US 'Grave Concerns' for International Law? Please, Just Stop.
The Hill reports on the Trump administration's legal gymnastics to justify capturing Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, citing 'grave concerns' from international law experts. They noted the lack of UN Security Council authorization and violations of the UN Charter. One might almost believe Washington cares about such trifles. (One might also believe pigs fly.) This sudden respect for sovereign
borders and international law is touching, if strategically timed. The US has, historically, shown 'grave concerns' for international law only when it suits—from interventions in Chile (1973 coup), Grenada (1983 invasion), Panama (1989 invasion to depose Noriega), to the bombing of Serbia without UN approval (1999) and the Iraq invasion (2003) based on fabricated WMD claims. Funny how 'grave
concerns' only surface when *we’re* criticized, not when *we're* doing the invading. Perhaps The Hill's next piece could detail the 'grave concerns' ignored during these other—ahem—democracy promotion missions.