The United States' policy toward Venezuela is a flagrant violation of the fundamental principles of international law. Economic strangulation through unilateral sanctions, open pursuit of regime change, undermining of popular sovereignty, and ultimately military invasion and arrest of the country's president constitute a framework unprovoked and unacceptable intervention in a sovereign state. Recent events in particular represent an unprecedented escalation in contemporary international politics and reveal a dangerous shift from international law to the logic of brute force.
Article 2§4 of the UN Charter explicitly prohibits not only military force, but also any form of coercion directed against the political independence of a state. The systematic use of sanctions with the stated aim of overthrowing an elected government also violates the principle of non-intervention, as repeatedly interpreted by the International Court of Justice in The Hague (e.g., Nicaragua v. United States).Finally, according to the same article, the arrest of a sitting head of state by a foreign power, without a decision by an international judicial body or authorization by the Security Council, constitutes flagrant violation of state sovereignty and a dangerous precedent for the global security system.
Oil and mineral wealth: the real core of the conflict
Venezuela has some of the largest proven oil reserves in the world, mainly in the Orinoco Belt. Control of these resources is strategic issue of the highest order. Every government that sought to strengthen the state's role in energy and redistribute revenues faced external pressure, economic exclusion, and political destabilization.
US sanctions are not «neutral tools of pressure.» According to UN reports, they have had devastating social consequences, particularly on public health and access to food and medicine. Collectively punishing a people for their political choices is not defending democracy; it is violating human rights.
The Chinese presence and geopolitical fears
The deepening of Venezuela's relations with China also plays a decisive role. Energy agreements, infrastructure investments, and non-dollar financing directly challenge traditional US dominance in Latin America. The targeting of Venezuela thus also serves as a deterrent to any country attempting to pursue a multidimensional foreign policy.
Political targeting and discrediting of democracy
Donald Trump's presidency has brutally exposed the true logic of American politics: when the election result is not to one's liking, it is contested. The recognition of «alternative authorities» and open military intervention constitute a direct attack on popular sovereignty and a dangerous precedent for the international system.
Conclusion
During Donald Trump's presidency, the rhetoric about «regime change» in Venezuela ceased to be suggestive and became overt. When an elected president is not «liked,» the popular verdict is questioned and replaced by external designs. This is not a defense of democracy. is a rejection of the very concept of the sovereignty of peoples.
The arrest and transfer of the Venezuelan president to the US constitute an institutional earthquake unprecedented.
The case of Venezuela is no exception; it is part of a recurring pattern, where international law is applied selectively and power prevails over rules. The silence or tolerance of the international community undermines the very system of collective security.
Condemning these practices is not an ideological luxury; it is institutional and ethical necessity. Tolerance, which I unfortunately have no doubt will exist (Kaya Kalas's «cold» statement is characteristic!), towards such practices leads to a world where the law yields to force — and this applies to everyone.
–
* Nikos Markatos is Professor Emeritus at the National Technical University of Athens, former Rector, and Secretary General of the European Association of Emeritus Professors.
