Global Hypocrisy in the Face of What Happened in Venezuela

By Andres Kogan Valderrama

HAVANA TIMES – With regard to what happened in Venezuela on January 3, and before saying anything or putting forward any kind of analysis, I would like to begin by empathizing with the joy of millions of Venezuelans, both inside and outside the country, at the capture of Nicolás Maduro. I mention this because one may hold a critical view of what Donald Trump and the United States have done, but we cannot be indifferent to the celebration and hope of many people in the face of the fall of a dictator who has caused so much harm.

That said, empathizing with this should not blind us to the profound hypocrisy of certain political sectors in response to what has occurred. This is evident, for example, among parts of the Latin American and European left that call themselves progressive and defenders of human rights and popular sovereignty, and that crudely deploy anti-imperialist rhetoric to silence and deny the abuses committed by a dictatorial regime devoted to persecuting, arbitrarily detaining, repressing, torturing, and murdering its opponents.

On the other hand, there are sectors of the right—conservative and liberal—that enthusiastically celebrate Maduro’s capture as a triumph of democracy and freedom, portraying Trump as a hero who has “liberated” Venezuela. But this narrative is equally hypocritical. Does anyone really believe that the United States cares about democracy in Venezuela? Its explicit interest does not lie in human rights or the well-being of the Venezuelan people, but in that country’s oil.

This hypocrisy on both the left and the right is not an isolated phenomenon; it is a symptom of a broader failure: that of international law as a whole. What happened in Venezuela once again shows us how global norms are applied selectively, depending on the geopolitical interests of the moment. The United Nations Charter, which proclaims non-interference in internal affairs and the peaceful resolution of conflicts, seems like an obsolete document when powers such as the United States act unilaterally, without a mandate from the Security Council.

And here lies the core problem: the UN Security Council, with its five permanent members (the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom) and their right of veto, does not safeguard world peace, but rather the interests of the great powers. Why do Russia and China veto resolutions on Ukraine, while the United States does the same regarding Israel? Venezuela is only the latest example of how this anachronistic body, inherited from the postwar era, perpetuates an unjust order in which the weak are trampled and the strong impose their will.

It is time to demand a profound democratization of the United Nations. We need to reform the Security Council to include voices from Latin America, Africa, and Asia, eliminating or limiting the veto that paralyzes collective action. Only then can we build a truly universal international law, capable of preventing both opportunistic interventions and internal dictatorships. Otherwise, we will continue in this cycle of hypocrisy, where the joy of a people becomes the pretext for colonial and imperial agendas.

Consequently, Maduro’s capture may be a turning point for Venezuela—but only if we learn from these lessons. I empathize with Venezuelan hope, but I warn: without an honest critique of all the actors involved, real change will remain an illusion.

Read more from opinion articles here on Havana Times.