The Pros And Cons Of The Monroe Doctrine
The Venezuelan dictator had perpetually deferred payment on bonds held by German investors and owed money to British collectors. Both countries agreed to send a combined fleet to create a blockade in Venezuela ports after delivering an ultimatum demanding immediate settlement of their claims. Even though this forth extension was in opposition to the international law, Roosevelt added through the Drago Doctrine which prohibited any foreign force in the Western Hemisphere, even if the only reason for their occupation was for the collection of debt.
To Roosevelt the Monroe Doctrine was a guarantee of commercial independence for the Americas and the United States should intervene itself in the domestic affairs of its neighbors if they proved unable to protect U.S. investments in the region on their …show more content…
had to be a police power in the Western Hemisphere when Europeans wanted to forcefully collect their debt. Continual wrongdoing by European nations needed the intervention of a “civilized society.” It is the job of the United States to uphold stability in the Americas and non-payment of debts interfered with the stability, so the U.S. is forced to intervene. This extension to the Doctrine became known as the Roosevelt Corollary. It replaced European intervention with that of the United States. This extension often causes the forth to be overlooked because they both refer to European powers using force to collect debt, but the Roosevelt Corollary states the police role of the United States and he attached it to the Monroe Doctrine to win public