House of Commons · Urgent Question
03 December 2025 · 13 other contributors
Opened by Calum Miller LD Bicester and Woodstock
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Calum Miller raised concerns about venezuela us military 2025-12-03 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
Key points
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
Will the Minister confirm whether US military strikes against Venezuelan land targets would be legal under international law? Are there steps being taken to ensure that the UK is not complicit in any violations of international law by the United States, including halting intelligence sharing?
Question
Does the Minister believe that US military strikes against Venezuelan land targets would be legal under international law? What steps are the Government taking, including on halting intelligence sharing, to ensure that the UK is not complicit in other US violations?
Minister reply
We must be very careful on making assessments. We stand by international law and continue to maintain limited engagement with Venezuelan officials where necessary. I confirm again, as we confirmed yesterday, that we were not involved in the strikes. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson asks whether we were involved in the strikes. I confirm again, as we confirmed yesterday, that we were not.
Question
What are the Government doing to try to stop Trump from taking this dangerous, escalatory path, which he now says could include land strikes?
Minister reply
As the Minister of State made clear to my hon. Friend yesterday, the UK is not involved in these operations. I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment on the deliberations of their House on these questions.
Question
What discussions are taking place with President Trump’s Administration about the objectives and scope of any imminent US military action? What would be the implications for the wider UK-US defence partnership?
Minister reply
We have extensive discussions on a wide range of shared security objectives, including counter-narcotics. We support fighting the scourge of drugs and organised crime, including with our partners in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Question
Have we assessed the impact of sanctions on Venezuela? What efforts are we making to protect human rights?
Minister reply
We strongly condemn the ongoing repression of civil society and members of the opposition in Venezuela. We continue to call for the unconditional release of those arbitrarily detained, including members of civil society and independent media.
Question
Does the Minister agree with me that it will be interesting to see what sort of outcry there is from either Russia or China if something like this goes ahead?
Minister reply
I will avoid the temptation on both making historical comparisons and commenting on the conduct of other powers. Clearly, the British position is that international law is vital.
Question
Does the Minister agree that the presidency of Venezuela is a decision for the Venezuelan people to make in a peaceful, democratic way, supported by the international community—not a decision for the US President to make under threat of military force?
Minister reply
The UK is clear that the outcome of the 2024 presidential elections in Venezuela was neither free nor fair, and therefore Nicolás Maduro’s claim to power is fraudulent. Clearly, proper process and a free and fair election is the way to determine the leadership in Venezuela.
Question
Nicolás Maduro is no respecter of the international rules-based system, but we must be. We do not want to see chaos in Latin America, but we are seeing the biggest military build-up in the Caribbean since the Cuban missile crisis and the biggest US military build-up since the war in Iraq. What lessons would the Minister draw from previous regime change that the UK Government have been involved in, and what advice would he give his US counterparts?
Minister reply
Again, it is tempting to indulge in some historical analysis, but the advice we give our friends and allies is mostly done in private. Clearly, it is important that the rights of Venezuelans to free and fair elections are respected in the way that I outlined in my previous answer to the hon. Member for Lewes (James MacCleary).
Question
I will continue with what has been a bit of a history lesson today. President Reagan had his famous wobble over the Falkland Islands but eventually he came to the right decision, supporting the UK at that time. This issue is about how we liaise with the United States as its closest ally—certainly, in our eyes we are its closest ally; whether it is the same the other way around, let us wait and see. Among the potential impacts of this action are the growing malign influence of both China and Russia in the region and how that might affect proximate Commonwealth countries such as Trinidad and Tobago or Guyana. There are unintended consequences from something that the United States might feel is completely legitimate. Finally, there is the issue of whether this legitimises Putin’s actions in Ukraine.
Minister reply
I am grateful for the experience that the right hon. Member brings to these questions. I want to be absolutely clear about the pre-eminent role of international law and how important that is to this Government and the actions we take. Those are, of course, points that we make to our allies as well.
Question
I say to the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) that I suspect he grants President Trump far too much credit when it comes to understanding the Munroe doctrine—but that is an aside. What legal advice have the Government received or obtained in regard to the legality or possible legal implications of support for the US, albeit through intelligence sharing, for any potential strikes on Venezuela?
Minister reply
As the House will know, Ministers receive legal advice on a range of matters relating to foreign policy, and that advice is subject to legal and professional privilege.
Question
Could the Minister be very clear? What the US is doing, in bombing vessels at sea in both international and potentially territorial waters, is illegal, as is the harassment of Trinidadian fishing communities. The threat now of bombardment on the Venezuelan mainland is completely illegal within all sections of international law. Have the British Government made any representations to the US on this, and what role do the British Government play at the United Nations in the discussions about this issue? Does the Minister accept that this is an incredibly dangerous, massive build-up of military force in the Caribbean, and that it can only be dangerous to the people not just of Venezuela but of every other country and island within the region? Surely there should be some move towards peace, rather than allowing this military confrontation to develop.
Minister reply
The right hon. Gentleman brings considerable experience of Latin American issues to this House. On the legal position, I do not have much more to add. There has been extensive reporting over the last few days of some specific US strikes. I reiterate to him that they were not strikes in which the UK had any role, so we are not in a position to provide the fuller explanation that we would have, had we been involved—which we were not. On his wider question about build-up in the region, the House has heard his views.
Question
I thank the Minister for his answers so far. I reiterate the question of the legality of the US bombing ships that are simply accused of carrying drugs. Is the Minister willing to actually say whether he thinks that is legal or not legal in international waters?
Minister reply
I want to be absolutely clear that the UK Government stand behind international law, in relation to both the law of the sea and international humanitarian law. In every forum, that is what we stand for. I am not in a position to make assessments on individual strikes, for the reasons that I have set out, but I once again underline our position on IHL and the law of the sea.
Question
Given the widespread concern about the potential for civilian casualties from these strikes near Venezuela, what assessment has been made to ensure that UK co-operation in the region does not in any way contribute to harming civilians, and remains fully consistent with our human rights obligations?
Minister reply
As ever, the hon. Gentleman asks an important question in a courteous way. The prospects for the people of Venezuela must be at the heart of our deliberations. We have been engaged with civil society and, where necessary, with the Venezuelan Government. We will continue to keep the human rights of the people of Venezuela in our minds.
Government Response
As my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for north America—the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth—told the House yesterday, questions about United States military action in the Caribbean and Pacific are questions for the US. The UK has not been involved in US strikes in the Caribbean. The Foreign Office currently advises against all but essential travel to Venezuela due to ongoing crime and instability. As always, our travel advice remains under regular review to ensure that it reflects our latest assessments of risks to British nationals. The UK stands with the Venezuelan people in their pursuit of a fair, democratic and prosperous future. Nicolás Maduro’s claim to power is fraudulent. The UK continues to call on the Venezuelan authorities to publish the results of the 2024 presidential election in full. The Government announced sanctions against 15 more members of Maduro’s regime in January. The UK will continue to work with our international partners to achieve a peaceful negotiated transition in Venezuela which ensures that the will of all Venezuelans is respected.