The US has a long history of meddling in Latin America. What’s different about Donald Trump’s approach?

Jimmy Carter, who was president from 1977 to 1981, considered^[1] the treaties signed in 1977^[2] to cede control of the Panama Canal to Panama, ending over a century of strained relations, one of the crowning achievements^[3] of his administration.

Today, Panamanians are uncertain whether Donald Trump will abide by these treaties – and are nervous about what could happen next. Panamanian journalists that I have spoken with are increasingly concerned that the US will invade.

Trump has repeatedly refused to rule out using the US military to seize the Panama Canal^[4], if necessary, despite boasting that he had an impeccable record of not starting any new wars^[5].

While this appears to be a huge departure in US foreign policy towards Latin America, the US has had a long history of invading, meddling, supporting coups and offering clandestine support to violent non-state actors in the region.

One historian^[6] has noted that the US participated (directly and indirectly) in regime change in Latin America more than 40 times in the last century. This figure does not even take into account failed missions that didn’t result in regime change, such as the US’s orchestrated invasion of the Bay of Pigs in Cuba^[7] in 1961.

When the US is not intervening, its approach to the region has been described as “benign neglect”^[8]. During these interludes, Latin America was mostly ignored while the US prioritised other geopolitical interests.

But Trump’s latest threats to Panama are a return to the paternalistic era of US foreign policy towards Latin America. This arguably started with the Monroe Doctrine^[9] in 1823 — a framework that aimed to protect US interests in the region from European aggression. Latin America essentially became the US’s backyard. At the time, the Monroe Doctrine received some support from Latin American countries that were hoping for independence from Europe and republican forms of government.

Read more: US pressure has forced Panama to quit China's Belt and Road Initiative – it could set the pattern for further superpower clashes^[10]

But this would change with the increasingly interventionist posture of US president Theodore Roosevelt during his two terms from 1901 to 1909. On November 18 1903, when Panama was just 15 days old, Roosevelt signed the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty ^[11], in which the US promised to support Panamanian independence from Colombia in exchange for rights to build and operate the Panama Canal. Reportedly the deal was engineered by a Frenchman, Philippe Bunau-Varilla, and no Panamanians^[12] were involved. This was the era of “big stick diplomacy”^[13] where the US would muscle its way into getting what it wanted with a series of credible threats.