The Monroe Doctrine has been described as a "hands off" warning to Europe. How did the U.S interpret the doctrine in practice?
On December second, 1823, President Monroe declared to the public his concerns on domestic and foreign affairs in his annual speech. In his words one could find ideas that did not matter only the U.S, but it interested Europe and the Americas as a whole. Such concerns would turn out to be a basis of a set principles that the U.S would implement in the future years, Monroe's words would soon be the Monroe Doctrine. However what Monroe said were bold ideas of support and pacific intervention, too altruistic for people to put into practice. Therefore those after him made tangents to such ideas, diversions so great that they changed the meaning and definition of the doctrine. This paper will analyze to what extent the U.S extensions to the Monroe Doctrine made this document diverge from its original "hands off" interpretation to become a more interventionist and militaristic.
In the early 1820's the U.S developed with President Monroe the Monroe Doctrine. Here he stated three important points the U.S should follow to successfully moderate its ties with nations this was his "hands off" warning to Europe and other powers. He stated that the U.S was to: not tolerate European colonization; remain neutral to wars and politics within European nations and their already existing colonies; take a stance against Europe if the New World was menaced. These ideas would be interpreted in a different manner by upcoming presidents.
As the Monroe Doctrine was declared by the 1820's, little was done to make it stand on its own. Europe saw this as a mere warning since the U.S was just developing and had no hardcore military or political influence to back any of its statements. The only help the U.S had was from the strong British navy which supported the U.S just to insure its commercial ties with America. These were the years in which the first...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document