The United States (US) military strike on Venezuela and the reported capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife have sparked a wave of global condemnation, with leaders across regions denouncing the operation as a blatant breach of international norms and Venezuelan sovereignty.
China’s foreign ministry sharply condemned the use of force against a sovereign state and urged the US to abide by international law and the UN Charter’s principles of peace and respect for territorial integrity. Russia’s foreign ministry described the strikes as “armed aggression,” insisting the US justifications are unfounded and warning against further escalation. The European Union (EU) officials called for restraint and reaffirmed that actions must comply with international law and the Charter of the United Nations, stressing that external imposition of political outcomes undermines peace efforts. Mexico, Colombia, and other Latin American governments rejected the unilateral military action, labeling it a violation of sovereignty that jeopardises regional stability and civilian safety. Cuban leaders went further, denouncing the operation as a “criminal attack” and “state terrorism” against the Venezuelan people, urging an urgent international response. Iran condemned the assault as a flagrant violation of the UN Charter, highlighting the prohibition on the use of force against another nation’s territorial integrity. Even within the US, several lawmakers expressed concern, arguing the attack lacked congressional authorization and recalling how past interventions have entrenched instability abroad rather than advancing peace.
This military operation recalls a long history of US interventions in Latin America and elsewhere, from Panama to Iraq, episodes widely critiqued for violating international law and undermining self-determination. Today’s actions underscore the dangers of unilateral force, set a perilous precedent for global order, and jeopardize prospects for peaceful, diplomatic solutions to political crises.
