Does the Donroe Doctrine now extend to outer space?
Despite those who proclaim that America is reclaiming its dominance in space, the facts on the ground do not support this claim. President Trump’s call for American superiority in outer space seems to have more to do with securing America’s national and economic interests in the Donroe Doctrine — the “America First” adaptation of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, utilizing tariffs, military threats, and economic pressure to exclude foreign influence (specifically China) and assert control over nations like Venezuela.
The December 2025 executive order, calling for superiority, strength and achievement in the name of America First space policy, rings hollow when viewed through the lens of former NASA Administrator Michael Griffin’s speech of 2007 on Real Reasons – competitiveness, curiosity and monument building – and Acceptable Reasons – scientific discovery, economic benefit and national security – for having a space exploration program.
Griffin argued that: “When you do things for Real Reasons instead of Acceptable Reasons, you have a chance to obtain Real Success” and “we produce our highest achievements. The people who do things for Real Reasons, and who know it, are also the ones who are the most successful by the standards embodied in Acceptable Reasons.”
Arguably, Real Success occurs when the US has coordinated policy with key allies, such as NATO, Japan, Republic of Korea, and Australia, and articulated a coherent rationale on behalf of mankind. America First sounds more like America Alone or America the Fortress. There is only scant mention of alliances or allies in the executive order. Griffin again says it well: “I would submit that the highest possible form of national security, well above having better guns and bombs than everyone else, well above being so strong that no one wants to fight with us, is the security which comes from being a nation which does the kinds of things that make others want to work with us to do them. What security could we ever ask that would be better than that, and what give more of it to us than the space program?”
There are other reasons to question whether Real Success is at hand. First, the Artemis I program and rollout had significant delays as the initial 2016 target date slipped to a November 16, 2022, launch. Multiple delays were caused by technical issues, including liquid hydrogen leaks, faulty engine sensors, and repairs, along with delays from hurricanes and tropical storms, requiring several rollbacks to the Vehicle Assembly Building.
Second, NASA released a report in February 2026 of findings from the Program Investigation Team examining the Boeing CST-100 Starliner Crewed Flight Test as part of the agency’s Commercial Crew Program. Revealing numerous technical problems, poor communication and management failures before and during the flight, the report declared a “Type A mishap” – the most severe classification of mission failures – that endangered crew safety.
Third, the centerpiece of Trump’s space program is Artemis II, which is scheduled to send four astronauts around the moon. However, as of February 2026, NASA revised its plans for future Artemis missions due to technical problems with Artemis II.
Equally concerning is the growing commercialization of space as outlined in the Executive Order ‘Enabling Competition in the Commercial Space Industry’ of August 2025. To his credit, Jared Isaacman, the new NASA administrator, did offer assurances in his confirmation hearing that he is independent from Elon Musk. This is a key statement as NASA becomes increasingly driven by commercial perspectives and economic interests. However, there are concerns that Musk’s moves are a power grab that could fundamentally alter the relationship between a state and its citizens and turn national governments into ‘Potemkin Powers.’ Is Isaacman’s announcement in March 2026 launching NASA Force – an exchange program providing mentorship and training — a way to rebuild NASA’s core competencies with a wide variety of both US companies and international partners?
Amidst the clamor inside the Beltway about China, one must surmise that the most important space policy issue and – Acceptable Reason – facing the country is China’s space program and its military-civil fusion strategy. However, despite the fears that perhaps China intends to build a digital, space-based Belt and Road Project, the Chinese program is struggling after the technical setbacks of its launches in December 2025.
We will know by the end of the year whether the Donroe Doctrine has been extended from the Western Hemisphere to outer space and the extent to which the Administration is prepared to go in the name of space dominance. Perhaps NASA Force is a return to Real Reasons.
Karl L. Buschmann is a management consultant who writes at the nexus of supply chain and national security.