Calling for the annulment of the Monroe Doctrine and the development of a "New Good Neighbor" policy in order to foster improved relations and deeper, more effective cooperation between the United States and its Latin American and Caribbean neighbors.
H. Res. 1056 is a House resolution expressing the sense of the House that the Monroe Doctrine should be formally disavowed as U.S. policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean, and that it should be replaced with a “New Good Neighbor” policy. The resolution frames the Monroe Doctrine as having been used over time to justify U.S. political, military, and economic interference in the sovereign affairs of countries in the Western Hemisphere, and it cites a long historical record of invasions, covert actions, sanctions, and support for coups and authoritarian governments in the region.
The resolution calls on the Department of State to confirm that the Monroe Doctrine is no longer part of U.S. policy and urges the federal government to pursue a more cooperative regional approach. It specifically recommends development policy based on respect for sovereign economic plans, technology transfer, climate and development finance, and grantmaking; termination of unilateral sanctions; greater congressional oversight of sanctions powers; automatic review of assistance after extraconstitutional transfers of power; declassification of records related to coups and dictatorships; reform of the Organization of American States; support for IMF, World Bank, and Inter-American Development Bank reforms; regular IMF Special Drawing Rights; and a shift away from austerity and loan conditionality toward growth, social protection, labor rights, and climate action.
In practical legal terms, the resolution does not itself amend the U.S. Code or create binding law. Its immediate effect would be political and declaratory, signaling congressional support for a major change in U.S. foreign policy and urging executive-branch and legislative action on sanctions, foreign assistance, transparency, and international financial institutions. It also highlights issues affecting Latin American and Caribbean governments, U.S. foreign policy agencies, multilateral lenders, and regional organizations.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly critical of past and present U.S. policy in the hemisphere and strongly supportive of a noninterventionist, partnership-based approach. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of debate or bipartisan support in the available context. The resolution’s tone suggests an effort to reframe U.S.-Latin America relations around sovereignty, human rights, and economic cooperation rather than coercion.
The main points of contention are likely to be the resolution’s sweeping historical critique of U.S. actions, its call to end unilateral sanctions such as the Cuba embargo, its criticism of the OAS and IMF, and its condemnation of recent U.S. actions under the Trump administration. Supporters appear to be the listed sponsors, who favor decolonization, anti-interventionism, and regional solidarity, while likely opponents would include those who defend sanctions, security cooperation, or a more assertive U.S. role in the hemisphere.
Because H. Res. 1056 is a nonbinding resolution, it does not directly change state law or federal statutory law. Its impact would be to express congressional intent and pressure the executive branch and Congress to alter foreign policy practices, including sanctions policy, foreign assistance review, declassification practices, and U.S. positions in international financial institutions and regional bodies. It also references possible future amendments to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the National Emergencies Act, as well as legislative changes affecting bilateral assistance and oversight of unilateral sanctions.
The bill’s sentiment is strongly supportive among its sponsors of a break with interventionist U.S. policy and a shift toward cooperation, sovereignty, and regional equality. The resolution is framed as a corrective to a long history of U.S. military, covert, and economic intervention in Latin America and the Caribbean, and it endorses diplomacy, development, and human rights. No votes or committee remarks are provided, so the available record shows only the sponsors’ clear support and no documented opposition in the supplied materials.
The most notable contention centers on the resolution’s rejection of the Monroe Doctrine and its criticism of U.S. sanctions, military actions, covert operations, and support for international financial conditionality. It also takes aim at the OAS, the IMF, and recent Trump administration actions involving Venezuela, Cuba, Brazil, Colombia, Honduras, Panama, and migration/deportation policy. Supporters likely view these provisions as necessary to restore sovereignty and accountability, while critics would likely argue that the resolution is one-sided, politically charged, and overly dismissive of U.S. security and diplomatic interests.