Venezuela

Caroline Nokes Excerpts

Monday 5th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

[Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)]

If a large and powerful country abducts the leader of another, however abhorrent that leader is, and tries to intimidate the smaller country to, as it says itself, gain access to its resources, does the Foreign Secretary not agree that this should be called out not just by Britain, but by our western allies? We should be calling it out for what it is—a breach of international law. It is not for the country breaking the law to say whether or not it has broken the law; it is surely for the west to stand up and call it as it is. Does she not therefore share my concern that there may be a profound risk of international norms changing? If we do not call it out, this may become okay, and we risk living in a world where might is right, which is surely not in Britain’s interests.

[Yvette Cooper]

I thank my right hon. Friend for her question, and I recognise that she has been consistent in her opposition to the Maduro regime, even when she was under pressure not to be through many years. She and I would probably agree that a man who is currently being investigated for crimes against humanity and has such a history of political repression, as well as economic destruction and corruption, should not be leading a country.

My right hon. Friend rightly referred to the issues of international law. I have set out our commitment to international law, and she will know that my predecessor as Foreign Secretary talked about progressive realism. We have set out the progressive principles we follow—including how important international law is, because the framework it sets does not just reflect our values, but is in our interests—but also that we have to engage with the world the way it is. I can assure her that, as part of that, I have raised the issue of international law with Secretary of State Rubio and made it clear that we will continue to urge all countries to follow it.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)]

I associate myself and my party with the Foreign Secretary’s comments about the tragedy in Crans-Montana.

When President Reagan invaded Grenada, Margaret Thatcher said that

“we in…the Western democracies…use our force to defend our way of life, we do not use it to walk into other people’s countries... We try to extend our beliefs not by force but by persuasion.”

I am disappointed that we have heard nothing as clear and courageous from either the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary, or from today’s Conservative party.

Maduro is a brutal, illegitimate dictator, but that does not give President Trump a free pass for illegal action. This was not about liberating the Venezuelan people. Trump’s refusal to back Nobel prize winner María Machado, Maduro’s brave liberal opponent, shows that Trump has no interest in Venezuelan democracy. This is about Trump believing he can grab anything he wants—this time, oil—and get away with it. We know what happens when an American President launches an illegal war under the pretext of an imminent threat. It is why we opposed the Iraq war, and why we condemn Trump today.

National sovereignty matters and international law matters. Without them, the world is far more dangerous and we are all less safe. Anyone who thinks Trump’s actions will make China or Russia think twice is either hopelessly desperate or desperately naive. Putin and Xi will be using this precedent to strengthen their hands in Ukraine and Taiwan. Anyone who thinks Trump will stop with Venezuela has not read his new national security strategy. He is already threatening Colombia, Cuba and Greenland, and even democracies across Europe. Does the Foreign Secretary not realise how ridiculous it looks to refuse to call this what it is: a clear breach of international law? Will she at least publish all the advice the Government have received on the legality of Trump’s actions?

--- Later in debate ---

[Ms Abbott]

Blithe.

I know that the Opposition are blithe about what Trump is doing, but let me say this: there will be countries that will look at Trump’s attitude and carelessness towards issues of sovereignty and think, “What happens if we have that threat? Who will be willing to stand up for us? Who will be willing to stand up for our national sovereignty?” As far as I have heard thus far, it will not necessarily be our Ministers. And there will be individuals—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. The right hon. Lady must get to a question shortly, please.

[Ms Abbott]

My question is: what would the Foreign Secretary say to British voters—ordinary British voters; not left-wing British voters in particular—who do not understand why a British Prime Minister is not willing to stand up for an international rules-based order and is not willing to defend national sovereignty?

[Yvette Cooper]

What I would say to my right hon. Friend is that support for a rules-based international order and for international law is a central part of our foreign policy and the decisions the UK Government make and the actions we take. There is an approach that says, “Look, this is a new world of great power politics and spheres of influence,” and rejects the role of international law. That is not our view not only because we believe it is right and part of our progressive values, but because it is in the UK’s interests. It is why we believe not just in the UN charter but, more broadly, in international law and a rules-based framework. It is why we believe in rules-based alliances and the maintenance of those alliances. Contrary to the great power strategic hemispheres approach, we believe in the transatlantic alliance and the NATO alliance. That is why we are taking such a strong position on Greenland and Denmark, but also why we work with close allies and talk to them on many issues privately as well as publicly.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

At the end of the Foreign Secretary’s statement, I am no wiser on whether the Government approve this action, or on whether they believe that it breaks international law. The Prime Minister is such a devotee of international law that he is not prepared to defend our borders from the small boats, and to take the necessary action there. Why is there one law for the American President, when he is doing what is right for his country and defending it, but a different law for us? My simple question is this: do the Government believe that this breaks international law, and do they approve this action?

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. Members will be aware that very many of you wish to contribute to this statement. There is another statement to come, and an important debate later. I encourage you to make your questions short.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

Whether it is Venezuela, Greenland, Ukraine, Palestine or Taiwan, the UK Government are right to champion international law, but we must face facts. The global rules-based order is crumbling before our eyes, as nations increasingly disregard those rules and national interest trumps long-standing alliances. In this new era of strongman politics, whether we like it or not, military strength is the ultimate guarantor of our security and sovereignty, so I ask the Secretary of State what steps the Government are taking to accelerate investment in defence, and to send a clear signal, so that we are respected by both friend and foe globally.

--- Later in debate ---

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

Regardless of what is said in this place, it is clear for all to see that Trump’s illegal actions in Venezuela are a blatant violation of international law, and now he has Greenland clearly in his sight. Frankly, the response from the international community and our own Government has been shameful. How can we pretend to defend international law when we refuse even to condemn the most blatant of violations and do not apply it equally?

The reality is that we are sending a green light to say that international rules no longer apply. Let us call this what it is. Trump’s actions are not about democracy; they are about oil and old-fashioned colonialism. I give the Foreign Secretary the opportunity again. If she truly believes and wants to stand up for international law, she should stand at that Dispatch Box and condemn these illegal actions. If she does not—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. I think we have got the gist. We really need to have shorter questions, or not everyone will get in.

[Yvette Cooper]

I remind my hon. Friend that the Maduro regime was deeply authoritarian and corrupt, and it allowed countries such as Russia and Iran, as well as Hezbollah, to intervene and increase their influence in that country. We should not shed a tear for the end of the Maduro regime; what we should do is work for democracy. That is in our values, and that is what we will continue to do. We will also continue to stand up for international law.

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. Let me update Members. I will run this statement until 8.15 pm, so questions and answers will need to be very short if everyone is to get in. The second statement will probably last only about 45 minutes.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend the Member for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery) has mentioned the threats to Colombia. The Foreign Secretary correctly said that we are the United Nations penholder for the peace accord achieved in 2016, after protracted negotiations between warring factions. The accord is heavily based on our agreements in Northern Ireland. Will she assure me that she has stressed to her American counterparts that the threat to peace in Colombia could unravel that accord?

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. To give Members an update on my previous announcement, this statement will now run its course, because the Backbench Business debate has been postponed until a future date.

[Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)]

The Maduro Government had no democratic legitimacy, but a return to gunboat diplomacy and strongman-led spheres of influence is not in our national interest. The rules-based international order is not teetering but collapsing, and that is disastrous. However, we cannot just bemoan it; we must respond to that threat by building up the coherence of our own bloc: Europe. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that these developments demonstrate that the absolute priority must be not noises off, but deepening connections, hard and soft, with our own continent?