How does the US "Monroe Doctrine" influence commodity pricing?

```

The new Monroe Doctrine centered on the "Trump Thesis" is reshaping the pattern of the commodities market.

According to Chase Trend Trading Desk, Southwest Securities pointed out in its latest macro and geopolitical research that at the beginning of 2026, U.S. foreign and security policy will undergo a directional, not just tactical, shift: a new Monroe Doctrine centered on the "Trump Thesis" will be officially incorporated into the National Security Strategy Report, with the U.S. re-establishing the Western Hemisphere as its priority area for geostrategy and resource security.

The report emphasizes that the key lies not in "returning to Latin America," but in how the U.S., amidst global strategic contraction, rebuilds a “resource–trade route–industrial chain” hinterland where pricing can be directly controlled. Under this logic, critical minerals, energy resources, and shipping lanes are no longer just economic variables, but are systematically integrated into the frameworks of national security and military deterrence.

As a result, the pricing fundamentals for commodities—especially copper, lithium, rare earths, energy, and precious metals—are undergoing a fundamental transformation:

Prices no longer simply reflect marginal supply and demand, but begin to reflect “availability, controllability, and political reliability.”

This means a new commodity cycle anchored long-term to a “security premium” is in the making.

"Trump Thesis": The Contemporary Expression of Monroeism

In its report, Southwest Securities pointed out that in the 2025 version of the National Security Strategy, the United States for the first time explicitly ranks regional strategic priority as “Western Hemisphere first—Indo-Pacific competition—Eurasian stability," and systematically puts forth the “Trump Thesis” as a contemporary upgrade of traditional Monroeism.

Unlike the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine of “preventing European intervention,” the core goal of this thesis is likely: to secure for the U.S. a base of resources and supply chains impermeable to external structural penetration amid global multi-front competition. Its practical operation path shows clear "offensive" characteristics:

Resource dimension: Treating critical minerals and energy assets as strategic facilities, not ordinary commercial investments;Security dimension: Integrating immigration, drugs, resource control, and port operations into the national security threat list;Economic dimension: Through tariffs, rules of origin, technical standards, and investment reviews, building a de facto exclusive economic bloc.

Southwest Securities points out that recent tough statements around Venezuelan oil assets, the offshoring of the Mexican supply chain, and Greenland mining rights and military presence are not temporary political postures but real-world interpretations of this thesis. Especially the discussion of Greenland, for the first time placing mineral resources, shipping routes, and military bases within the same strategic coordinate system, sends a strong signal:

The United States is prepared to break traditional sovereignty and commercial boundaries on resource issues.

From a historical perspective, the report likens this logic to the contemporary version of the 1904 “Roosevelt Corollary”: When the U.S. determines that regional countries exhibit “governance failure” or “risk of strategic spillover,” it may reserve the right to intervene proactively to protect its core strategic assets.

Game Reset in the Western Hemisphere: Politically Shifting Right and Economic Rebinding

Southwest Securities notes the U.S. strategic return to the Western Hemisphere is coinciding with a crucial turning point in the Latin American political cycle.

The report believes that Latin America will enter a new wave of intensive elections in 2025. Against a backdrop of high inflation, fiscal constraints, and worsening public security, voter patience for “redistributive left-wing narratives” is notably decreasing, and there is a structural rightward shift in the region’s political spectrum. Political shifts in Chile, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia, and other countries significantly lower the resistance for the U.S. to advance “security–trade–supply chain” trilateral cooperation.

But what truly triggers U.S. anxiety is not internal Latin American politics, but changes in the structure of trade and investment. Although the U.S. remains the largest single investor in Latin America, China has become the largest trading partner in several key countries and is deeply embedded in the minerals, energy, and infrastructure sectors. This structural change is the core background behind the U.S. push to reverse this trend via exclusive, reciprocal trade frameworks.

The report outlines recent reciprocal trade arrangements the U.S. has signed with Argentina, Guatemala, Ecuador, El Salvador, and others,

Greatly expanded topics: Extending from tariffs to governance of minerals, digital trade, and supply chain security;Security clauses prioritized: Key resources required to be “reliably supplied”;Explicit exclusivity: Through standards, compliance, and export controls, raising costs for third-party entry.

Southwest Securities expects this means that the allocation logic for Latin American resources is shifting from “market-oriented” to “marketization under political and security constraints.”

Resources and Trade Routes: The "Security Anchor" of Commodity Pricing

From the perspective of resource endowments, Southwest Securities notes the Western Hemisphere is one of the world's most concentrated regions for strategic minerals, while the U.S. is highly dependent on imports for these resources.

The report cites data that more than half of the U.S. consumption of 46 minerals depends on imports, with 15 completely dependent on overseas supply. Key minerals such as copper, lithium, cobalt, nickel, rare earths, and tungsten are mainly concentrated in Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Peru, Bolivia, and Greenland.

At the same time, Southwest Securities stresses that the Western Hemisphere controls many “low-substitutability” strategic routes vital to global trade:

The Panama Canal remains a key node in the global shipping system;The Arctic route is becoming commercially viable as glaciers melt;Greenland sits at the strategic junction of the Arctic route and transatlantic shipping lines.

On this basis, the U.S., EU, and Australia are simultaneously advancing strategic mineral reserve expansions, signaling the global resource system is actively sacrificing efficiency for security redundancy. The report mentions the $2.5 billion “strategic resilience reserve,” which is not about the scale but a signal in pricing logic: resources are considered “must-hold,” not “buy as needed.”

Changes in Pricing Logic: From Cycles to Geopolitical Premium

Southwest Securities believes that once strategic resources are formally brought under the national security framework, the pricing logic will inevitably undergo structural changes.

The report forecasts that key minerals such as copper, lithium, cobalt, nickel, rare earths, tungsten, gallium, and germanium are entering a stage dominated by “geopolitical pricing,” and in the future will show three common features:

Uplifted price center: Security premium becomes a constant, not a temporary variable linked to risk events;Changed volatility structure: Prices become extremely sensitive to geopolitical news, but with limited downside room;Policy as marginal pricer: Export controls and stockpiling policies directly alter the supply curve.

The logic for precious metals is especially typical.

In an environment of fiscal expansion, electoral politics, and a tough foreign posture, gold and silver are not just safe-haven assets, but are instruments for pricing policy uncertainty. History shows that when precious metals’ volatility compresses for a long period, it often signals a big trend brewing. The report thus judges that in the first half of 2026, precious metals may maintain an upward oscillating pattern.

Conclusion

The return of the U.S. “Monroe Doctrine” is not a historical regression, but a systematic realignment around resources, corridors, and pricing power.

For commodities, this signifies a fundamental change: resources are no longer mere commodities, but geopolitical assets.

Under the new pricing framework, the key to understanding price is no longer supply and demand alone, but: Who controls the resources, who defines security, who commands the corridors.

This may be the true starting point for commodities to enter an era of “high volatility, high center, and low pullback.”

Risk warning and disclaimerThe market is risky; investment needs caution. This article does not constitute individual investment advice and does not consider the special investment goals, financial situation, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their specific circumstances. You are responsible for any investment made accordingly.

```