Background on Key Figures and Context
The recent military intervention by the United States in Venezuela, resulting in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, has once again brought the roles and capabilities of multilateral organizations like the Organization of American States (OAS) and the United Nations (UN) into the international spotlight.
Raúl Guillermo Benítez Manaut, a specialist in Latin American affairs and an investigator at the Center for North American Studies of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), argues that both institutions are currently experiencing a “sharp decline,” as reported in a recent UNAM article.
Mexico’s Diplomatic Stance and Limitations
According to Benítez Manaut, Mexico’s stance is consistent with a diplomatic tradition that opposes military interventions in other countries’ territories, regardless of the political sign of the ruling government.
However, he considers Mexico’s statement to be “very mild.” The country maintains multiple strategic interests with the United States and faces an imminent review of the Tratado entre México, Estados Unidos y Canadá (T-MEC). In this context, the Mexican government expressed its disagreement with the US-ordered incursion but stopped short of any action beyond a diplomatic condemnation.
European Reactions and Legal Dilemmas
In the case of the European Union, Benítez Manaut noted that several member states did not recognize Nicolás Maduro as a legitimate leader due to alleged electoral fraud in his third term beginning in 2019. Nevertheless, some European countries condemned the US military operation.
The specialist summarized the dilemma as a double violation of legal order: on one hand, the US violated international law by intervening militarily and extracting a head of state from their country; on the other, Maduro violated Venezuelan popular sovereignty by remaining in power through contested electoral processes.
OAS, UN, and Their Limited Influence
Benítez Manaut explained that situations like Venezuela’s highlight the current limitations of the OAS and UN. In war or military action scenarios, both organizations are often sidelined due to a lack of effective tools to influence events.
Despite this, he emphasized that they remain the only multilateral forums where conflicts such as the war in Ukraine, the Gaza crisis, or the intervention in Venezuela can be debated.
In the case of Venezuela, the UN Security Council convened a meeting, but Benítez Manaut anticipated that differing stances among powerful nations like Russia, China, the US, France, and the UK would prevent any substantive resolution.
The specialist’s analysis points to an international scenario where multilateral organizations retain symbolic and dialogical value but have lost real action capacity. The Venezuelan crisis not only exposes the fragility of international law in the face of great powers but also the weakening of institutions created to uphold it.
Key Questions and Answers
- What is the current state of the OAS and UN according to Raúl Guillermo Benítez Manaut? Both organizations are experiencing a “sharp decline” due to their limited ability to influence events in scenarios of war or military actions.
- How did Mexico respond to the US intervention in Venezuela? Mexico issued a mild statement condemning the incursion while maintaining strategic interests with the US and facing a T-MEC review.
- What are the legal dilemmas presented by the recent events in Venezuela? The US violated international law through military intervention, while Maduro allegedly violated Venezuelan popular sovereignty through contested elections.
- What role can the OAS and UN play in addressing the Venezuelan crisis? Although limited, they remain essential forums to debate international conflicts. However, their inability to enforce resolutions highlights the fragility of international law and the weakening of institutions designed to protect it.
