According to the BBC, an attack by American forces on Venezuela “may define (US President Donald) Trump's legacy and America's place in the world.”
“The president who campaigned against 'forever wars,' who sharply criticized past US attempts at regime change and who promised to pursue an 'America First' foreign policy, now puts his presidency on the line to rebuild a South American country whose economy is in ruins and whose political stability has been undermined by decades of dictatorship,” the British broadcaster noted.
As he recalled, although when he took office a year ago, Trump “promised that he would be a mediator, but at that time he showed that he was more and more willing to use military force around the world.”
The article continues below the video
How do the British media assess the US attack on Venezuela?
What did the Financial Times notice about Trump's actions?
What were the consequences of the US attack on Venezuela according to the Guardian?
What does the BBC say about the legacy of the Trump presidency?
The Financial Times also noted that during his second term, Trump is “increasingly willing to use imperial-style military operations.” Saturday's raid on Caracas came just a week after U.S. airstrikes in northwestern Nigeria, which Trump claimed were intended to protect Christians in the country, and after last year's U.S. attacks on Iran's underground nuclear facilities, the daily calculated. He also recalled that the US president also talked about her “plans for Canada, Panama, Greenland and the Gaza Strip.”
“Leaders in the Western Hemisphere and beyond will not sleep soundly from now on. Trump is becoming more and more familiar with the impressive firepower at his disposal. The consequences of his disregard for both international and American constitutional law will take time to emerge, as will the nature of his plans to govern Venezuela,” the newspaper predicts.
According to the editorial team, “regardless of the development of events, Trump's new world order is already a reality.” The new order “has no obvious rules, disrespects allies, glorifies the law of the jungle and is almost always about money,” the FT specifies, noting that “there is a lot of wealth hidden underground in Venezuela, and Trump is determined to extract it.”
According to the Guardian, the US attack on Venezuela “violated international law and global norms.” “Trump not only breaks the rules, he destroys them, and the consequences go beyond Caracas,” predicts the British daily. He recalls the words of American commentator David Rothkopf, who described these actions as the “Putinization of American foreign policy.”
“Russian commentators have often suggested that Latin America lies in the US sphere of influence, just as Ukraine was in Russia's shadow. Vladimir Putin shares this view with regard to most of Eastern Europe. Xi Jinping will draw his own conclusions,” we read in the newspaper.
According to the editorial team, the US president “is becoming more and more irritable, short-tempered and incoherent every day,” and his decision to use military force may be “related to his declining popularity and an attempt to divert attention from the Epstein scandal.”
“The attack on Venezuela shows that the attractiveness of foreign lands, oil and minerals is now more important to Trump than winning the Nobel Peace Prize,” noted the Guardian. Trump “looks at the world through the eyes of a 19th-century imperialist, with a 21st-century weapon in his hand.” – concluded the daily.
According to Sky News, American military interference in Venezuela will make “geopolitics (…) potentially even more dangerous.” It was recalled that the US President announced in his speech that “American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never be questioned again.” Meanwhile – as the editorial team pointed out – “there are plenty of Trump-hostile neighbors in America's backyard that he could deal with: cartels in Mexico, a corrupt, failing regime in Cuba, cocaine laboratories in Colombia.”
