Starmer Criticized... for *Not* Cheering War Crimes Loud Enough?
Mainstream media wants to dissect whether Keir Starmer sufficiently questioned Trump's Venezuela policy. They focus on the nuance of his 'queries' rather than the fundamental violation of international law inherent in a foreign power's attempt to overthrow a sovereign government, especially one executed by a US administration. Trump's 2020 'Operation Venezuela,' including naval deployments and
bounties on Maduro, was a blatant act of aggression, a playbook the US has run countless times across Latin America since the Monroe Doctrine. But sure, Starmer's 'query' is the story. One might wonder if the Financial Times would dedicate similar column inches to unpacking the 'legality' of Starmer's own party's current unwavering support for other internationally condemned actions. This isn't
about Starmer's legal background; it's about validating the idea that US interventions are even up for 'querying' rather than outright condemnation. When the initial act is illegal, debating the tone of the criticism often serves to normalize the offense.