Kemi Badenoch Defends US Venezuela Raid

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has defended the US raid on Venezuela that led to the capture of President Nicolás Maduro, claiming the action was 'morally right' despite questions regarding international law. Her statement breaks from the prevailing sentiment in British politics, where few have been willing to support the US operation.

Badenoch initially adopted a noncommittal stance similar to Keir Starmer, stating she needed more information before forming an opinion. However, she has since shifted to a position of moral support for the US action. She emphasized her personal background growing up under a military dictatorship in Nigeria, which she says gives her insight into the situation in Venezuela.

The Conservative leader also challenged the concept of a rules-based international order, arguing that international law is merely an agreement between nations that can be disregarded. She highlighted the lack of global response to previous foreign interventions in Venezuela by Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah as evidence of hypocrisy in the application of international law.

Kemi Badenoch has stated that the US raid on Venezuela was 'morally' the right thing to do, despite acknowledging that the legal certainty surrounding the operation is not yet clear. In a departure from her earlier, more cautious comments, the Conservative leader explained that her support is rooted in the nature of the Venezuelan government.

Badenoch described the Venezuelan regime as 'brutal' and noted that the UK did not recognize it as a legitimate government. She expressed understanding of the American decision to intervene, citing the potential for public celebration similar to what occurs when oppressive regimes fall.

Her personal history played a significant role in her assessment. Badenoch shared that she grew up under a military dictatorship in Nigeria, giving her a unique perspective on living under leadership similar to Nicolás Maduro's.

She stated: "I know what it’s like to have people celebrating in the street. So I’m not condemning the US."

Kemi Badenoch questioned the validity and consistency of the rules-based international order, arguing that the world has changed significantly. She asserted that international law is not an absolute authority but rather a set of agreements that nations choose to follow or ignore.

Badenoch explained her view on the limitations of global governance:

"As we all know, international law is what countries agree to. Once people decide they don’t agree, there is no international law. There’s no world police, no world government, no world court. These are agreements."

She criticized the selective outrage regarding foreign interference in Venezuela. Quoting opposition leader María Machado, Badenoch noted that Venezuela had already been 'invaded' by other powers without triggering the same defense of international law.

The specific entities she mentioned as having previously intervened in Venezuela include:

• Russia
• Iran
• Hezbollah

Badenoch asked, "Where were the people talking about international law then?" suggesting a double standard in how global interventions are judged.

Kemi Badenoch provided historical context regarding the rules-based order by referencing her time as trade secretary. She pointed to the US withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO) as a precursor to the current shift in global dynamics.

According to Badenoch, the US walked away from the WTO because other nations, specifically China, were breaking the rules. She argued that if participants do not adhere to the regulations, a rules-based order cannot exist.

She further critiqued the current diplomatic approach, suggesting that Western nations are operating under outdated paradigms. Badenoch argued that the international community is acting as if it is still 1995, relying on the 'peace dividend' from the Cold War and World War Two, while the geopolitical reality has fundamentally shifted.

The defense of the US raid by Kemi Badenoch stands in contrast to the actions of other British politicians. Over the previous three days, it was noted that it was difficult to find anyone in British politics willing to defend the raid.

In the House of Commons, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper attempted a 'delicate balancing act.' She stressed the UK's support for international law while avoiding direct criticism of the US breach of that law. MPs from all main parties had been demanding a stronger pushback against Donald Trump regarding the raid.

Badenoch's initial response to the raid was similar to that of Keir Starmer—noncommittal and requesting more information. She remained 'on the fence' until her recent statement offering moral support for the US action.