Which European countries issued explicit condemnations of the U.S. operation in Venezuela, and what domestic debates followed?
Executive summary
Several European governments and leaders reacted with a mix of condemnation, cautious calls for restraint and partisan praise after the U.S. military operation that removed Nicolás Maduro; France and Denmark issued notably sharp criticisms of the U.S. action as breaching international law, while Spain joined a formal rejection alongside Latin American governments and a string of EU members backed a measured statement urging respect for the UN Charter [1] [2] [3]. Those official positions sparked immediate domestic debates across Europe—ranging from parliamentary rebukes and street protests to partisan splits over alliance politics and legal norms—exposing fault lines between rule-of-law rhetoric and strategic deference to Washington [4] [5] [6].
1. Who in Europe explicitly condemned the U.S. operation: France and Denmark took a firmer line
By midweek France and Denmark moved from initial caution to explicit criticism: reporting highlights that both Paris and Copenhagen issued statements that stiffened European condemnation of the U.S. seizure of Maduro and framed the operation as raising serious legal questions under international law [1] [7]. French officials walked a fine line—Emmanuel Macron publicly welcomed the end of the “Maduro dictatorship” yet France’s foreign ministry also criticized the U.S. military action as violating the principle against the use of force, a tension reflected in French commentary [7].
2. Spain’s formal rejection and the transatlantic reverberation across EU capitals
Spain joined five Latin American countries in a joint communiqué explicitly rejecting the U.S. military operation and warning against appropriation of Venezuelan resources, a diplomatic rebuke that underscored European worries about precedent and sovereignty [2]. At the EU level the High Representative issued a statement, supported by 26 member states, calling for calm, restraint and respect for the UN Charter—language that stopped short of an outright blanket condemnation of the U.S. but signalled broad European unease [3].
3. Where reactions were equivocal or divided: UK, Germany, Italy and others
Several capitals displayed ambivalence: the UK’s initial responses were cautious—Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he would “shed no tears” for Maduro’s fall while urging respect for international law, and UK diplomats at the UN did not issue a blunt condemnation [8] [1]. Germany’s leadership warned the legal assessment was “complex,” and reporting notes a domestic split between politicians applauding Maduro’s removal and others condemning the U.S. action as problematic for international norms [8] [6]. Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, represented the other strand of opinion by deeming the operation legitimate, illustrating Europe’s ideological fractures [6].
4. Domestic debates: parliamentary rebukes, protests and critiques of European institutions
Across Europe the U.S. operation provoked immediate domestic contestation: Dutch lawmakers from the Socialist Party, GreenLeft and others publicly denounced the strike as illegal and called for formal condemnation even as the Dutch foreign ministry urged restraint [4]. Greece saw thousands protesting in the streets against perceived violations of Venezuelan sovereignty [4]. In several countries pundits and opposition politicians accused EU institutions of a weak response—The Guardian documented criticism that the European Commission’s muted social-media posts and cautious language betrayed a reluctance to challenge a powerful ally [5]. Those debates blended legal argument (violation of the UN Charter) with geopolitical anxiety about being sidelined by an assertive U.S. policy [5] [3].
5. Political implications: rules-based rhetoric versus alliance politics
The reaction exposed an awkward trade-off for many European governments: defending international law and territorial sovereignty risked antagonising Washington, while silence or praise risked accusations of hypocrisy given Europe’s prior insistence on rules-based norms in crises such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine [1] [5]. Coverage shows parties on the left and some centrist lawmakers pushing for stronger condemnations and legal scrutiny, while conservative or pro-Atlantic leaders framed Maduro’s removal as a strategic gain, underscoring a partisan realignment in how European governments weigh legal principle against geopolitical calculations [6] [7].