These differences should be considered in the context of the so-called Monroe Doctrine. Its author, James Monroe, the fifth President of the United States (1817–1825), governed at a time when American colonies had only recently declared independence from the British Empire, while the Spanish Empire was struggling to retain control over its territories in Central and South America.
To support these colonies in gaining independence, Monroe declared in his 1823 State of the Union address that European powers could not interfere in the affairs of the two American continents. While this declaration initially lacked military or economic backing from the United States, by the twentieth century, it had evolved into the foundation of the American grand strategy in the Americas. Later known as the Monroe+ Doctrine, this strategy aimed to neutralise the influence of non-European powers – first Imperial Japan, then the USSR, and more recently, China.
During the Cold War, the USSR sought to expand its influence south of California and Texas, both directly and through its Cuban stronghold. It succeeded in gaining a foothold in countries such as Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala. In response, the United States, adhering to the Monroe Doctrine, worked to counteract Soviet-backed regimes. Honduras became the centre of American operations against pro-Soviet governments in Central America. Following the overthrow of right-wing dictator Anastasio Somoza in Nicaragua, his supporters fled the country, which fell under the control of left-wing dictator Daniel Ortega – who has since transformed into a right-wing dictator himself.
Ortega’s ideological shift was, in part, influenced by the Catholic Church. Initially, the Church supported him when he espoused right-wing views. However, after becoming an active member of the Church, he began oppressing it, imprisoning or exiling bishops and priests who criticised his rule. I had the opportunity to personally speak with some of them and heard harrowing accounts of the persecution they suffered at the hands of a man whom the Church had once endorsed.
But let’s go back to the period when Ortega still held left-wing views and opposed the Church not as a member, but as an ideological adversary. The CIA created the Contras movement from followers of the overthrown right-wing dictatorships in Nicaragua and other countries in the region, along with local recruits. The movement was designed to wage a military struggle against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua, as well as other leftist governments and forces in the region. Honduras became the base for the Contras.
One might assume that America would have invested in Honduras to transform it into an oasis of capitalism – much like it once did with West Berlin – to showcase to the communists what a “bright future” for humanity should look like. However, as I travelled through most of Honduras, I saw no signs of prosperity. Except for the island of Roatán, a destination for American tourists, the rest of the country is marked by poverty and crime.
In stark contrast to Honduras was Belize, which until 1981 was known as British Honduras. Though it gained independence that year, it remains under the British crown. However, neighbouring Guatemala refused to recognise Belize’s independence. Since the time when both Guatemala and Belize were part of New Spain – and later when Britain established control over British Honduras – Guatemala has laid claim to Belize. The Guatemalan government sought to capitalise on Belize’s declaration of independence to seize control.
Interestingly, ordinary Belizeans told me they relate strongly to Ukraine’s situation because, to them, Guatemala is what Russia is to us. In fact, I heard more expressions of support for Ukraine in Belize than in Honduras.
Theoretically, when Guatemala amassed its army on the border with newly independent Belize, Britain could have simply washed its hands of the situation, while the United States – following the Monroe+ Doctrine – should have intervened. But the opposite happened. Britain chose to defend the small nation, despite its recent separation.
In Belize, I met former British officers who were deployed to protect the country’s independence in 1981. They spoke with pride about capturing Guatemalan soldiers attempting to cross the border, stripping them naked, and sending them back to Guatemala. That is how the British army defended Belize – and continues to train its military today. Some former British soldiers and officers have even been granted Belizean citizenship and now live in this tropical paradise.
As for the Americans, they quietly sought to sabotage British efforts by siding with the Guatemalan government of General Romeo García, which was strongly pro-American at the time. It was, in essence, a dictatorship that systematically violated human rights – detaining, torturing, and killing dissidents without trial. Yet the American government turned a blind eye.
Similarly, the US ignored the human rights abuses of the right-wing military dictatorship in Honduras, particularly under Colonel Oswaldo López Arellano. Notably, the infamous 3-16 Battalion – trained by American and Argentine military personnel who had participated in Argentina’s Perón-era Dirty War – became notorious for its brutality. The exact number of its victims remains unknown, but human rights activists estimate the toll in the hundreds.
I frequently travel to Central and South America to study the history of local wars, dictatorships, and efforts to address their consequences. In countries such as Argentina and Chile – where right-wing dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s committed the same atrocities as Battalion 3-16 in Honduras – government-led Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, as well as national and independent memory institutions, now carefully document and investigate these crimes. Contrary to my expectations, I found no references to such crimes in Honduran museums. Instead, I only saw the high walls of the UN Human Rights Office in Tegucigalpa.
Nevertheless, under international pressure, Honduras has begun examining human rights violations. However, this process largely avoids the period when the country served as a staging ground for the Contras and the 3-16 Battalion. It focuses almost exclusively on cases from the past 15–20 years. Earlier violations remain effectively off-limits – partly due to the stance of the US government.
What lesson does this hold for Ukraine? We must continue our fight for independence, identity, and justice – even without American support. The US government may not always be on our side. It has stood on the wrong side of history before. The key is for us to resist the temptation to do the same. If we remain on the right side of history, we will always find allies – just as Britain once did for little Belize.