Скачать или смотреть NEWS UPDATES: Top 15 Global News

International law critique: Most experts (e.g., from Chatham House, Just Security, Stanford/Notre Dame/Columbia professors) argue it violated core UN Charter principles. No UN Security Council authorization under Chapter VII existed. It wasn’t self-defense under Article 51 (no “armed attack” by Venezuela; drug issues don’t qualify as kinetic assault). It breached Article 2(4)’s prohibition on force against territorial integrity/sovereignty. Head-of-state immunity (customary law) was ignored. The UN Secretary-General called it “deeply alarming” and a “dangerous precedent”; the Security Council held an emergency meeting where allies expressed concerns, while Russia/China condemned it as aggression.
Overall legality assessment (predominant expert view in these lectures): Not lawful under the UN Charter or Security Council rules. Unilateral forcible abduction into sovereign territory without consent or UNSC approval constitutes a breach, even if Maduro’s regime was illegitimate or criminal. Drug/narco-terrorism charges provide no justification for military force abroad. Some U.S. defenders argue it’s enforceable domestic law enforcement, but this is widely rejected internationally.
Keywords
• Operation Absolute Resolve lecture
• Maduro capture international law analysis
• UN Charter violation Maduro arrest
• US Venezuela intervention 2026 expert talk
• Nicolás Maduro abduction legality
• Head of state immunity Venezuela
• Article 2(4) UN Charter breach
• UN Security Council Venezuela emergency meeting
• Narco-terrorism charges Maduro lecture
• Chatham House / Just Security Maduro analysis
• Professor international law Maduro video
• Trump Maduro regime change precedent