Welcome to "The Open Court"
The Open Court is a public law journal dedicated to sophisticated legal discourse and judicial analysis for the modern age.
By Victoria Joshua
Above the Law? Operation Absolute Resolve and the Crisis of International Rules
Introduction
On January 3, 2026, the United States had Operation Absolute Resolve, a military operation to seize Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. The U.S. government justified this move as a law enforcement action, saying that Maduro was a criminal involved in narco-terrorism and that his alleged cooperation with militant groups to smuggle drugs was a threat to American national security and public health 1(Singh, 2026). While the mission was a military success, it has created a major debate about international law and how it works.
Foundations
Foundations of International Law
Modern international law is primarily built on the UN Charter, an agreement created after World War II to keep the peace 2(United Nations, 1945). The most important part of this charter is State Sovereignty. This is the legal principle that every nation has the right to govern its own territory without outside interference. The goal of these rules is to ensure that even the most powerful countries cannot simply use force to get what they want.
Violations
How the U.S. Violated International Rules
Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, it is illegal for a country to use force against the territory or government of another state 2(United Nations, 1945). There are only two legal ways to use force: if a country is acting in self-defence against an armed attack, or if the UN Security Council gives permission. The U.S. "narco-terrorism" excuse does not usually meet the legal definition of self-defence because drug trafficking is not considered an "armed attack" by a military 3(Milanovic, 2026). Furthermore, there is a legal concept called immunity. This rule protects sitting presidents from being arrested by foreign powers. By ignoring these protocols, the U.S. acted outside the accepted legal framework 4(Akande, Goodman and Knuckey, 2026).
Global Perspectives
Global Perspectives
The international community was deeply divided. Some allies, such as Canada, supported the removal of Maduro, arguing his government was illegitimate. However, other major powers were much more critical. The French government said that the mission went against the principle of solving disputes peacefully 4(Akande, Goodman and Knuckey, 2026). Leaders in the "Global South," including countries in Africa and South America, called the move a "state-sponsored kidnapping" and warned that it sets a dangerous precedent where no world leader is safe from a superpower 5(Tams, 2026).
Critical Analysis
The Enforcement Dilemma and Future Prospects
Why Is There No Punishment? A major problem with international law is that it is difficult to enforce. While the UN Security Council has the power to punish countries that break the law, the United States is one of five permanent members with veto power. This means the U.S. can block any legal action or punishment aimed at itself. Without an independent court or police force that is more powerful than a superpower, the law is often applied only to smaller, weaker nations 6(Institut de Droit International, 2026). Does the System Need Updating? Operation Absolute Resolve shows that the current rules of international law might be outdated. When a powerful nation decides that its own security is more important than global treaties, the current system has no way to stop it. This suggests that the UN Charter may need to be updated to ensure that no country is "above the law." If international law is going to work in the future, the world must find a way to protect the rights of all nations, not just the strongest ones.
References
1Singh, D. (2026). The Capture of Venezuela', Greenland Security and Airstrikes against Iran. Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, https://www.davidpublisher.com/Public/uploads/Contribute/69c49b37e53c4.pdf
2United Nations (1945). United Nations Charter.
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text
3Milanovic, M. (2026). The U.S. Strikes Against Venezuela and the Credibility of the Anti-Aggression Norm. Völkerrechtsblog.
https://voelkerrechtsblog.org/the-u-s-strikes-against-venezuela-and-the-credibility-of-the-anti-aggression-norm/
4Akande, D., Goodman, R. and Knuckey, S. (2026). Expert comment: illegality of US attack against Venezuela 'beyond debate' - how the world reacts. University of Oxford.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2026-01-07-expert-comment-illegality-us-attack-against-venezuela-beyond-debate-how-world-reacts