United States President Donald Trump ordered direct military action against Venezuela and captured dictator Nicolas Maduro. The action, according to the analysis of doctor of international law Priscila Caneparo, violates the rules, but presents few internal legal risks.
According to international law, this attack may constitute an illegal act. “The Charter of the United Nations only authorizes military intervention with the approval of the Security Council or in cases of self-defense, which is not the case in this case,” specifies the expert.
“Classifying Maduro’s government as a narco-state can even serve as political rhetoric, but it is a justification that international law will not accept,” Caneparo believes.
There are, however, limits to UN action. The United States is a permanent member of the Security Council and therefore has a veto over any decision. According to Caneparo, what could contain Trump on the international stage is the interaction of the interests of great powers, such as Russia and China, which support Caracas.
In the national scenario, Caneparo explains that, according to American law, the Executive must inform Congress in advance of military actions — except in the case of the use of the anti-terrorism law, used in the case of Venezuela.
Trump had already indicated, on December 18, that he did not feel obliged to inform Congress of possible attacks against Venezuela, citing his concerns about leaks of information from parliamentarians.
“It wouldn’t bother me, but … I don’t need to tell them. It’s proven, but it wouldn’t bother me at all,” Trump said when asked. “I just hope they don’t leak (information). You know, people leak. They’re politicians, and they leak like a sieve.”
The episode triggers provisions of the War Powers Act of 1973, passed after the Vietnam War to limit unilateral military actions by the White House. Although the president is commander in chief of the armed forces, the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war.
In practice, however, U.S. presidents have for decades avoided formal declarations of war and have resorted to congressional resolutions or broad interpretations of their constitutional powers to authorize limited military operations abroad.
According to the U.S. Senate website, the last formal declaration of war approved by Congress was during World War II. Since then, Parliament has authorized the use of force through specific resolutions and exercises influence over military policy primarily through budgetary control and oversight of operations.
“Congress may even try to block or not allow attacks to continue, but that doesn’t necessarily matter to Trump,” Caneparo says.
Abuses of power can even lead to impeachment proceedings – Trump has already survived two.
The New York Times spoke with Trump after the military action. Journalist Tyler Pager questioned whether there was prior consultation with Congress before the armed forces carried out what Trump himself described on social media as a “full-scale attack.”
“Let’s talk about it,” the president replied to the American newspaper, which called a press conference early Saturday afternoon.
“What can stop Trump is the allied base itself, in particular the Maga movement (acronym for ‘make America great again’, Trump’s slogan), which opposes military interventions outside the United States,” says Caneparo.
In mid-December, the House narrowly rejected two resolutions introduced by Democrats that would have required explicit congressional authorization for the Trump administration’s military campaign in the Caribbean – one targeting attacks on ships and another on “hostilities in or against Venezuela.”
About The Author
