials in Venezuela was the sort of thing the United States found unacceptable. In April 2019, Bolton told Bay of Pigs veterans that the Monroe Doctrine was alive and well.
博尔顿将该主义作为反对外国干涉委内瑞拉（特别是来自俄罗斯、中国、古巴和伊朗的干涉）的理由。他提及古巴、尼加拉瓜和委内瑞拉构成的"暴政三巨头"，强调古巴在委内瑞拉派驻数千名安全人员的存在是美国绝不可接受的行为。2019年4月，博尔顿对猪湾事件老兵宣称，门罗主义"依然充满活力且运作良好"。
This represents an inversion of the doctrine’s purported purpose. The original emerged when the United States was a relatively weak power with limited international ambitions. Today’s invocation comes from a nation maintaining nearly 800 military installations across more than 70 countries, waging wars across multiple continents simultaneously. The United States has transformed from a republic with restrained foreign policy ambitions into a global consumer imperium projecting military power into every corner of the planet.
这标志着该主义宣称的初衷已被颠覆。最初的主义诞生于美国国力相对薄弱、国际野心有限的时期。而如今的援引者，却是一个在超过70个国家维持近800个军事基地、同时在多个大洲进行战争的国家。美国已从一个外交政策克制的共和国，转变为一个将军事力量投射到全球每个角落的全球性消费帝国。
Distinguishing Legitimate from Illegitimate Doctrine Applications
Here lies the crucial distinction that current policy utterly fails to make. The Monroe Doctrine retains legitimacy when establishing clear red lines against genuine security threats—specifically, preventing extra-hemispheric powers like Russia and China from establishing military bases in the Western Hemisphere. This represents a defensible national security interest aligned with the doctrine’s original defensive purpose. No American administration should tolerate Russian or Chinese military installations in Cuba, Venezuela, or elsewhere in the Americas that could threaten American territory or project power against the United States.
区分正当与非正当的主义运用
当前政策完全未能把握的关键区别正在于此。门罗主义在针对真实安全威胁划定明确红线时——具体而言，即防止俄罗斯和中国等域外大国在西半球建立军事基地——仍具有正当性。这代表着一种可辩护的国家安全利益，与该主义最初的防御目的相一致。任何美国政府都不应容忍俄罗斯或中国在古巴、委内瑞拉或美洲其他地区建立可能威胁美国领土或向美国投射力量的军事设施。
Such a baseline security policy differs fundamentally from the universalist foreign policy currently pursued. Establishing a red line against foreign military bases is one thing; pursuing comprehensive regime change, social engineering, and economic strangulation abroad is quite another. The former represents a legitimate security concern; the latter represents an unrealistic project of imperial domination that systematically undermines the very security interests it claims to defend.
这样一条底线安全政策与当前奉行的普遍主义外交政策有着本质区别。划定红线禁止外国军事基地是一回事；而在海外推行全面的政权更迭、社会改造和经济扼杀则完全是另一回事。前者是正当的安全关切；而后者则是一个不切实际的帝国统治计划，它系统地损害了其声称要捍卫的安全利益本身。
The goal should be benign hegemony, wherein the United States maintain sufficient influence in the Western Hemisphere to prevent hostile military threats while respecting the sovereignty and agency of Latin American nations to develop their own political and economic systems. This means accepting that some governments in the region will not align with American preferences, will pursue economic relationships with China, or will maintain diplomatic ties with Russia and Iran. So long as these relationships do not extend to hosting foreign military bases or allowing power projection capabilities against the United States, they fall within the legitimate sphere of sovereign decision-making. More importantly, the United States would also reduce its military footprint abroad by closing its hundreds of foreign military bases and bringing back the over 170,000 active-duty troops stationed abroad. From there, the United States can build a national security strategy focused on protecting the border and protecting shipping lanes in the Western Hemisphere.
目标应当是良性的主导地位，即美国在西半球保持足够影响力以防止敌对军事威胁，同时尊重拉丁美洲各国的主权和自主权，允许它们发展自身的政治和经济体系。这意味着接受该地区部分政府不会遵循美国的偏好、将与中国建立经济联系，或与俄罗斯及伊朗保持外交关系。只要这些关系不涉及允许外国建立军事基地或部署针对美国的武力投送能力，它们就属于主权决策的合法范畴。更重要的是，美国也应通过关闭其数百个海外军事基地、撤回超过17万名驻外现役军人来缩减海外军事存在。在此基础上，美国可以构建一个专注于保护本土边境及西半球航运航道的国家安全战略。
Current policy is still stuck on maintaining American primacy, consequences be damned. Washington pursues regime change and comprehensive sanctions against Venezuela not because Caracas hosts Russian military bases—though American policy is creating incentives for precisely that outcome—but because the country possesses vast oil reserves and Venezuela’s government challenges American preferences and maintains relationships with American adversaries. The result is a self-defeating spiral where economic warfare pushes Venezuela into the arms of Russia, China, and Iran, creating the very military threats that would legitimately trigger actions in line with the Monroe Doctrine.
If Washington continues down this path, it may soon face a geopolitical crisis of its own making, one born not in Caracas or Moscow but in the blind corners of its own imperial ambition.
现行政策仍固守于维持美国的主导地位，而不计后果。华盛顿对委内瑞拉推行政权更迭和全面制裁，并非因为加拉加斯设有俄罗斯军事基地（尽管美国的政策正在诱使这一结果发生），而是因为该国拥有巨大的石油储量，且委内瑞拉政府挑战了美国的偏好并与美国的对手保持关系。其结果是一个自我挫败的恶性循环：经济战将委内瑞拉推向俄罗斯、中国和伊朗的怀抱，从而恰恰催生了那些本可正当触发门罗主义行动的军事威胁。
如果华盛顿继续沿着这条道路走下去，它可能很快会面临一场由其自身造成的地缘政治危机——这场危机并非源于加拉加斯或莫斯科，而是源于其自身帝国野心中盲目的角落。
（完）
很赞 1
收藏