The Chinese Doctrine versus the Donroe Doctrine

Following the initial shock of the United States' attack on Venezuela, many eyes quickly turned to China, not only because of its specific weight on the global stage, but also because of its ties to Caracas, especially in the energy and oil sectors. Aware of this expectation, Beijing reacted with predictable speed and positioned itself among the first international actors to classify the invasion as an act of unilateralism, intimidation, and violation of fundamental norms of international law. This stance—later reaffirmed in the United Nations Security Council—rose as the antithesis of the current "Donroe Doctrine," a foreign policy principle summarized in the phrase "America for the Americans," that is, for the United States.

“All countries must accept the development paths of other countries, chosen independently by their people, and respect international law and the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The most important countries, in particular, must set an example,” President Xi Jinping stated 48 hours after the attack, in an unequivocal message that dispensed with mentioning names so that the world would know to whom he was referring.

“We have never believed that any country can play the role of world policeman, nor do we agree that anyone should arrogate to themselves the status of international judge,” added Foreign Minister Wang Yi, defending the principles of multilateralism and emphasizing that the sovereignty and security of states must be protected by international law, not by the law of the strongest.

In this regard, editorial articles from the official communication apparatus — Xinhua, People's Daily, CCTV, China Daily and Global TimesAmong other outlets, they were even more explicit in describing the US offensive as “an outrageous act that reveals who the real violator of international law is” and an attempt to “expand its hemispheric dominance to control strategic resources,” especially Venezuelan oil. “Launching a military attack against a sovereign country in the name of 'law enforcement' and forcibly detaining the president of another country by resorting to overwhelming power is a scenario so outrageous that even Hollywood screenwriters would have difficulty imagining it,” they stated.

Beyond the initial official condemnations, the outlines of Beijing's position became clear during the emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, held this week in New York at the request of Venezuela itself, along with Colombia, Russia, and China. On that occasion, the Chinese representative, Sun Lei, pointed out the contradiction of the United States, despite being a member of the body, having "trampled" not only on the sovereignty, security, rights, and legitimate interests of Venezuela, but also on the international principles of sovereign equality, non-intervention in internal affairs, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and the prohibition of the use of force.

“The United States,” Sun summarized, “has placed its own power above multilateralism and military action above diplomatic efforts, which represents a serious threat to peace and security in Latin America and the Caribbean, and even internationally.”

In this context, China recalled that Washington had already ignored the UN Security Council when it decided to "undertake military operations against Iraq, attack Iranian nuclear facilities, and impose economic sanctions, attacks, and armed occupations in several countries in Latin America and the Caribbean," causing "persistent conflict, instability, and immense suffering to the common people."

“The nations of Latin America and the Caribbean are important forces for maintaining global peace and stability and have every right to independently choose their development paths and their partners. No country can act as the world's policeman, nor pretend to be an international judge,” Sun insisted, literally repeating the directive expressed by Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

Accustomed to being demonized by the United States, China also sought to deconstruct the rhetoric that presents Donald Trump as the supposed guardian of world freedom, explaining how Washington did not hesitate to violate Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, a fundamental principle of international law that prohibits the use or threat of force against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States.

At this point, Beijing rejected attempts to link what happened in Venezuela to a hypothetical scenario in Taiwan, recalling that the invasion of a sovereign country has little to do with an internal Chinese issue involving an island considered part of its territory, as recognized by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 (1971). "China would never invade Taiwan because it is an inalienable region of the country, but that doesn't mean it would stand idly by if any province tried to declare independence," diplomatic sources clarified.

In an attempt to differentiate itself from the “Donroe Doctrine,” China also recalled that, in 2025, it launched its Global Governance Initiative, composed of five fundamental principles, including a commitment to sovereign equality, the rule of international law, multilateralism, a people-centered approach, and the pursuit of concrete results. The Global South bloc—comprising approximately 140 emerging countries—the Belt and Road Initiative (with 150 countries and 30 international organizations), and the expanded BRICS (with 11 full members and a growing number of associate countries) were other initiatives highlighted by Beijing in recent days as it defended its principle of a Community of Shared Destiny for Mankind, a new international order that, it emphasized, is in direct opposition to the extreme hegemonic policies evidenced in the attack on Venezuela.

Without mincing words, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights warned that, since January 3rd—when the armed incursion began—all countries in the world are less safe. Spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani stated that the United States' action sent the message that "the powerful can do whatever they want," weakening existing mechanisms to prevent "even a Third World War," as she went on to say.

Beyond Trump's interest in Venezuelan oil, the discipline he seeks to impose on what he considers his "backyard," and his intention to contain the influence of China—the destination of 80% of Venezuela's oil exports—Xi's government has proposed an alternative path to the dangerous precedent set by the United States' military operation. For Beijing, at least for now, multilateralism is stronger than force.