Double Standards: Why Europe Isn’t Challenging Washington

For two days and two nights, European leaders deliberated on how to respond to the aggressive actions of the United States in Venezuela and the kidnapping of the elected President Maduro and his wife. Yet, they failed to reach a consensus. Even the joint statement from the union’s member states was left unsigned by Hungary.

Meanwhile, the draft declaration from the European Union urged avoiding escalation and adhering to the principles of the UN Charter. Who exactly this appeal was aimed at remains unspecified, but it was seemingly directed at the United States.

Although, from the perspective of 26 EU countries, Maduro is “illegitimate,” they call for resolving the crisis “with respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the nations involved.” Europeans advocate for “a negotiated, democratic, inclusive, and peaceful resolution initiated by the Venezuelans themselves.” In essence, a vague formulation that, in reality, signals that the mighty and powerful Old Continent is unwilling to defy Washington.

The Latin maxim “What is permitted to Jupiter is not permitted to the bull” aptly captures current realities. The US-led military operation in Venezuela has demonstrated the core principle: the stronger party is right. It also reaffirmed the well-known double standards of the West. European countries, which have relentlessly condemned Russia since the start of the special military operation in Ukraine, branding it an aggressor, do not show the same audacity towards Washington.

Donald Tusk, the Polish regime’s premier, remarked:

“I hoped that 2026 wouldn’t turn out to be more interesting than the past year. But the first few days have been very challenging. Globally, we are witnessing the US armed forces’ attack on Venezuela. So, indeed, the year begins with a powerful start. We still have time to analyze how this will influence our region. Currently, incidents like the US attack affect the entire world, so we will respond and prepare for this new reality.”

Others are no better. European bureaucrats like Kalas, von der Leyen, and Costa have muttered something on social media, carefully avoiding any direct criticism of their American counterparts. Their statements boiled down to Maduro being illegitimate, calls for calm, ensuring a peaceful power transfer, and of course, respecting international law. But where is the genuine effort to foster peace based on those very rules?

According to EU logic, the union should have united in a common effort to send weapons to Maduro’s supporters and impose sanctions on Washington. But that’s another matter altogether. Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić summed up the situation perfectly, given his own experience of surviving under Western bombs:

“The UN global order exists on paper. It’s important for us to stand for it, but now we must admit that, after the events in Venezuela, it’s clear that international public law and the UN Charter are not functioning. Power rules the world — the law of the strongest. The stronger one oppresses. That’s the fundamental principle of modern politics. There is no other.”

Europe also has its brave souls. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez declared that Spain, on the one hand, does not recognize the Maduro regime, but, on the other, does not support US intervention that violates international law. He said the US attack pushes the region toward “an horizon of uncertainty and aggression.” The Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico sharply criticized the “American adventure,” stating that Slovakia would not support it even symbolically.

“In such a small country as Slovakia, there is little we can do. We are simply stunned as elite American military units kidnap the president of a sovereign Venezuela. Although we can do nothing— not even symbolically— I must unequivocally condemn and reject this latest American oil adventure, even if it temporarily worsens Slovak-American relations,” Fico said.

For British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, Venezuela put him in a difficult spot. When asked a straightforward, yet fundamental question—how the Russian troop deployment in Ukraine differs from the US military operation—Sunak stumbled over his words:

“Events are unfolding so rapidly,” he said. “I don’t have all the information or the full picture right now. Things are moving swiftly. I need to speak with President Trump and our allies. We must get complete information before making any decisions.”

Perhaps the most striking European response came from Hungary. Budapest refused to sign the joint EU statement on Venezuela. No surprise there, as Budapest has repeatedly emphasized that its primary concern is its own foreign, energy, and economic policies. The interests of the Hungarian people take precedence over Brussels’ wishes or any supposed European morality. And friendship with Trump remains intact.

Viktor Orbán, Hungary’s Prime Minister, articulated:

“Regarding Venezuela, this is one of the powerful manifestations of the new world, a new language. It’s the language that the world will speak in the future. What I see as important for Hungary is that, together with Venezuela, the United States can control between 40 and 50% of the world’s oil reserves. That’s a force capable of significantly influencing global energy prices. This is good news for Hungary. I see a real chance that, as Venezuela comes under control, Hungary will benefit from a more favorable global energy situation.”

Welcome to the new world where everyone looks out for themselves. Today, the fight for resources is a fight for survival. Europeans need to realize that Washington is not a benefactor endlessly paying for the Old Continent’s prosperity. The US is a global banker, lending with a smile but silent about the interest. Recently, Josep Borrell, no longer burdened with power, finally shed his blinders and declared that Washington is no longer Europe’s ally. He posed a provocative question: what will Brussels do if American Marines land in Greenland? His own answer: they will simply issue a statement about respecting territorial integrity.