Heads of state, lawmakers and international law scholars are among those who have called US military actions against Venezuela and the capture of its leader on January 3, 2026 illegal. But what exactly does that mean?
The Conversation asked Mary Ellen O’Connell, a professor of international law at the University of Notre Dame, to explain what recent US actions violate international law and why this matters.
How would you describe the actions of the United States in Venezuela from the point of view of international law?
I consider what happened on January 3 as part of a series of illegal actions by the United States towards Venezuela that began on September 2, 2025, when the United States first attacked and detonated a small vessel in the Caribbean that was allegedly transporting illicit drugs to the United States. Despite global outrage over the illegality of those attacks, the government persisted.
The most egregious operation was the January 3 attacks on sites in Caracas, Venezuela, a densely populated city. Its purpose was to cover up special operations forces to enter the president’s home and forcibly detain him, along with his wife, Cilia Flores, and then take them to the United States, where they are now in custody and facing trial.
You are interested: Who really governs Venezuela?
What laws were broken?
I have been considering these illegal US military operations in three broad categories. There is the category of international law that prohibits the use of force.
Then there is the category of international criminal law, which defines who can legally be brought before foreign courts to face criminal charges.
And the third is imperial intervention and control of a foreign country.
Could you explain what you mean by each category?
In terms of international law and the use of force, we know that any use of military force, even of a negligible kind, is restricted by the United Nations Charter. This includes, without a doubt, the missiles and bombs that the United States has been using since early September in the Caribbean and the Pacific, as well as in Venezuelan territory.
Article 2(4) establishes a clear general prohibition on the use of force. This general prohibition has only two limitations: when the Security Council authorizes the use of force or when a UN Member State has been attacked by another State with a significant armed attack.
The best example we have today of that category of self-defense is the defense of Ukraine against Russia. Venezuela would have had the right to use military force against this US military intervention because the United States had no justification for carrying it out. These are clear, demonstrable, serious and significant violations of international law by the United States.
As for the second category, a sitting head of state enjoys immunity from the jurisdiction of foreign courts, period. So regardless of how Maduro appeared in US courts, international law states that anyone who attempts to run a government must be free from interference by foreign courts.
This is a common sense rule. Probably every country in the world has a problem with foreign leaders, and if they started bringing criminal charges against them, kidnapping them, and taking them to court, international travel of presidents and foreign ministers would be banned. International diplomacy would come to an end. As a result, disruption, chaos and insecurity would result.
The United States has an extradition treaty with Venezuela, and if the United States had viable criminal charges against anyone in Venezuela, it is supposed to use the regular legal process of extradition to ensure that what it does is not illegal in itself.
One of the dark ironies of this episode is that, in the supposed attempt to impose the law on these individuals, the United States is breaking the law. The United States is sending the message that it is somehow above the law we apply to others. This is really detrimental, in general, to the rule of law.
And the third category, which is very worrying, refers to President Trump’s comments about how he would govern Venezuela, about stripping Venezuela of its wealth. These are violations of the political independence and territorial integrity of Venezuela, and of its permanent sovereignty over its natural resources.
These are fundamental principles of international law. They have to do with the self-determination of peoples. They have to do with the most important rules that maintain order in the world. If President Trump truly wants America to prosper in the world—to enjoy economic and cultural success—he needs to promote international law, not undermine it.
We recommend: Venezuela’s civil-military alliance is being stretched: if it breaks, numerous armed groups could be dragged into a disorderly division
What are the consequences of this?
I think that all countries, looking at the current performance of the United States, will have to reassess whether they can trust it, whether they can trust it to live up to its treaty commitments, particularly the United Nations Charter.
President Franklin Roosevelt witnessed the consequences of World War II and did not want any country to pay the price of such a catastrophe again. The preamble of the Charter says it all. The UN was founded “to preserve future generations from the scourge of war.” For this reason, the Charter prohibits the use of force, and has a Security Council that acts when that norm is violated.
The world knows that the United States played a critical role in conveying the message that it cares about the Charter and the right to peace, and that both reflect Americans’ deep moral and philosophical commitment to life and community on this planet.
When this is undermined, countries without such concerns will feel free to pursue their own policies, regardless of the good of the international community. I firmly believe that the repercussions will be very serious for a long time, even if they are intangible.
*Mary Ellen O’Connell is a professor of Law and International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame.
This text was originally published in The Conversation
Do you like to get informed through Google News? Follow our Showcase to have the best stories
