The dramatic removal of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro by US military action has presented the British government with a significant and uncomfortable diplomatic dilemma, according to a leading defence expert.
A Questionable Victory
Professor Michael Clarke, a Visiting Professor at King’s College London and former director of the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), argues that while many will welcome the end of Maduro's dictatorial rule, the manner of his ousting deals a severe blow to the established international order. The series of explosions at Caracas's Fuerte Tiuna military complex and La Carlota airport on January 3, 2026, marked a decisive, unilateral American intervention.
Clarke states there is "no obvious international legitimacy for what the Americans have done", noting that formally, the United States has acted illegally. This event, he contends, is part of a pattern of expansionism under President Donald Trump, following serious intentions to acquire Greenland and retake control of the Panama Canal.
The Thin Line Between Intervention and Illegality
The analysis acknowledges that Maduro, the successor to Hugo Chávez, lacked democratic legitimacy, particularly after the disputed 2024 presidential election. Venezuela, once a prosperous "Switzerland of South America," has been reduced to an economic catastrophe under his radical left-wing government.
However, Clarke emphasises that the global community does not generally accept the lack of democratic mandate as a justification for enforced regime change. On such grounds, numerous nations worldwide could be considered targets. The significant role of Venezuela's vast oil reserves, and the position of US giant Chevron within the country, is seen as a central motivator, rather than the publicly cited issue of narcotics.
"Having built up such a large task force in the Caribbean, Trump couldn’t stand it down until something had been achieved," Clarke writes. The outcome, while appearing a neat tactical victory for Washington and a defeat for Caracas's allies in Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran, sets a troubling precedent.
Britain's Uneasy Position
For the United Kingdom, the crisis creates a profound strategic headache. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government, which has stated it had no involvement in the strikes, is now aligned with a European community deeply uneasy about the operation's questionable legality.
Professor Clarke concludes that while Maduro's departure may benefit Venezuela, the method undermines global stability. The United States, under this analysis, is behaving as a revisionist and quasi-rogue state, abandoning its traditional role as the leader of the liberal democratic order. This shift forces allies like Britain into a difficult position, having long relied on Washington to champion a rules-based system that this action blatantly disregards.
