Jan 4, 2026 / 00:15 am (CNA).
The U.S. capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has drawn divergent international reactions, with European leaders calling for restraint ahead of an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting Monday.
Pope Leo XIV has not yet commented on Saturday’s operation, though observers expect him to address the situation during his midday Angelus address Sunday. The pope warned in December against U.S. military intervention in Venezuela, urging President Trump to seek dialogue rather than force.
The Vatican’s daily newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, led its Saturday edition with coverage of the “sudden escalation,” describing the situation in Caracas as “highly volatile.”
European leaders stress international law
EU High Representative Kaja Kallas said on X she spoke with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the EU ambassador in Caracas. Acknowledging Maduro “lacks legitimacy,” she called for a peaceful transition while prioritizing EU citizens’ safety.
French President Emmanuel Macron wrote on X that Venezuelans “could only rejoice” at ridding themselves of dictatorship. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez affirmed Spain never recognized Maduro but will not recognize “an intervention that violates international law”.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said “Britain was not involved” while posting on X that the UK “regarded Maduro as an illegitimate president and we shed no tears about the end of his regime.”
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz acknowledged Venezuela’s drug trafficking while confirming Germany had not recognized the Maduro regime as legitimate. He called for a transition towards a democratically elected government.
China, Russia condemn strikes
China’s Foreign Ministry expressed “deep shock” at the “blatant use of force,” noting its envoy met with Maduro hours before the operation.
Russia called the strikes “armed aggression”, saying “ideological hostility has triumphed over businesslike pragmatism.”
The U.N. Security Council will convene an emergency meeting at 10 a.m. Monday in New York after Colombia requested the session, backed by permanent members Russia and China.
U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said he is “deeply alarmed,” describing the operation as “a dangerous precedent.”
Latin American responses divided sharply, with Brazil, Colombia, Chile, and Mexico condemning the strikes while Argentina’s Javier Milei praised the capture. Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado declared “the hour of freedom has arrived.”
Maduro is being held at Brooklyn’s Metropolitan Detention Center ahead of Monday’s arraignment on narco-terrorism charges. Venezuelan bishops called for prayer and national unity.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
The US is now facing some legal challenges which the Trump team might not have planned out thoughtfully. For example, it got Guaido to rejoin the Rio Treaty but then notwithstanding removing Maduro, it is presently dealing with the existing regime through Delcy Rodriguez who was always the “CEO” or de facto manager of the post-Chavez system including the deepened integration of FARC, Cubans, military involvements and narcotics. Could be very unwise to use Munroe Doctrine to throw wrenches into the international order; which Doctrine (so-called) he has been explicitly projecting.
Legal-cum-policy challenges, that is to say.
The Trump team will have done this for the sake of minimizing military intervention, Trump said he is trying to be judicious; however, persisting in dealing with Rodriguez and those factions going and that will come into it, will tend to legitimnize Rodriguez and accommodate more and more corrupting forces.
Adding insult to injury, the Chavez-Maduro-Rodriguez event was a CIA-backed initiative. So look what – The US arriving at resolutions with the US in the name of freedom?
All due respect to Trump and his team, this is a sort of test not of resiliency but of imaginative sound statecraft and integrity of good will, of the US (I think).