Far from unprecedented: Professor Krister Knapp discusses recent U.S. foreign policy in Venezuela

Professor Krister Knapp discussed the nuances and historical parallels (such as those to the Monroe Doctrine) in the Trump administration’s recent involvement in Venezuela on Jan. 22.

Professor Krister Knapp discussed the nuances and historical parallels (such as those to the Monroe Doctrine) in the Trump administration’s recent involvement in Venezuela on Jan. 22.

A teaching professor in WashU’s history department, Knapp is a scholar of U.S. foreign relations, both modern and historical. The talk was a part of his own lecture series through the WashU Department of History. 

Faculty, students, and members of the St. Louis community (including Chancellor Andrew D. Martin) packed Hurst Lounge last Thursday night to hear Knapp’s take on Operation Absolute Resolve, the U.S. capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores. Knapp presented the operation as consistent with U.S foreign policy, drawing parallels to the 1823 Monroe Doctrine.

Knapp asserted that the buildup for Operation Absolute Resolve was a long one, dating back to March of 2020, when the first Trump administration indicted Maduro for cocaine trafficking conspiracy and narco-terrorism. In summer 2025, the president signed a secret order, sanctioning the use of military force against drug cartels (which the administration labeled as terrorist organizations) to provide “legal leverage to act against them,” Knapp said. 

One of the most important factors in the administration’s actions in Venezuela is oil. In August 2025, the Department of Justice deployed U.S. naval power in the Caribbean. After trying and failing to negotiate a deal giving the U.S. access to Venezuela’s oil fields, the U.S. established a blockade around Venezuela and began to seize illicit oil tankers. Six have been seized so far. Knapp explained that the administration’s goal is to gain leverage over Venezuelan oil amid U.S. competition with China, a major buyer of Venezuelan oil. 

“Gone is the talk about immigrants and illegals and narco-terrorism, and it’s all come down to oil now … Oil makes the world go ‘round,” Knapp said.

Knapp also mentioned that these foreign policy objectives in Venezuela were outlined in the administration’s National Security Statement (NSS), which identifies annual security objectives for the U.S.

“There has been a major shift away from not just focus on the forever wars in the Middle East, but especially away from great power competition with China and Russia, and instead a turn towards economic competition with those very same countries, but in Latin America and the Western Hemisphere,” Knapp said. 

Although the Trump administration is evidently making changes to foreign policy, Knapp outlined many historical precedents for the event, including the Louisiana Purchase, the Mexican-American War, and the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine that allowed the U.S. to involve itself in many Latin American countries, including Venezuela. 

Knapp honed in on the Monroe Doctrine, drafted by President James Monroe’s Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams, declaring the Western hemisphere off-limits to European powers, ensuring they would not be able to regain control of their colonial holdings.

President Trump recently released the “Trump Corollary” to the doctrine, in which he reasserts his administration’s commitment to controlling the Western hemisphere. 

“The Trump administration’s policy and behavior in Latin America is neither new nor all that unusual,” Knapp said. “This impulse has gone by different names … but they all share the same expansion as the interventionist impulses in the name of U.S. interests.”

Trump has been clear that the invasion of Venezuela was partially in pursuit of rectifying a debt from the 1970s, in which Venezuela cancelled profitable contracts with U.S. energy companies. 

Knapp’s remarks extended beyond Operation Absolute Resolve. Notably, he commented on Trump’s recent statements regarding a possible acquisition of Greenland for security purposes. Russia and China currently lead the U.S. in ice-breaking new sea lanes revealed by melting polar ice caps. In Knapp’s perspective, the two superpowers’ new position constitutes a security risk to the northern U.S. states. Controlling those routes would also economically benefit the U.S. by allowing ships to go over the North Pole instead of around it. 

Having access to ports in Greenland would expedite the development of sea lanes for the U.S. Additionally, Greenland has large rare earth deposits, and the need for them has recently become more urgent as supply chain issues hinder U.S. acquisition of the materials. 

“The president is not wrong to talk about Greenland as an interest of the United States. It’s how he goes about it that I think is part of the problem here,” Knapp said. 

Audience members and St. Louis educators Jan Jacobi and Charlie Clark praised Knapp’s unbiased portrayal of Trump. 

“He’s so good at helping people see both sides,” Jacobi said. 

A common theme throughout Knapp’s talk was balancing critical and supportive rhetoric about Trump with historical evidence that puts his policies into context. 

“I see this as an opportunity he gave me to get away from the dining table discussions,” Clark said. 

Crisis & Conflict in Historical Perspective (CCHP) is a lecture series led by Knapp that brings informed discussion of world events to the WashU and St. Louis community. The next lecture, “Causes and Consequences of the Russia-Ukraine War,” will be on March 30, given by Professor James Goldgeier from the School of International Service at American University.