International reactions to U.S. strikes in Venezuela

Following the U.S. strikes in Venezuela and the forcible seizure of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro and his wife, many countries expressed concern and rejection of the U.S. use of force, urging peaceful resolutions.

A joint statement issued on Sunday by Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Spain and Uruguay said:

"We express our deep concern and rejection of the military actions carried out unilaterally in the territory of Venezuela, which contravene fundamental principles of international law."

"Such actions set an extremely dangerous precedent for regional peace and security and for the rules-based international order, in addition to endangering the civilian population."

"We reiterate that the situation in Venezuela must be resolved exclusively by peaceful means, through dialogue, negotiation, and respect for the will of the Venezuelan people in all its expressions, without external interference and in accordance with international law."

A spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres says the developments between the U.S. and Venezuela constitute a "dangerous precedent." The spokesperson says "the Secretary-General continues to emphasize the importance of full respect – by all – of international law, including the UN Charter. He is deeply concerned that the rules of international law have not been respected."

Colombian President Gustavo Petro says in an X post that "the Colombian government condemns the attack on the sovereignty of Venezuela and Latin America."

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva writes that "the bombings on Venezuelan territory and the capture of its president cross an unacceptable line. These acts represent a grave affront to Venezuela's sovereignty and yet another extremely dangerous precedent for the entire international community."

"Attacking countries in flagrant violation of international law is the first step toward a world of violence, chaos, and instability, where the law of the strongest prevails over multilateralism," says Lula.

A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said "the U.S. move is in clear violation of international law, basic norms in international relations, and the purposes and principles of the UN Charter," urging the U.S. to stop efforts to overthrow the Venezuelan government and to resolve disputes through dialogue and negotiation.

Professor Christopher Isike, president of the African Association of Political Science and a professor of African Politics and International Relations at the University of Pretoria, said to CGTN that the U.S. operation ultimately falls outside established international legal frameworks governing the use of force.

Isike added that the operation also carries implications beyond the region, noting that African states with tense relations with Washington may view the move as a sign of a more assertive and personalized U.S. foreign policy with a lower tolerance for adversarial governments.

U.S. use of force in Venezuela triggered domestic protests as well. 

Hundreds of peaceful demonstrators took to Times Square in New York City on Saturday, January 3 to protest U.S. military action in Venezuela, joining a wave of "No War on Venezuela" protests planned nationwide, covering over 100 cities.

"This war is not about drugs, it is about Venezuela's oil," said Karen, a middle-aged New Yorker who participated in the protest.

"How do you have the right to step in Venezuela, to attack Venezuela?" she said. "It feels like we act as criminals."

So far, the death count from Saturday's attack has risen to 80, including civilians and soldiers, according to The New York Times.

(With input from Reuters)