Connect with us

News

Maduro seized, norms tested: Security Council divided as Venezuela crisis deepens

Published

on

Maduro seized, norms tested: Security Council divided as Venezuela crisis deepens

Why it matters: Council members are split over whether Washington’s move upholds accountability – or undermines a foundational principle of international order.  

Some delegations argue the action was exceptional and justified; others warn it risks normalising unilateral force and eroding state sovereignty.

Setting the tone, the UN Secretary-General cautioned that international peace and security rest on all Member States adhering to the UN Charter – language that framed a debate likely to expose deep and lasting divisions inside the chamber in New York – all as the Venezuelan leader appeared in a downtown federal courtroom just a few miles away.

US Ambassador Michael Waltz addresses the Security Council.

US: Law-enforcement operation, not war

The United States rejected characterisations of its actions as military aggression, describing the operation as a targeted law enforcement measure facilitated by the military to arrest an indicted fugitive.

Advertisement

Ambassador Michael Waltz said:

  • Nicolás Maduro is not a legitimate head of State following disputed 2024 elections.
  • Saturday’s operation was necessary to combat narcotics trafficking and transnational organised crime threatening US and regional security.
  • Historical precedents exist, including the 1989 arrest of Panama’s former leader Manuel Noriega.

“There is no war against Venezuela or its people. We are not occupying a country,” he said. “This was a law-enforcement operation in furtherance of lawful indictments that have existed for decades.”

Venezuelan Ambassador Samuel Moncada addresses the Security Council meeting.

Venezuelan Ambassador Samuel Moncada addresses the Security Council.

Venezuela: Sovereignty violated; a dangerous precedent

Venezuelan Ambassador Samuel Moncada described his country as the target of an illegitimate armed attack lacking any legal justification, accusing the US of bombing Venezuelan territory, the loss of civilian and military lives, and the “kidnapping” of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores.

“We cannot ignore a central element of this US aggression,” he said. “Venezuela is the victim of these attacks because of its natural resources.”

Calling on the Council to act under its Charter mandate, he urged that:

  • The US be required to respect the immunities of the president and his wife and ensure their immediate release and safe return;
  • The use of force against Venezuela be clearly and unequivocally condemned;
  • The principle of non-acquisition of territory or resources by force be reaffirmed; and
  • Measures be adopted to de-escalate tensions, protect civilians and restore respect for international law.

Article 2 of the UN Charter in a nutshell

The ground rules for global cooperation 

Article 2 lays out the core principles that guide how countries work together under the United Nations. Here’s what it means:

Advertisement
  • Equality for all nations: Every Member State, big or small, is treated as an equal.
  • Keep your promises: Countries must honour the commitments they made when joining the UN.
  • Peaceful problem-solving: Disputes should be settled without violence, to protect peace and justice.
  • No force or threats: Nations must not use force or threaten others’ independence or territory.
  • Support the UN’s actions: Members should help the UN when it acts to maintain peace—and never assist those opposing it.
  • Influence beyond membership: Even non-member States should follow these principles when peace and security are at stake.
  • Hands off domestic affairs: The UN cannot interfere in a country’s internal matters – except when enforcing peace under Chapter VII, which deals with actions to preserve international peace and security.

Read more about the UN Charter here.

Concern over use of force

Several Council members and others invited to take part expressed deep concern over the US military action, grounding their positions firmly in the UN Charter.

Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Chile and Panama, underscored their region’s long-standing declaration as a zone of peace and warned that unilateral military action risked destabilising the Western hemisphere and aggravating displacement flows.

  • Colombia, in its first intervention as an elected Council member, rejected “any unilateral use of force” and cautioned that civilians invariably pay the highest price.
  • Brazil said the bombing and seizure of a head of State crossed an “unacceptable line,” warning of the erosion of multilateralism.
  • Mexico stressed that externally imposed regime change violates international law regardless of political disagreements.

Ambassadors also cited a worrying human rights situation inside Venezuela and the suffering of civilians, highlighting the need to ensure compliance with international law:

  • The United Kingdom highlighted years of suffering endured by Venezuelans – poverty, repression and mass displacement – while underscoring that respect for the UN Charter and the rule of law is essential for global peace and security.
  • Denmark and France acknowledged the imperative to combat organised crime and protect human rights – but warned that counter-narcotics efforts and accountability must be pursued through lawful, multilateral means.
A wide view of the United Nations Security Council meeting discussing threats to international peace and security, specifically regarding the situation in Venezuela.

A wide view of the Security Council meeting on the situation in Venezuela.

Regional voices backing US action

A smaller group of countries from the region took a different view.

  • Argentina praised the US operation as a decisive step against narcotics trafficking and terrorism, arguing that the operation and Mr. Maduro’s removal could open a path toward restoring democracy, the rule of law and human rights in Venezuela.
  • Paraguay also welcomed Mr. Maduro’s removal, calling for the immediate restoration of democratic institutions and the release of political prisoners, while urging that the transition proceed through democratic means.

Charter credibility at stake

Russia and China delivered some of the strongest criticism, characterising the US action as armed aggression and warning against the normalisation of unilateral force.

This position was echoed by countries beyond the Americas – including South Africa, Pakistan, Iran and Uganda – which warned the selective application of international law risks undermining the entire collective security system.

Representatives of Moscow and Beijing called for the immediate release of President Maduro and stressed the inviolability of head-of-State immunity under international law, framing the situation as a test of whether Charter principles apply equally to all States.

Advertisement
Broadcast of the Security Council meeting regarding the situation in Venezuela.

News

DOJ warns of criminal charges for state election officials if noncitizens vote

Published

on

DOJ warns of criminal charges for state election officials if noncitizens vote

The Justice Department sent letters warning election officials in all 50 states and the District of Columbia that they could face criminal prosecution over noncitizen voting, a spokesperson for the Justice Department confirmed Tuesday.

The letters, signed by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who heads up the department’s Civil Rights Division, give states five days to explain how they will comply with federal voter eligibility laws and how they will maintain “clean voter lists.”

Advertisement

“The Department sent these letters to all 50 states and the District of Columbia, asking for voluntary compliance in a timely manner with their obligations under federal law to ensure only citizens vote in federal elections,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in a statement.

Noncitizen voting in federal elections is extremely rare, but Trump and his administration have falsely portrayed it as a widespread issue.

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar and Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson are among those who said they received the letters from the Justice Department.

The letters say state election officers “could be criminally prosecuted for aiding and abetting” noncitizen voting. They further specify that any election officer who knowingly retains noncitizens on a statewide voting registration list or who facilitates noncitizens’ receiving and casting ballots could be subject to criminal liability.

“An intentional act that is aimed at diluting the votes of citizens could also constitute a violation” of federal law, the letters said.

Advertisement

Henderson wrote on social media that the threats constitute “truly bizarre behavior.”

“Got another love letter this morning from the DOJ sprinkled throughout with threats of criminal prosecution,” she wrote. “I’m sure I’m not the only chief election officer of a state who is being targeted for following state and federal laws by resisting DOJ’s demands for private voter data that have thus far been ruled illegal by at least a dozen courts.”

The letters are the latest move in the Justice Department’s campaign to assert more federal control over state elections.

While some states have complied with the administration’s demands that they hand over voter roll data, the Justice Department has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., for resisting. So far, 11 different federal courts have dismissed the Justice Department’s efforts to seize voter rolls.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Reigning champion Argentina escapes with remarkable World Cup victory over Egypt

Published

on

Reigning champion Argentina escapes with remarkable World Cup victory over Egypt

Lionel Messi #10 of Argentina celebrates scoring his team’s second goal during their World Cup match against Egypt in Atlanta on Tuesday.

Elsa/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Elsa/Getty Images

They looked beaten. And out. Argentina, the defending World Cup champion and No. 1-ranked team, was down 2-0 late against Egypt.

Then, in a span of 13 remarkable minutes, Argentina scored not once, not twice, but three times, capping a comeback for the ages and leaving Egypt stunned and shellshocked.

For much of the game in Atlanta, Egypt was in control, hobbling Argentina early. The Egyptian attack began almost immediately with a stunning header goal delivered by Yasser Ibrahim in the 15th minute. After that, Egypt’s defense closed ranks, making it practically impossible for Argentina to equalize.

Advertisement

It was downhill from there for the Argentines: team captain Lionel Messi failed to convert a penalty kick, and in the 67th minute, Egypt got a second goal from Mostafa Ziko (after an earlier Egyptian goal had been disallowed after a video review). It looked like Argentina was finished. On the brink of elimination.

But no one told the Argentine players that.

In the 79th minute, Lionel Messi began doing his thing. He fired a cross near the Egyptian goal, and Cristian Romero headed it in. Messi was not done. Four minutes later, he powered a shot past the Egyptian keeper. It was his eighth goal of this tournament, the most of any player. The score was 2-2.

Then, in stoppage time, yet another Argentina header and another goal, this time from Enzo Fernandez.

“This is the World Cup for you,” said Messi after the game. “It wasn’t easy to come back from two goals down. But as I always say, this group never gives up. We always try to fight until the end.”

Advertisement
French referee François Letexier speaks with Egypt forward Mohamed Salah during the World Cup Round of 16 match between Argentina and Egypt in Atlanta.

French referee François Letexier speaks with Egypt forward Mohamed Salah during the World Cup Round of 16 match between Argentina and Egypt in Atlanta.

Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images

Advertisement

Afterward, Egypt coach Hossam Hassan complained about the French referee and the officiating. “I am not convinced. I am not convinced with this outcome. I’m not convinced with the way things unfolded during this match,” said Hassan in a post-match news conference. “We have been treated unfairly today. We have suffered injustice.”

“We would have deserved to earn this win, but we are leaving with honor, with pride, regardless of this defeat,” said Hossan.

African soccer teams have been the stars of this World Cup. Morocco has yet to lose a game. Cape Verde qualified for the first time in its history and stymied Spain, Uruguay and Saudi Arabia. Argentina barely beat them in a nail-biter of a match.

Continue Reading

News

Top Senate Democrats push Trump-affiliated companies for answers about IRS settlement

Published

on

Top Senate Democrats push Trump-affiliated companies for answers about IRS settlement

Top Senate Democrats are pushing for answers on whether a provision in a controversial settlement agreement between President Trump and his own administration applies to companies co-founded by or affiliated with the Trump family.

As part of a deal struck in May by the Justice Department to resolve a lawsuit brought by Mr. Trump, the Internal Revenue Service is permanently barred from pursuing claims against Mr. Trump, his oldest sons Don Jr. and Eric, and the Trump Organization based on prior tax returns.

In a one-page document signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and dated May 19, the Justice Department said the defendants in the president’s lawsuit — the IRS and the Treasury Department — are “FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED” from “prosecuting or pursuing, any and all claims” arising from tax returns filed before the settlement took effect. Blanche also wrote that the settlement applies to “parties including trusts, parent, sister, or related companies, affiliates, and subsidiaries.”

Now, Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, and Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee Ron Wyden of Oregon are pushing 11 businesses and organizations with ties to the Trump family to get answers for the “significant questions” the settlement raises relating to the tax audit provision, and whether the companies are included in the deal.

“Under the guise of a so-called legal settlement, the Trump administration has attempted to decree that the President, his family, and their entire business empire — potentially including entities with even the vaguest ‘affiliation’ to the family — are to face zero consequences if they have committed a range of financial crimes or misdeeds — regardless of the severity of the violation,” the senators wrote in letters transmitted to the companies Monday night. 

Advertisement

The letters were sent to mining company Kaz Resources, defense firm Powerus, cryptocurrency companies World Liberty Financial and American Bitcoin, robotics startup Foundation Future Industries, investment firm 1789 Capital, private aviation company Tag Air, and prediction markets Polymarket and Kalshi. 

All of the companies either were founded by Mr. Trump and his two adult sons, or list members of the Trump family as advisers, board members, or partial owners. Donald Trump Jr. sits on Polymarket’s advisory board and 1789 Capital, where he’s a partner, has invested in Polymarket. Days before Mr. Trump took office for his second term, Kalshi also announced Trump Jr. would be a strategic adviser.

The Democrats, who are in the minority, lack subpoena power, so Mr. Trump, his children and his companies can’t be forced to answer the questions posed by the senators.

According to recent financial disclosures, the president earned more than a billion dollars from cryptocurrency ventures alone last year, including from his meme coin business and World Liberty Financial, his family’s cryptocurrency firm. 

Separately, the senators also asked the Trump Organization in a separate letter if it believes it has “immunity from all audits, civil penalties or federal prosecution” for any crimes that could have occurred before the settlement.

Advertisement

Trump Media and Technology Group, which is majority owned by a trust that lists Mr. Trump as the sole beneficiary and operates the Truth Social platform he uses daily, also received a letter from the Democratic senators.

“The public deserves transparency about the scope of this get-out-of-jail free card for Trump-aligned businesses, and about whether you intend to rely on this settlement as a free pass for any possible violations of the law,” the senators continued in their letter, which also seeks any communications that executives at the companies have had with the Justice Department and White House leading up to or after the settlement was signed.

The settlement was announced months after Mr. Trump and two of his sons and the Trump Organization accused the IRS and Treasury Department of unlawfully allowing a government contractor to leak tax returns to media outlets in 2020. 

In a statement, a Justice Department spokesperson said “the IRS routinely provides releases as part of resolving taxpayer reviews and audits. This settlement follows that same standard practice.” 

The spokesperson did not provide specific information about which companies are covered by the audit provision, or whether the Trump Organization and Trump family are the only entities covered by that addendum. 

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending