Maduro, the US and International Law

Is the capture of Nicolás Maduro by members of the United States’ Delta Force, under order of President Trump, a breach of international law?

The simple, and short, answer is “yes.”

Article 2, sections (2) and (3) of the UN Charter stipulate as follow:

(2) All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

(3) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

It is clear that the actions of the United States, by kidnapping the President of a Sovereign State, cannot be regarded as settling an international dispute in a peaceful manner. Also, it boils down to the use of force against the territorial and political independence of Venezuela.

The United States could have done this, within the confines of International Law, by approaching, and getting the approval of the United Nations’ Security Council in advanced. Article 2, (7) of the UN Charter stipulates as follows:

(7) Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

The said Chapter VII deals extensively with the preconditions for, and the circumstances under which, the Security Council may authorise the use of force against another state.

However, the issues is that the Trump Administration did not approach the UN before acting, and did not get the permission of the Security Council to do so.

So, yes, the capture of Nicolás Maduro by members of the United States’ Delta Force, under order of President Trump, was a breach of international law.

The Europeans, more so than even the Russians or Chinese, are very angry about it. There are open threats from European leaders that the United States is destroying the internal order, and that Europe must ditched the US and go it alone.

Now Europe is threatening to close US military bases. My question is: For decades the United States has defended Europe, at great expenses, while European nations preferred hugely expensive public health – and welfare states, not paying their dues for their own defense. The US taxpayers, not enjoying these socialist luxuries of state care, paid for the defense of Europe. Where is the threat, from the perspective of Europe?

Now Europe must defend against Russia, and they cannot afford it, because their socialist luxuries, maintained over decades, have bankrupt them. France is on its knees, Britain is bankrupt, Germany’s economy has stagnated.

Anyway, who actually cares about “international law” anymore? What matters, is ideology, not law.

Just considers the hypocritical South African government. It condemns the United States government for capturing Maduro, but is silent about Russia’s invasion of a sovereign state. How many people has dies during the US’s actions in Venezuela? Hundreds of thousands have died because of Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine. The South African government took the Israeli government to the ICJ, but maintain strong ties with the oppressive regimes in Iran and Cuba (both states that are guilty of gross human rights violations).

So, the US has breached international law by kidnapping Maduro. But who cares? Let me tell you, not the ANC. The ANC’s standard is their Cold War loyalties.  

---

Image source: 123RF