When in 1954 the United Fruit Company persuaded then-US President Dwight D. Eisenhower to overthrow the democratically elected President of Guatemala, Jacobo Arenz, the event had repercussions in Latin America because decades.

Now, experts are searching for the roots of the so-called “Donroe” doctrine—which current US President Donald Trump has applied in the capture of President Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela—in that operation led by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and propelled by a multinational corporation that made its money from selling bananas.

“That company was so powerful in Guatemala and neighboring countries that it was called 'The Octopus,' because it had tentacles everywhere,” Grace Livingstone, an expert from the University of Cambridge, tells the BBC.

Although it was a US company, the United Fruit Company had no official ties to the Eisenhower administration.

But when Arbenz proposed the expropriation and redistribution of land in the vast banana plantations to alleviate the chronic poverty in his country, the United Fruit Company sought the government's support by playing the Cold War card and showing Guatemala as a country vulnerable to Soviet influence.

“Arbenz was going to give them generous compensation—more than double what the United Fruit Company had paid for those lands—but they weren't happy with the amount,” Livingstone explains.

But despite what Arbenz had maintained in 1950 when he assumed power—that he was going to transform Guatemala from a feudal society into a capitalist economy—Eisenhower agreed to intervene.

Eisenhower's justification was the so-called Monroe Doctrine.

At the beginning of the 19th century, James Monroe, the fifth president of the United States, made a declaration stating that the Western Hemisphere should be free from the influence of European powers, an idea that became a defensive weapon to keep countries at bay on issues the US considers its regional affairs.

But in 1904, another USpresident, Theodore Roosevelt, updated this policy to make it “an explicit justification for US military intervention in the region,” Livingstone clarifies.

And he notes that the now-called “Donroe” Doctrine, a play on words between Monroe and President Trump's first name, also explicitly relies on this message to justify saber-rattling over Venezuela, Greenland, and Iran.

“Before Maduro's capture, the US president himself made the announcement, reinstating all the doctrinal justifications for US intervention in the hemisphere that we have always known,” noted journalist Jon Lee Anderson in The New Yorker.

This “sphere logic” is “at the heart of Trump's approach to the world order and is partly a response to his aversion “This prolonged shift towards globalism, multilateralism, the formation of alliances, and perpetual wars in distant countries,” notes Stewart Patrick, director of the Global Order and Institutions program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

The goal of the new US national security strategy, according to Trump last year, has been to “protect the trade, territory, and resources that are at the heart of our national security.”

Since then, the president has emphasized that “American dominance” is key—and military, ideology, and psychological pressure will be applied to protect US interests.

In Venezuela and Iran, those interests are tied to oil, Anderson explains, and the threat that China could seize it first.

Greenland also possesses important resources that Trump wants before Washington's adversaries acquire them.

Centuries-Old Tactics

In Guatemala, it was a different matter: ideology. The Cold War with Russia and bananas. But just as with the justification, the tactics remain the same.

“Similar to what we saw in Venezuela recently, there was a military setup around Guatemala,” Livingstone notes.

“Einsenhower announced he was sending two submarines south and also sent bombers to Nicaragua, which began intercepting ships at sea near Guatemala. Things we saw in Venezuela. when they crossed the border, there was no spontaneous uprising.”

“The CIA, which supported this supposed invasion, began bombing strategic points in Guatemala and in the capital itself.He even launched a massive smoke bomb against military barracks and played the sound of the bombings on the radio. This was intended to demoralize the population and the army,” he adds.

In turn, the military leadership, believing it could not defeat the invaders, urged and finally convinced Arbenz to resign.

In the 21st century, Greenland—and, by extension, Denmark—has received direct threats from Trump on social media, including plans to annex the territory and impose economic sanctions in the face of any resistance.

Meanwhile, in Iran, psychological pressure has intensified, with threats of strong military action to force obedience, instill fear, and protect US interests. “A massive army is heading to Iran,” Trump posted on social media “Like Venezuela, it is ready, willing, and able to accomplish its mission swiftly, with speed and violence, if necessary.” In that operation in the 1950s, a few weeks after his resignation, Arbenz was forced into exile. “At the airport, the new regime forced him to strip naked and searched him down to his underwear in front of a booing crowd, then put him on a plane,” says Livingstone. More than 70 years later, Maduro was forced to travel to New York after being captured by US forces. “First we saw the images of the bombing of Caracas,” says Anderson. “And the next thing we knew, we saw Maduro in chains, flanked by soldiers, and humiliated. This is part of a pattern.”

Analysts like Mike Crawley of CBC News point out that Trump's strategy toward Greenland also relies on visual politics—social media ads, canceled state visits, and provocative imagery—as a way to assert his dominance and undermine the ability of smaller states to act.

Long-term threat

The common refrain among those who support US intervention is that only dictators and those who show contempt for democracy or US security have anything to fear, but several observers disagree.

“Guatemala demonstrates that the US was willing to overthrow a democratically elected government and that, since the Monroe Doctrine was proclaimed, “The United States has intervened in Latin America more than 80 times,” Livingstone states. “Trump is reaffirming the doctrine in its most blatant form.” However, what came after that intervention in Guatemala might worry the president. Decades of violence and instability followed, during which authoritarian governments, and then drug cartels, exploited the power vacuum, strengthening their positions and funneling both desperate migrants and illegal narcotics across the US border. And this, observers say, has posed a greater long-term threat to US interests than the land reforms or fears of communist influence used to justify the interventions in the first place.