As the world enters 2025, former U.S. President Donald Trump, now preparing for his second term, has reignited the flames of territorial ambition with rhetoric that harks back to America’s imperial past. Proclamations about annexing Canada, reclaiming the Panama Canal, and purchasing Greenland have sent ripples through the global political landscape. Trump’s statements signal a bold, and perhaps dangerous, revival of expansionist policies reminiscent of the Monroe Doctrine, this time rebranded for the 21st century.
Trump recently unveiled a revised map of North America on Truth Social, merging Canada into the United States under the caption “Oh Canada.” At a press conference held at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump elaborated on his plan, claiming that Canada would benefit more as America’s 51st state than as an independent nation. Though dismissed as outlandish by many, including Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Trump’s remarks underline a calculated strategy to project American dominance. The rhetoric surrounding Mexico follows a similar pattern. Trump’s insistence that Mexico must bear the costs of its perceived failures to control immigration and drug trafficking comes with veiled threats of military intervention.
“If they can’t solve their problems, we’ll solve them for them,” Trump declared, reinforcing a narrative steeped in the history of U.S. intervention in Latin America. Perhaps most provocative is Trump’s stance on the Panama Canal. Calling it a “global treasure mismanaged by Panama,” Trump accused Chinese interests of exerting undue influence over the vital waterway. His rhetoric and the suggestion of reclaiming the canal by force evokes the United States’ century-long control of the canal, which ended in 1999. “It’s time to restore American authority over what rightfully belongs to us,” he said, signaling potential friction with Panama and its regional allies. Trump’s 2025 plans extend to the icy north, with renewed proposals to purchase Greenland from Denmark. Dismissed as absurd during his first tenure, Trump’s proposition is underpinned by the island’s strategic location and vast untapped resources.
Melting ice caps have made Greenland a focal point in the emerging Arctic geopolitical race, with its reserves of minerals and hydrocarbons attracting global attention. Trump’s transactional framing of the deal-“Denmark gains nothing, America gains everything” – aligns with his characteristic approach to foreign policy. While Denmark has categorically rejected the notion, the U.S.’s strategic interests in Greenland remain a point of concern for European and Arctic nations. At the heart of Trump’s declarations lies a revival of the Monroe Doctrine, articulated in 1823 to establish the Western Hemisphere as a U.S. sphere of influence. Trump’s modern reinterpretation prioritizes economic and strategic dominance, reflecting a departure from diplomacy in favour of unilateralism. The doctrine’s historical echoes can be heard in Trump’s call for a consolidated North America and his ambitions in Latin America. While critics argue that Trump’s rhetoric borders on neo-imperialism, his policies during his first term revealed a similar ethos.
The assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, the arming of Ukraine, and economic sanctions on Venezuela and Cuba demonstrated an interventionist streak cloaked in nationalist rhetoric. Trump’s vision, as evidenced by his comments on Canada, Mexico, Greenland, and Panama, signals a continuation of this approach. Trump’s rhetoric is not limited to grandiose proclamations but is backed by a strategy of economic coercion. During his press conference, he suggested imposing sanctions on Canada if it resists annexation. “They’ll come around,” he quipped, emphasizing America’s leverage as Canada’s largest trading partner. Similarly, he hinted at tariffs and aid freezes for Mexico, reiterating his belief that economic pressure can achieve what diplomacy cannot. The Panama Canal’s significance to global commerce and American interests cannot be overstated. Handling 5 per cent of global maritime trade, with a large portion benefitting U.S. markets, the canal’s control has symbolic and strategic value.
Trump’s accusations of Chinese influence provide a convenient pretext for intervention, though experts argue that his claims lack substance. Another striking aspect of Trump’s rhetoric involves the Gulf of Mexico. Rebranding it as the “Gulf of America,” he proclaimed that the renaming would symbolize America’s dominance over its maritime borders. While seemingly superficial, the gesture underscores his vision of a reinvigorated American identity, projecting control over geographical and economic spheres. Trump’s ambitions are not without historical precedent. The Louisiana Purchase, the annexation of Texas, and the acquisition of Alaska were all met with skepticism in their time but later became cornerstones of American territorial expansion.
Trump’s framing of Greenland as “a business deal” reflects this legacy, albeit in a contemporary context. However, the global order has evolved since the days of Manifest Destiny. Nations like China and Russia present formidable challenges to American supremacy, and unilateral land grabs risk alienating allies and sparking international conflicts. Critics caution that Trump’s vision, while appealing to a segment of his base, could destabilize the geopolitical balance. Domestically, Trump’s rhetoric galvanizes his supporters, who view territorial expansion as a pathway to restoring America’s greatness. His calls for reclaiming the canal, annexing Canada, renaming the Gulf of Mexico, and purchasing Greenland resonate with voters nostalgic for an era of unquestioned American dominance. However, such ambitions risk deepening divisions at home and straining international relations. Globally, Trump’s statements have drawn sharp criticism. Canadian leaders have dismissed his remarks as “absurd posturing,” while Denmark’s officials reaffirmed Greenland’s autonomy.
Latin American nations, wary of U.S. interventionism, have expressed concerns over the implications of Trump’s rhetoric. Even traditional allies in Europe and Asia have questioned America’s commitment to multilateralism under Trump’s leadership. As Trump prepares for his second term, his vision of an expanded America remains a focal point of his political narrative. Whether through economic pressure, military intervention, or rhetorical theatrics, his statements reflect a broader ideological shift toward asserting American primacy in an increasingly multipolar world. The question is not merely whether Trump’s ambitions are feasible but what they reveal about America’s evolving identity and its role in the global arena. Trump’s rhetoric encapsulates a vision of American imperialism reimagined for the modern era.
While these ambitions may never materialize, their implications for global geopolitics and America’s international standing are profound. As 20 January approaches, the world watches with bated breath to see how Trump’s vision unfolds, and what it means for the future of American power. (The writer is Associate Professor, Centre For South Asian Studies, Pondicherry Central University.)