The initial reaction from European leaders to Donald Trump's illegal military intervention in Venezuela has been widely criticised as dangerously weak and short-lived. Faced with a brazen act of imperialism, the response lacked the robust defence of international law that many expected.
A Tepid European Response
On Sunday, 4 January, European Union member states pointedly refused to condemn the US attack on Venezuela as a breach of international law. Instead, they issued a hopeful but largely delusional call for a "negotiated, democratic, inclusive and peaceful solution to the crisis, led by Venezuelans." This feeble statement was immediately undermined by President Trump's own declaration to reporters that same day: "We're in charge."
The US president further threatened additional military action if the regime left behind after Nicolás Maduro's seizure failed to comply with Washington's demands. As illustrated by the early marginalisation of Nobel prize-winning opposition figure María Corina Machado, the will of the Venezuelan people is not a priority. Operation Absolute Resolve was a raw exercise of power to dominate a sovereign nation and control its future oil production.
Leadership Failure and the Need for Clarity
Confronted with such contempt for rules-based multilateralism, figures like Sir Keir Starmer and his European allies must do better than look away and disingenuously shift the discussion. French President Emmanuel Macron, after initially focusing on the need for a democratic transition, stated on Monday that he "neither supported nor approved" the manner of Maduro's removal.
Sir Keir Starmer, whose evasions and obfuscations on the matter have been described as "painful to witness," during an interview with Laura Kuenssberg on the BBC's Sunday political show, is urged to adopt a similarly clear position. The warning from Emily Thornberry, Labour chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee, that US actions will embolden other global bullies to trash international norms, is one he must acknowledge as correct.
Planning for a Dangerous New World Order
European governments now face the urgent task of planning for a world where the traditional concept of "the West" is obsolete. The reluctance to criticise Trump is partly driven by a desire to keep the US president supportive of Ukraine at a crucial moment. While meaningful White House security guarantees for Kyiv are vital to counter Vladimir Putin's ambitions, unchecked "America First" expansionism is becoming a geopolitical menace in its own right.
Europe, alongside the United Nations, has a duty to resist the subjugation of international law to the whims of rogue superpowers. This requires not just principled statements but the rapid development of sufficient hard power to exert real influence. The seriousness of the threat was underscored by Denmark's Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen, who stated that Trump's renewed claims on the autonomous Danish territory of Greenland needed to be taken seriously—a jaw-dropping admission of the new reality.
The regime change in Caracas followed a bellicose US national security strategy pledging to "restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere." With Colombia, Cuba, and even a NATO ally like Denmark now on notice, a dangerous new world order is forming at pace. Within it, Europe must find its voice to defend its values and build the capacity to protect its own interests.
