August M
President Donald Trump has openly questioned the need for international law as his administration presses ahead with an increasingly aggressive foreign policy agenda.
The comments have alarmed legal experts and UN officials, who warn the approach risks destabilising global norms and encouraging wider conflict.
Morality over law
Trump brushed aside the relevance of international law in remarks to The New York Times, saying only his personal judgment restrained US actions.
“I don’t need international law. I’m not looking to hurt people,” Trump said.
When pressed on whether he was bound by international law, he added that it “depends what your definition of international law is”.
The comments came after US forces abducted Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro in an operation that critics say violated the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force against another state’s sovereignty, Al Jazeera reported.
Military pressure
The operation in Venezuela followed a series of assertive US moves abroad.
After early-morning strikes across Caracas and Venezuelan military sites, Trump said the United States would “run” Venezuela and exploit its oil resources, while his administration signalled it would dictate policy to interim President Delcy Rodriguez.
“If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” Trump said in an interview with The Atlantic.
Trump has also suggested possible military action against Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro, intensified efforts to acquire Greenland and previously ordered strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Imperial fears
UN special rapporteur Margaret Satterthwaite told Al Jazeera that dismissing international law was “extremely dangerous”.
She said the world could be sliding back into an “age of imperialism”, warning that US rhetoric may embolden other powers.
“We’re worse off if we don’t insist on the international law that does exist,” she said.
International law scholar Yusra Suedi of the University of Manchester cautioned that rejecting legal norms signals that “might is right”, potentially encouraging actions by states such as China or Russia.
Lessons from history
Ian Hurd, a professor at Northwestern University, said Trump’s approach echoed past US interventions in Latin America.
“There are innumerable examples historically of this, from Panama to Haiti to Nicaragua to Chile in the ’70s and on and on,” he told Al Jazeera.
He said US interventionism had repeatedly led to instability and regret, adding: “These never work well.”
Sources: Al Jazeera, The New York Times
