The Politics of Kidnapping: U.S. Intervention and the Detention of Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro-Implications for International Law and State Sovereignty

This study examines the alleged U.S. intervention targeting Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro, situating the case within the framework of international law, particularly the United Nations Charter, and analyzing its implications for sovereignty, legality, and regime legitimacy. The research employs a qualitative, doctrinal, and comparative methodology, integrating legal analysis, case study review, and media discourse evaluation. Findings indicate that the alleged operation contravenes core principles of international law, including the prohibition of the use of force (Article 2(4) UN Charter), non-intervention in domestic affairs (Article 2(7)), and head-ofstate immunity, highlighting selective enforcement of legal norms influenced by geopolitical power asymmetries. To deepen the comparative perspective, the study examines Bangladesh's political crisis following 5 August 2024, characterized by extra-constitutional political consolidation, mass detentions of opposition figures, and restricted civil liberties. While the Page 2 of 43 Bangladeshi crisis was largely internal, selective international responses reveal similar challenges in applying legal norms consistently across global contexts. Comparative analysis demonstrates that law, sovereignty, and legitimacy are frequently instrumentalized to achieve political objectives, and that media framing plays a critical role in shaping perceptions of legality. The study concludes that current multilateral mechanisms are insufficient to prevent unilateral coercive interventions or ensure equitable enforcement of international law. Policy recommendations include strengthening UN oversight, reaffirming head-of-state immunity, enhancing early warning and regional monitoring systems, and promoting normative equity in the application of international legal principles. By integrating Venezuela and Bangladesh as complementary cases, this research contributes to understanding the politics of kidnapped leaders, extraterritorial interventions, and the selective enforcement of international law in contemporary global governance. This study examines the legal, political, and normative dimensions of the alleged U.S. intervention targeting Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro, situating the case within international law frameworks, particularly the UN Charter, and drawing comparative insights from Bangladesh's political crisis post-5 August 2024. The analysis highlights tensions between sovereignty, law enforcement, regime change, and power asymmetry, illustrating selective application of international law and the instrumentalization of legal norms for geopolitical objectives. Recommendations include strengthening multilateral enforcement mechanisms, reaffirming immunity and accountability, and enhancing early warning and media oversight to mitigate unilateral coercive actions.