“We have entered the era of the Donroe Doctrine,” said CNN’s Jake Tapper in the aftermath of the US abduction of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. The Trumpian twist on the Monroe Doctrine, a US foreign policy principle established more than a century ago, ushers in a more assertive strategy that could have significant implications worldwide.

What is the Monroe Doctrine?
In December 1823, then-president James Monroe declared that the US was the dominant power in the Western Hemisphere and warned European powers against interference in its sphere of influence.

The doctrine has since been used to justify US intervention in the Dominican Republic, Haiti and Nicaragua, and its role in the coups that overthrew Guatemala’s Jacobo Árbenz in 1954 and Chilean leader Salvador Allende in 1973. It was also invoked during the Second World War to make Greenland a de facto US protectorate after Denmark was invaded by Nazi Germany.

What’s new about the Donroe Doctrine?
In its latest national security strategy, the Trump administration declared an intention “to reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine”. But it also added a “Trump Corollary” to the doctrine, describing US aims to “expand our network in the region” and roll back “foreign influence”.

“Donroe Doctrine” is not an official White House term (it seems to have been coined by the New York Post) but Trump “appears to have taken a liking” to it, “as with most things that bear his name”, said international politics expert Pablo Uchoa on The Conversation. Its “vision of geopolitics” justifies the aggressive pursuit of any resources that the US thinks are “beneficial to its interests, from Greenland’s minerals and strategic position to the Panama Canal and Venezuelan oil”.

What does it mean for the rest of the world?
The “absence of conspicuous military support for Maduro” from either Moscow or Beijing suggests that neither object to a doctrine “that appears to entitle powerful countries with the right of having spheres of influence”, said Uchoa.

Six key areas have already been identified as potential targets for “further American expansion, intervention or annexation”, said CBS News: Greenland, Iran, Cuba, Colombia, Canada and the Panama Canal.

Parents keeping tabs on their children with an AirTag or through an app like Find My Friends is now widespread – even after they fly the nest. A Unite Students survey in September of 1,027 parents of first-year university students found that 67% tracked their child’s location using an app. But does the practice offer safety and comfort, or has the rise in parental surveillance shifted into murkier ethical territory?

‘Peace of mind’
When my son began getting the train to secondary school in London on his own, putting a “little disc in his blazer pocket” made the “nerve-racking journey slightly less intimidating”, said Naomi Greenaway in The Telegraph, both “for me and for him”. Watching my teenage daughter “wind her way into the centre of town on my phone screen” provides a similar “peace of mind”.

“There are two kinds of child in this world,” said Esther Walker in The Times – the “ones who wander off and the ones who don’t”. If you have the latter, “your child probably rattles with AirTags”. We once briefly lost our four-year-old daughter at an adventure playground and it was “the longest 10 minutes of my life”. Now my children are at secondary school and “both schoolbags are tagged”. It’s the “closest thing I’ve got to Mrs Weasley’s magic clock”.

‘Excessive and exhausting’
I thought tracking my kids would give me comfort, said Charlotte Cripps in The Independent, but instead it turned me into a “neurotic and paranoid mother”. If I couldn’t see them for a moment in the park, “I’d catastrophise it as a kidnapping, and ping the AirTag”. I had become “addicted to stalking my kids”.

Micromanaging children’s movements can be “excessive and exhausting for both parent and child”, said Zing Tsjeng in The i Paper. “Of course, I understand the safety reason” for wanting to keep tabs on your child. “But at some point you have to ask yourself: when is enough enough? Do you trust your child to get themselves back home safe when they’re 19? What about when they’re 20? Or 21? Where does it end – and when can you let go?”

Camels run away as South African driver Henk Lategan and co-pilot Brett Cummings speed through the desert in the Dakar Rally. Originally a race from Paris to the Senegalese capital, the off-road event has been held in Saudi Arabia since 2020.

Giuseppe Cacace / AFP / Getty Images

The epoch-defining Bayeux Tapestry is coming to the UK this year for a not-to-be-missed visit. Other exhibitions to check out in 2026 include tributes to artistic legends, as well as opportunities to cast a fresh eye at the work of artists who may be underappreciated.

Bayeux Tapestry, British Museum, London
In what may be the “art event of the year”, said Jonathan Jones in The Guardian, the “vast embroidery” telling the story of the Norman Conquest will be displayed here in a “once-in-a-lifetime triumph of cultural generosity by France”. Book early – it’s expected to be a blockbuster.

Enid Marx, Compton Verney, Warwickshire
You might not have heard of Enid Marx, said The Times, “but you’ve probably sat on one of her most famous works” – the design that covers the seats of the London Underground. A “prolific and imaginative designer”, her work spanned textiles, children’s books, wrapping paper, stamps and bookplates.

Beryl Cook: Pride and Joy, The Box, Plymouth
The work of “self-taught painter” Cook “may not be great art”, said The Guardian, but it is fun, colourful and larger-than-life. This show, marking her centenary year, serves up a “bawdy slice of Plymouth and post-war British life”.

Gwen John: Strange Beauties, National Museum, Cardiff; National Gallery of Modern Art, Edinburgh
The “luminous, introspective and quietist works” of Welsh modernist Gwen John offer a vision that still feels strikingly modern 150 years after her birth, said Laura Cumming in The Observer. The first major showing of her work for 40 years, this is an “unmissable retrospective”.

Trump’s lessons for Europe
Peter Mandelson in The Spectator
Europe’s “growing geopolitical impotence” is confirmed by the “brutal reality” of the “histrionics about Greenland”, writes Britain’s former US ambassador Peter Mandelson. To be clear, Donald Trump won’t actually “invade” Greenland: “he doesn’t need to”, because US troops are “already there”. Once the “threats to Arctic security” from Russia and China “crystallise” in our minds, “serious discussion will take over”. The “bigger issue” is when European leaders will adjust to the “revolution under way” in the White House.

If a pint puts drivers over the limit, it’s time to order smaller drinks
Rosamund Hall in The Independent
New drink-driving laws mean “a full pint would put many motorists over the legal alcohol limit”, writes drinks expert Rosamund Hall. “If we’re serious about road safety”, maybe “that’s no bad thing”. Let’s “rethink our devotion” to the “hulking” glass of “foamy beer” that “rarely leaves me wanting more – only needing the loo”. We should embrace the “cooler, more sensible” two-thirds pint and adjust “what we sink on a Friday night”, for “longer, healthier and happier lives”.

The royals’ coolest family just showed why William won’t need Harry and Meghan back in UK
Chris Riches in the Daily Express
Meghan and Harry “think they can have their Californian cake and eat it over here”, writes Chris Riches. But while William and Kate “could do with another family with young children to capture” the nation’s hearts, it’s Princess Anne’s daughter Zara and her “down-to-earth” husband, Mike Tindall, who have developed “trusting bonds” with the Waleses. “Not since the River Kwai will a bigger bridge need building” for the Sussexes to come back into the “royal fold”.