A Legal Study of Kidnapping of the President of Venezuela: Interventionist Policy of the United States during the Trump Administration

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate professor, department of international relations, Allameh Tabataba'i university, Tehran. Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Social Sciences and Economics, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

State sovereignty constitutes one of the foundational principles of public international law,safeguarding political independence and prohibiting external interference in the internalaffairs of states. The disclosure of an alleged plan by the United States, during the Trumpadministration, to kidnap the President of Venezuela represents a contemporary manifestation ofcoercive conduct carried out through ostensibly non-military means. Situated within the broadercontext of escalating tensions between the United States and Venezuela and closely connectedto U.S. energy, economic, and security interests in Latin America, this case raises significantlegal questions concerning the scope of the principle of non-intervention and the applicabilityof international legal norms to covert and extraterritorial operations.The central objective ofthis study is to examine the legal nature of the alleged non-military kidnapping plot and assesswhether such conduct constitutes a violation of state sovereignty and political independence.Adopting a descriptive–analytical methodology, the article evaluates the legality of the allegedaction in light of the United Nations Charter, relevant rules of customary international law, the1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally ProtectedPersons, and the principles governing international state responsibility. The findings indicate thatthe kidnapping or attempted kidnapping of political leaders, even outside the context of armedconflict and in the absence of overt military force, entails an inherently coercive and interventionistcharacter. Such conduct constitutes a serious breach of state sovereignty, political independence,and the international legal protections afforded to heads of state, thereby triggering the actingstate’s international responsibility. The article concludes that the normalization of covert non-military coercive measures poses a substantial threat to the integrity of the international legalorder and highlights the urgent need to strengthen legal accountability mechanisms to safeguardthe principle of state sovereignty in contemporary international relations.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics