Global backlash and U.S. defense as Maduro’s capture sparks debate on sovereignty
UNITED NATIONS (FN) — Russia’s envoy to the United Nations on Monday demanded the immediate release of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, warning that Washington’s actions could usher in a new era of colonialism and imperialism.
“The assault against the leader of Venezuela… has become a harbinger of a turn back to the era of lawlessness and U.S. domination by force,” Ambassador Vasily Nebenzya told the UN Security Council. He condemned what he called “a U.S. act of armed aggression against Venezuela” and urged Washington “to immediately release the legitimately elected president of an independent state and his spouse, Cilia Flores.”
Nebenzya accused the United States of “generating fresh momentum for neocolonialism and for imperialism,” saying such practices had been “repeatedly and decisively condemned and repudiated by the peoples of this region and by the global south as a whole.” He added, “The bell now tolls across the region, ringing for every country of the Western Hemisphere.”
The envoy also took aim at Western governments, accusing them of hypocrisy. “Those who, in other circumstances, froth at the mouth and demand that others respect the UN Charter, today seem particularly hypocritical and unseemly,” he said, in apparent reference to Western criticism of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Responding to the criticism, U.S. envoy Mike Waltz defended the operation, describing it as a “surgical law enforcement operation facilitated by the U.S. military against two indicted fugitives of American justice: narco‑terrorist Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.” Waltz stressed that “there is no war against Venezuela or its people. We are not occupying a country.”
He told the Security Council that Maduro was “responsible for attacks on the people of the United States, for destabilizing the western hemisphere and illegitimately repressing the people of Venezuela.” Waltz added that President Donald Trump had “given diplomacy a chance,” which he claimed Maduro failed to take. “The United States wants a better future for Venezuela,” he said. “We believe a better future for the people of Venezuela and for the people of the region and the world is stabilizing the region and making the neighborhood that we live in a much better and safer place.”
Latin American governments have offered mixed reactions. Colombia expressed concern about regional stability, while Mexico urged respect for sovereignty. Brazil called for dialogue, warning that escalation could worsen humanitarian conditions and migration pressures across South America.
European officials have been cautious, with the European Union stressing the need for adherence to international law but stopping short of condemning Washington outright. Analysts say the muted response reflects Europe’s balancing act between supporting U.S. policy and avoiding a precedent that could undermine global norms.
Economist Jeffrey Sachs added his own warning, cautioning against allowing international law “to wither into irrelevance” in the face of unilateral military actions. Legal experts have noted that the International Criminal Court and UN Charter provisions could become central to debates over the legitimacy of Maduro’s capture.
As Maduro’s case unfolds in New York, the clash at the UN highlights a broader struggle over sovereignty, intervention, and the future of international law. For Russia and its allies, the courtroom drama is not just about one leader but about resisting what they see as a return to U.S. domination by force, while Washington insists it is enforcing justice against indicted fugitives.
