The European Union’s recent statement regarding the United States’ intervention in Venezuela has sparked a significant rift within the German political landscape, highlighting diverging approaches to transatlantic relations and international law. Armin Laschet, Chairman of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee for the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), lauded the EU’s measured response, emphasizing the need for pragmatic engagement with Washington, even amidst serious concerns.
Laschet argued that a swift and unilateral condemnation of U.S. President Donald Trump would risk alienating a crucial ally and hindering future diplomatic efforts. “Foreign policy is complex” he stated, “one must account for realities in the world”. He underscored the importance of maintaining dialogue with the U.S., urging them to facilitate a process in Venezuela that aligns with the will of the Venezuelan people, while referencing Germany’s ongoing commitment to the situation in Ukraine as a factor in strategic decision-making.
However, this stance contrasts sharply with the criticism voiced by Adis Ahmetovic, the SPD’s (Social Democratic Party) parliamentary spokesperson for foreign affairs. Ahmetovic directly challenged Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s (CDU) initial description of the U.S. action as “legally complex” asserting that “the legal assessment is clear: The U.S. attack on Venezuela is a clear violation of international law”. He pointed to the lack of a UN mandate or Congressional approval, accusing Trump of undermining the international order and triggering a dangerous escalation.
Chancellor Merz’s circumspect language, which delayed a definitive legal assessment, appears designed to avoid direct confrontation with the U.S. This reluctance was further criticized by Vice Chancellor Lars Klingbeil (SPD), who openly denounced the intervention as a disregard for international law – a position Ahmetovic considers reflective of a genuine German position echoed within the broader EU declaration.
The divergence reveals a palpable tension within the governing coalition. Ahmetovic acknowledged the pressures faced by the Chancellor, recognizing that the role demands a degree of diplomatic constraint not afforded to opposition lawmakers. Nevertheless, he drew a firm line: “There is no difference between the CDU Chancellor and the SPD Vice Chancellor in the overall assessment. Attacks on the rule-based order are unacceptable, regardless of their origin.
The debate underscores a broader question: to what extent should Germany prioritize strategic alliances, particularly with the United States, when those alliances seem to conflict with fundamental principles of international law and potentially embolden unilateral actions with destabilizing global implications? The evolving response to the Venezuelan crisis will likely serve as a key test of Germany’s commitment to upholding a rules-based international order and navigating a complex relationship with a powerful, sometimes unpredictable, ally.
