The excuses fabricated before the US aggression against Venezuela, such as drug trafficking and possession of weapons, etc., were null and void and very implausible.
International law, self-determination and territorial integrity are once again being completely marginalised, after Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria… Now even the most reluctant are beginning to realise that the double standards of the so-called value-based order (international law only applies to others) leads to complete lawlessness. Even Wolfgang Ischinger, Former Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany to Washington and London and former Head of the Munich Security Conference, wrote on X: ‘If the US intervenes in Venezuela now – without a UN mandate – the argument that Russia should not have intervened in Ukraine without invoking the UN Security Council loses its political and international legal value, doesn’t it?’
Yes, that’s exactly what it does, but that’s nothing new. The turning point did not occur on January 3rd 2026. What is new is that the US administration is no longer staging a moral cover-up in the media, as it did in previous interventions with the incubator lie or non-existent weapons of mass destruction, but is openly stating what is at stake, as General Laura Richardson, head of US Southern Command until a year ago, put it:
“The US is not focusing on ‘democracy’ in Latin America, but on control of oil, lithium, gold and rare earths. Venezuela, with the largest oil reserves and important strategic resources, is the main target.”
Stephen Miller, advisor to Donald Trump, has now openly declared that the world is not governed by international law, but by ‘strength and power’ – an explicit rejection of international law as the guiding principle of international politics, not because it is being violated, but because it is being declared irrelevant. Miller speaks openly of how ‘absurd’ it is to allow a country in America’s ‘backyard’ to be a supplier of resources to opponents of the US.
As far as the US are concerned, sovereignty only applies to other states for as long as they are not in conflict with Washington’s interests. States do not appear here as independent actors, but as strategic assets – or as a threat if they elude the logic of exploitation. This also makes it clear that the US will never regard other countries as real or even equal partners, not even within NATO, but as vassals or variables in a balance of power.

This is also illustrated by Miller’s comments on Greenland. He openly asks on what basis Denmark claims Greenland at all, why Greenland is a Danish colony – and in the same breath declares that Greenland must become part of the United States. Where is the outcry from the EU and the German government in all this?

If the ‘right of the strongest’ is legitimised in foreign policy, the rule of law also loses its significance at home.
Order exists only through reliable rules. If these rules are disregarded, a domino effect ensues, leading to a decline in standards, reliability, and safety. This is also demonstrated by the seizure of the Russian-flagged oil tanker “Marinera” in the Atlantic Ocean by the US military. The seizure of the tanker in neutral waters is a systemic breach with similar consequences of the erosion of legal norms – in this case, international maritime law and the inviolability of neutral sea lanes – which are essential for the peaceful coexistence and reliable trade relations between states.

All this decline is a return to the logic of the 19th century: territory belongs to those who are strong enough to claim it. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen clearly states that NATO will come to an end if the US attempts to annex Greenland. The end of the dangerous NATO military alliance is necessary in any case for Europe’s emancipation from the USA and an end to its vassal status/sphere of influence (second backyard?). However, Europe must not then develop into a military power or imperial actor again, but rather become a neutral force for peace by returning to its own interests, values and experiences from history! As a democratic peace union, Europe would have the opportunity to counter the hegemonic ambitions of the US with its own peaceful project in foreign policy matters, in its own interests, to play a decisive role in peaceful mediation in many conflicts and to counter the decline of international law and the rule of law.