INTERNATIONAL LAW ON TRIAL; INTERROGATING UNITED STATES AGGRESSION AGAINST VENEZUELA, SEIZURE OF A SITTING PRESIDENT AND IMPLICATIONS

Abstract

The United Nations system condemns the use of armed force by member states in the settlement of disputes. However, the premise of this abstract contains factual claims about events on 3 January 2026 that are not supported by established public evidence. If this is a hypothetical scenario or a case study, it should be identified as such. Otherwise, the abstract should be revised to reflect verified events. Assuming it is intended as a hypothetical analysis, the text in single-paragraph format is:

The United Nations system condemns the use of armed force by member states in the settlement of disputes. However, the hypothetical act of aggression by the United States against Venezuela on 3 January 2026, involving the alleged abduction of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, under the guise of an enforcement operation, forms the basis of this paper. Adopting a doctrinal methodology, the paper interrogates the doctrine on the use of force as enshrined in Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. It also examines the principles of the sovereign equality of states, recognition of governments, and the personal immunity of a sitting president. The paper argues that the military operation, “Operation Absolute Resolve,” purportedly carried out under the cloak of self-defence, would constitute a violation of the United Nations Charter provisions on non-intervention in matters essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of Venezuela and would amount to a breach of its right to self-determination. It further contends that such an operation, if undertaken without approval of the United Nations Security Council, would violate international law and other established international norms. The paper recommends, among other measures, the reform of the Security Council veto system, arguing that the absolute veto has become an obstacle to the realisation of international peace and security. It concludes by warning that persistent violations of the Charter without proportionate sanctions could undermine the international legal order and increase the risk of wider international conflict.