After US Attack on Venezuela: European Leaders Scramble to Legitimize US Imperialism

After the US attack on Venezuela, which killed up to 100 people on January 3rd, and the subsequent kidnapping of Nicolás Maduro, European leaders have rushed to prove that they are the loyal lapdogs of US imperialism.

Statements issued by various European leaders all show a similar pattern: They all reiterate that the US operation is complex and openly refuse to say if it goes against international law, that Maduro was a dictator, and that they will have to wait and see what happens next.

On January 3rd, German chancellor Merz proclaimed:

“Nicolás Maduro led his country into ruin. The last elections were rigged. We – like many other states in the world – did not recognize his presidency. Maduro played a problematic role in the region. The legal classification of the US-operation is complex. For this we are taking our time. Our standard remains international law. Now, no political instability should arise. The goal should be a regulated transition to a government legitimized by elections.”

In an interview on January 3rd, UK Prime Minister Kein Starmer stated:

“The UK government will discuss the evolving situation with US counterparts in the days ahead as we seek a safe and peaceful transition to a legitimate government that reflects the will of the Venezuelan people. […] I want to get all the material facts together, and we simply haven’t got the full picture at the moment. […] “It’s fast moving, and we need to piece that together.”

French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted:

“The Venezuelan people are today rid of Nicolás Maduro’s dictatorship and can only rejoice. By seizing power and trampling on fundamental freedoms, Nicolás Maduro gravely undermined the dignity of his own people. The upcoming transition must be peaceful, democratic, and respectful of the will of the Venezuelan people. We wish that President Edmundo González Urrutia, elected in 2024, can swiftly ensure this transition. I am currently exchanging with our partners in the region. France is fully mobilized and vigilant, including to ensure the safety of its nationals during these uncertain times.”

The prime minister of Greece, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, went even one step further, arguing in the same statement that the legality of the US invasion is not the question to be asked at the moment and that the democratic legitimacy of the Venezuelan government is necessary:

“Nicholas Maduro presided over a brutal and repressive dictatorship that brought about unimaginable suffering on the Venezuelan people. The end of his regime offers new hope for the country. This is not the time to comment on the legality of the recent actions. The priority must now be to ensure a peaceful and speedy transition to a new inclusive government that enjoys full democratic legitimacy. Greece will coordinate with its European Union and UN Security Council partners on the matter.”

The sheer hypocrisy of European leaders’ statements on the US attack on Venezuela is made all the more apparent in light of their unabashed condemnation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Yet it is not mere moral hypocrisy; the difference in condoning or condemning depends on the EU’s own imperialist interests and dependency on the US.

While European leaders scramble to give ideological legitimacy to the brutal US attack on Venezuela by drawing on “transition of power” and “democracy,” while unironically throwing “international law” overboard, the Trump administration has reverted to a more crude colonial mode of ideological propaganda.

US interventions over the last few decades have gone hand in hand with a propaganda war to legitimize regime change, bombing campaigns, and attacks on foreign nations. During the US war in Afghanistan, the US ruling class pushed the narrative of saving Afghan women and freeing Afghanistan from Islamofascism. During the US invasion of Iraq, the media apparatus and an army of pundits claimed the war was necessary to stop Saddam Hussein from using “weapons of mass destruction” and argued that Saddam Hussein was the “new Hitler.” The killing of hundreds of thousands of people in both Afghanistan and Iraq was painted as collateral damage in the name of “democracy,” “women’s rights,” and “freedom.”

This time around, sections of the ruling classes in the US have claimed that the US attack on Venezuela and kidnapping of Maduro is necessary to fight against “narco terrorism” and “authoritarianism of the Maduro regime”. Yet, this ideological smoke screen has been accompanied by Trump and his administration openly stating that the interests of the US lie in Venezuela’s oil. “We want the oil,” Trump reiterated multiple times, even saying that the US will “run Venezuela.” Access to Venezuela’s oil is accompanied by imperialist expansion: the Trump administration has made abundantly clear that their actions constitute a 21st century version of the Monroe Doctrine, according to which the Western Hemisphere is the backyard of the US empire, which no other powers, most notably China, should meddle in.

The fact that the Trump administration has stated that they will be working together with Delcy Rodríguez, Maduro’s vice president, to carry through their interests, shows that the veneer of “democratic transition” has taken the backseat. Snubbing the neoconservative opposition leader Marina Corina Machado as “not popular enough,” Trump is further testing the waters for future interventions and attacks (as he has stated on Cuba, Iran, or Colombia), where lip service to democracy, as practiced by previous US imperialist invasions, is apparently off the table.

By Omnia Magdy