HEATED CLASH: Explosive UK Parliament Debate Over Venezuela After U.S. Captures Maduro | AC15

The UK government is in close contact with our international partners on this issue. The first duty of government is the safety and security of our citizens, and my department is working tirelessly to ensure the safety of British nationals.

Over the weekend, I spoke with the UK Chargé d'Affaires in Caracas, and all our embassy staff are safe and accounted for and are working to support the approximately 500 British nationals in Venezuela. Our travel advice currently advises against all travel to Venezuela, and British nationals in Venezuela should closely follow our travel advice, which will be kept up to date.

Madame Deputy Speaker, we should be under no illusion as to the nature of the Maduro regime. A once functioning democracy has become a hub for very dangerous organized criminal gangs. Corrupt links involve Iran with Hezbollah increasingly present in recent years, as well as malign support from Russia and a regime which has facilitated illicit finance, sanctions evasion, and organized criminal activity, including narcotics trafficking and illegal gold trading that undermines the security of the whole region, including UK overseas territories, as well as the United States and other regional partners.

The country has been driven into economic ruin, with an 80% drop in their GDP in a decade. Over 8 million people have left, causing instability elsewhere in the region. And we have seen Maduro's regime systematically dismantle democratic institutions, silencing dissent and weaponizing state resources to maintain power through fear and corruption. The International Criminal Court has opened an investigation into possible crimes against humanity following reports of hundreds of extrajudicial killings, including at the hands of Venezuela's security services and paramilitary groups under the regime's command. And UN investigators have repeatedly reported a pattern of arbitrary detentions, torture, and killings.

In the July 2024 presidential election, millions of Venezuelan voters voted, but the official results have never been published. The opposition leader María Corina Machado was banned by Maduro from standing. International observers cited basic failures of election integrity, and independent tallies covering 80% of polling stations showed a clear victory for Edmundo González. And yet, Maduro claimed victory. And most recently, in October, the UN independent fact-finding mission reported on state security forces using firearms against protesters after the elections 18 months ago, where 25 people died. González has been forced to leave the country and claim political asylum in Spain. Machado was forced into hiding for her own safety and had to be spirited out of the country to receive her Nobel Peace Prize in Norway last month. These are the hallmarks of a regime that clings to power through fear, coercion, and violence, not through democratic consent. And that is why, as the Prime Minister said on Saturday, we can shed no tears for the end of Maduro's rule.

Let me turn to UK policy. Because, Madam Deputy Speaker, the UK has long been an advocate for a democratic Venezuela and a vocal critic of the Maduro regime. Since 2019, successive UK governments have refused to recognize the regime. Through the G7, the UN, with partners, and directly, we have continued to call out the Maduro regime and its appalling human rights violations. We have also, in some areas, taken a different policy approach to some of our allies. Our other Five Eyes partners have closed their embassies, but we have maintained our diplomatic mission in Caracas at a much more senior level than many of our partners, seeking dialogue, sustaining direct contact with the opposition, supporting Venezuelan civil society, and advocating for British interests.

A year ago, around Maduro's inauguration, the UK acted alongside partners and announced a wave of new sanctions. We targeted 15 individuals, including judges and senior-ranking officials in Maduro's regime responsible for undermining democracy, the rule of law, and human rights violations. And we have imposed sanctions on individuals but not on sectors of the economy. And we have not supported or been involved in blockades or strikes against drug boats. We have continued to directly promote the interests of the British overseas territories, who need to see stability in the region. And, of course, throughout, we have promoted and maintained support for international law.

Commitment to international law, as the Prime Minister set out on Saturday, is immensely important to this government. Those principles guide the decisions that we make and the actions we take as part of Britain's foreign policy. That commitment to international law is part of our values; it is also strongly in the UK's national interest. And our manifesto talked about a foreign policy that is progressive and that is also realistic. Engaging with the world as we find it in the interests of UK security, prosperity, and our values. That means upholding international law and defending democracy. And it means confronting the complex, evolving, and hybrid threats that we and our allies face in the world today. And those principles and values also guide the conversations that we have with our allies across a range of issues where we agree and disagree. And in my discussions with Secretary Rubio, I raised the importance of complying with international law, and we will continue to urge all partners to do so at every stage. It is, of course, for the US to set out the legal basis for their actions, and the UN Security Council is discussing Venezuela this afternoon. These issues will continue to be matters for international discussion. I discussed with Secretary Rubio what should happen next and our continued commitment to a transition to a peaceful and stable democracy. Our collective immediate focus must be on avoiding any deterioration in Venezuela into further instability, criminality, repression, or violence. That would be deeply damaging for the people of Venezuela, our own overseas territories, our allies, and in the US and other regional partners.

The UK has long been clear that the leadership of Venezuela must reflect the will of the Venezuelan people. So, the international community must come together to help achieve a peaceful transition to a democratic government that respects the rights and will of its people. That must mean action on the economic crisis, the release of political prisoners, the return of opposition politicians, an end to political repression, respect for human rights, and plans for the holding of free and fair elections. And I urge the acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, to take these steps forward because the people of Venezuela have a right to decide their own future.

The US Secretary of State and I discussed the particular role that the UK can play to support a peaceful democratic transition and stability, because drawing on our embassy in Caracas and on the work that we have done over many years to build up relationships and dialogue with Venezuelan opposition parties and with the current authorities and regime, and, of course, our relationship with the US. To that end, I have also spoken today with Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, and her unwavering fight for democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in Venezuela and against oppression is inspirational, and we will keep in touch over the days and weeks ahead.

Finally, Madame Deputy Speaker, let me turn briefly to another matter. The House will have seen recent comments from the United States and from Denmark regarding Greenland. Let me be very clear on the UK position. Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Our close European partners, our longstanding NATO allies, and all our countries work closely together on security issues and will always do so. The future of Greenland is a matter for the Greenlanders and Danes, and no one else.

I commend this statement to the House.

I call the Leader of the Opposition, Keir Starmer.

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker, and I would like to start by associating myself with the condolences expressed by the Foreign Secretary about the awful tragedy in Crown Montana. And I also like to thank her for her statement on Venezuela. Although I am disappointed that it is not the Prime Minister delivering the statement, because many of us in this House and beyond want to know how he is going to respond to this situation.

Madame Deputy Speaker, Nicolás Maduro was a tyrant who criminally abused the Venezuelan people and destabilized the region. It is no surprise that there is jubilation on the streets, because Venezuelans remember what their country was like before it was ravaged by years of socialist dictatorship. For four years, the Conservative government refused to recognize the legitimacy of Maduro's horrific regime of brutality and repression, and we were pleased to see the Labour government follow suit.

However, Madame Deputy Speaker, we are in a fundamentally different world. The truth is that while the likes of China have been strategic and aggressive in strengthening their influence across the world, including South America, the West has been slow. Foreign policy should serve our national interest. It should be about keeping Britain safe. We should be clear-eyed. The United States is our closest security partner. We must work with them seriously, not snipe from the sidelines. We on this side of the House understand why the US has taken this action. As the Foreign Secretary said, UK policy has long been to press for a peaceful transition from authoritarian rule to a democracy. That never happened. Instead, Venezuelans have been living under Maduro's brutal regime for many years. The US has made it clear it is acting in its national interest against drug smuggling and other criminal activity, including potential terrorism. So we understand that.

However, we do have concerns about what precedent this sets, especially when there are comments made about the future of Greenland. It is important that the United Kingdom supports its NATO ally Denmark, which has made it categorically clear that Greenland is not for sale. So I welcome the Foreign Secretary's remarks in that regard.

What is critical now is the stability of the region and the wider world. It is important that we listen to those who have been risking their lives for freedom and democracy in Venezuela. Opposition leader María Corina Machado, when asked about US action, said that Venezuela had already been invaded by Iran, by Russia, by drug cartels, and Hamas and Hezbollah. It is clear that Venezuela had become a gangster state. I am pleased to hear that the Foreign Secretary has spoken to María Machado. But can she also update the House on whether the Prime Minister has spoken to President Trump? And I ask this because the government talks up its relationship with the US, but we keep finding that we are not in the room when big decisions are made.

Madame Deputy Speaker, we should be under no illusions. A democratic transition in Venezuela will be far from straightforward. So when the Foreign Secretary speaks of democratic transition, what does that actually mean to the government in practice? And can she also set out what happens to the UK's Venezuela sanctions regime? Now, in a world changing as it is, we must be serious and responsible about our security and standing. We know what the President of the United States' strategy is. His government set out its national security strategy last year. The US is acting in its national interest. We need to do the same. We should be working to protect the rules-based order and we should be standing up to hostile actors that want to undermine us. But what is our government doing instead? Giving away the Chagos Islands and paying £35 billion for the privilege with no strong legal basis to justify this. Last year, the Defence Committee warned that the UK was not adequately prepared to defend herself from attack. The government is still stalling on defence spending. Conservatives want to see spending increase to 3% of GDP.

We want to see spending increase to 3% of GDP by the end of this Parliament, given the changing world. Why has the government not matched that commitment? It has never been more important for the UK to have a coherent foreign policy strategy. Right now, Labour doesn't have one. If they do, we'd like to hear the Foreign Secretary tell us what it is, because I didn't hear anything remotely sounding like that in her statement. Let us be honest, Madam Deputy Speaker. Old strategies will not work. We are living in an increasingly dangerous world. The axis of authoritarian states seeking to undermine us respects just one thing: strength. Britain must be ready and willing to defend our own interests, to protect ourselves from those who would undermine us, to protect the unity of the Western Alliance, and to support democracy and freedom around the world.

Foreign Secretary.

Um, I must, um, just say to the, um, Leader of the Opposition, obviously welcome her support on, um, Greenland, Denmark, and so on. But I have to say that really felt like a very poorly judged tone of response. That was really all over the place. Many times when we were in opposition, we had issues that we agreed with the government on and in the national interest. We set out our agreement and we recognized that some of these were cross-party issues. I actually suspect that had the Shadow Foreign Secretary have made that response to our statement, she probably would have done that. And in fact, on the different issues that she talked about on Venezuela, she seemed to agree with us that the Maduro regime has been deeply damaging, corrupt, and deeply destructive, and therefore it is, uh, that no one should shed any tears for it going. She also, I think, implicitly, when she talked about the rules-based order, recognized the importance of precedence, of the importance of, uh, international law, and also the complexity of the world in which we face. And she also said that she thought we should show support for Denmark and for Greenland. So, in fact, I could not see a single detailed thing that she could disagree with in that response, except for the fact that she seems to want to express opposition for opposition's sake. And I would, let me just say to her, just in terms of the overall approach, and I think everyone recognizes the real leadership that this Prime Minister has shown on the international stage, chairing the coalition of the willing, leading the European and international support for Ukraine against Russia, agreeing three trade deals with India, Europe, the US, after her government ripped up the trade cooperation and trashed the UK's reputation across the world. The biggest increase in defence investment since the Cold War, properly supporting UK security, and with the US, the most successful state visit leading to major tech investment in the UK, with the UK Prime Minister who talks frequently to the US and deep partnerships on security, intelligence, and the military. And our close working now on Gaza, on the peace process, on the crisis in Sudan, and, of course, fundamentally on Ukraine. So, u many times in the past, we took a cross-party approach. I would just expect her to do the same on the matters that really are about the future of this country. This government will continue to stand up for Britain's interests, for our prosperity, and for our values.

Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Emily Thornberry.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Speaker. If a large and powerful country abducts the leader of another, however abhorrent that leader is, and then tries to intimidate the smaller country in order, it says itself, to gain access to its resources, doesn't the Foreign Secretary agree that this should be called out, not just by Britain, but by our Western allies? We should be calling it out for what it is: a breach of international law. It is, it is not for the country that is breaking the law to say whether or not it has broken the law. It is for the West, surely, to stand up and say, "Call it as it is." Doesn't she therefore share my concern that there might be a profound risk of international norms changing if we don't do that? It may become okay, and that is a risk that, that, that we then risk living in a world where might is right. And surely that isn't in Britain's interests.

Secretary.

Can I, um, just thank my honourable, right honourable friend for her question, because and also recognize that she has been consistent in her opposition to Maduro, the Maduro regime, even when she was under pressure not to be through many years. And I know that she and I would probably agree that a man who is currently being investigated for crimes against humanity and who has such a history of political repression as well as economic destruction and corruption should not be leading a country. And she rightly refers to the issues around international law, and I have set out our commitment to international law. And she will know that my, uh, predecessor as Foreign Secretary talked about progressive realism, where we set out the progressive principles we follow, how important international law is because of the framework that it sets that is in our interests, not just reflecting our values, but also that we engage with the world the way it is. And I can assure her that as part of that, I have raised this issue of international law with Secretary of State Rubio and made clear that we will continue to urge all countries to follow it.

Lead, with the Liberal Democrats, Edward Davey.

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Can I associate myself and my party with the comments from the Foreign Secretary about the tragedy in Crown Montana? Madam Speaker, when President Reagan invaded Grenada, Margaret Thatcher said this: "We in the Western democracies use our force to defend our way of life. We do not use it to walk into other people's countries. Yeah, we try to extend our beliefs not by force but by persuasion." So I'm disappointed we've heard nothing as clear and courageous from either Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary or today's Conservative party. Maduro is a brutal, illegitimate dictator. But that does not give President Trump a free pass for illegal action. This wasn't about liberating the Venezuelan people. Trump's refusal to back Nobel Prize winner María Machado, Maduro's brave liberal opponent, shows Trump has no interest in Venezuelan democracy. This is about Trump believing he can grab anything he wants and get away with it. This time, oil. We know what happens when an American president launches an illegal war under the pretext of an imminent threat. It's why we oppose the Iraq war, and why we condemn Trump today. National sovereignty matters. International law matters. Without them, the world is far more dangerous, and we are all less safe. Anyone who thinks Trump's actions will make China or Russia think twice is either hopelessly desperate or desperately naive. Putin and Xi will be using this president to strengthen their hands in Ukraine and Taiwan. And Madame Deputy Speaker, anyone who thinks Trump will stop with Venezuela hasn't read his new national security strategy. He's already threatening Cuba, and Greenland, and even democracies across Europe. Does the Foreign Secretary not realize how ridiculous it looks to refuse to call this what it is: a clear breach of international law? Will she at least publish all the advice the government has received on the legality of Trump's actions?

Secretary.

Well, um, let me say to the honourable gentleman that we do, um, I hope agree on the brutality of the Maduro dictatorship, and also I would hope that, uh, Venezuela has, uh, it is better for Venezuela not to be led by somebody like Maduro. And therefore, the most important thing now for Venezuela is for it to have a transition to democracy. And I have spoken directly to the US Secretary of State about that, and also about the potential role that the UK can play in that, because unusually, we have a very senior and experienced Chargé d'Affaires in Venezuela who has long-standing relationships with the Venezuelan opposition, with the regime, and also, of course, we have the close relationship with the US that puts us in a particular position and gives us a particular responsibility in order to keep progress being made towards towards that democratic transition, because stability will not be maintained unless there is a transition that is in the will of the people. We say to him, just in terms of international law again, we have made very clear the our commitment to international law and the way that it must guide our decisions and UK foreign policy, and we will continue to raise it with our partners, both in public and in private. Uh, it is important that we do so. And as for the, um, issue on, um, uh, government legal advice, he will know that the ministerial code is very clear about government not either, uh, publishing or commenting on different legal advice.

Diane Abbott.

Nobody in this chamber wants to defend the regime of Maduro. But what some of us want to do is to stand up for the importance of a rules-based international order. And I might add, because my parents were born overseas, I take the question of national sovereignty extremely seriously. And you cannot have a situation where a country, because it is bigger and stronger, walks into a smaller country, snatches its political leadership, whatever you think of that political leadership, but snatches its political leadership, helicopters it out, and put it on a show trial in an outside country. That cannot be something which this government is prepared to support. And let me add, I know that you know the opposition obliges, what Trump is doing. Blind. Blind. I know the opposition are blind about what Trump is doing. But let me say this: there will be countries that will look at Trump's attitude and carelessness to issues of sovereignty, and they will think, "What happens if they have that threat? Who will be willing to stand up for them? Who will be willing to stand up for their national sovereignty?" As far as I have heard thus far, it won't necessarily be our ministers. And there will be individuals.

Order. Order. The, the honourable, right honourable lady must get to a question shortly. Please.

The question is, what would the Foreign Secretary say to British voters, ordinary British voters, not particularly left-wing British voters, that do not understand why a British Prime Minister is not willing to stand up for an international rules-based order and is not willing to defend national sovereignty?

Well, um, what I would say to my, uh, right honourable friend is that the support for a rules-based international order and for international law is a central part of our foreign policy and the decisions that the UK government makes and the actions that we take. There is an approach which says that, look, this is a new world of great power politics and spheres of influence, and which rejects the role for international law. That is not our view. Not only because, uh, we believe this is right, it is part of our values and part of our progressive values, but also because it is in UK interests as well to do so. It's why we believe not just in the UN Charter, but also more broadly in international law and a rules-based framework as well. But it's also why we believe in rules-based alliances and the maintenance of those alliances. And contrary to the approach of the, uh, the sort of great power strategic hemispheres, we believe in the transatlantic alliance and the NATO alliance. That is why we're taking such a strong position on Greenland and Denmark. But it is also why we work with close allies and talk to them on many issues privately as well as publicly.

Father of the House, Edward Leigh.

At the end of the Foreign Secretary's statement, I'm no wiser as to whether the government approves this action and believes or does not believe that whether it breaks international law. Now, the Prime Minister is such a devotee of international law that he's not prepared to defend our own borders from the small boats and take the necessary actions. Correct. Why is it that there's one law for the American President doing what is right for his country and defending his country, but a different law from us? So the simple question is: does the government believe this breaks international law? Does it approve this action?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, I think as I said in my statement, as the Prime Minister said on Saturday, there can be no tears shed for, uh, the Maduro regime and, uh, the damage that it has done over many years. It is for the US to set out the legal position behind their actions. We were not involved in those actions. We continue to be guided by international law in our approach, and we continue to work now for the most important issue: to get a transition to peaceful democracy in Venezuela.

Richard Burgon.

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. It was the Prime Minister that decided to disregard the United Nations Charter when it came to Trump's bombing, killing, and kidnapping of the head of state. I think it speaks volumes that the Prime Minister has chosen not to come to this House to explain his decision. The reality is this: if it were Putin doing this, the Prime Minister would not be saying, "Oh, it's up to the Russians to decide whether or not this is legal." But this is exactly what the Prime Minister has said in relation to Trump's disgusting attack on Venezuela. Isn't the reality that the Prime Minister is willing to ditch international law and sidestep the United Nations Charter in order to appease Donald Trump? And doesn't this cowardly, craven approach drag this country's reputation through the dirt?

Secretary.

Well, I just say to the honourable member, I do find it hard not to remember his support and welcoming for the Maduro regime, a regime which is currently being investigated for crimes against humanity. Most people's view of Maduro's capture will be good riddance, and I would have liked the government to be more categorical in supporting US action in removing an illegitimate and evil dictator. But if the new US approach extends to the annexation of Greenland, the sovereign territory of a NATO member, it could mean the end of the alliance with disastrous consequences. So how much planning is going on at the Foreign Office to actually make sure such a disaster doesn't happen? We understand that discussions between allies have to be in private. But what it looks like from the outside is that Europe is weak and divided. So can she reassure the House the right conversations are happening, and we are not just hoping for the best?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, um, let me just reiterate our strong support for the Greenlanders and for Denmark. Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, and it is the future for Greenland is for them to decide, not for anybody else, notwithstanding any of the things that we have heard the US, uh, say or others say as well. We are very clear about that, and I have raised this issue internationally, and we will continue to do so. But we are very firm in our view on this point.

Phil Boswell.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. My constituents don't mourn the removal of Nicolás Maduro, who oversaw violent repression of his own people, a fraudulent presidential election, and horrific human rights abuses for many years. But they are alarmed about the unilateral regime change sought by the Trump administration in order to access Venezuelan oil resources. Two wrongs don't make a right. So what measures is the Foreign Secretary taking to support opposition leaders, including 2025 Nobel Prize winner María Corina Machado?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, our country has particularly strong relationships with the Venezuelan opposition as a result of the work of our Chargé d'Affaires and the work of our embassy in Venezuela that we have maintained when other countries have not. Uh, as I have said, that does put us in a particularly significant position in terms of being able to support a transition to democracy. That is what we have always argued for: to get that transition to democracy. It is exactly why I have spoken to María Corina, uh, today, and why we will keep in close touch in order to be able to recognize their call as a first step for the end to political repression in Venezuela. That must happen.

Edward Miliband.

I will not mourn the passing of the Maduro regime, but I will mourn the passing of the rules-based international order. If we accept the premise that a big power country can do what it wants without any ramifications anywhere in the world, then we accept the behaviour of Putin over the last two decades and the behaviour of Xi Jinping in the future. We cannot allow it to stand. And it is clear that our future security lies with closer cooperation with our European allies. So what is she doing to ensure that the UK stands in lockstep with those people that do share our values?

Secretary.

Well, we have, uh, strengthened our relationship with our European partners. Indeed, I've been in touch with the Danish Foreign Minister today, exactly on the issue, uh, around Greenland. Uh, and we will continue to support the rules-based international order, but also the UN Charter and international law. But all I would just say to him is, I really would warn members against making equivalents here around what Putin has done in Ukraine, where thousands of children have been kidnapped, where they have, uh, invaded a country led by a democratically elected President Zelensky. We should be careful about what we say and the implications of it.

John Cryer.

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. I welcome the Foreign Secretary's statement in what is an incredibly complex international situation. Maduro stole elections, murdered opponents, and 9 million Venezuelans were forced to flee their country. Venezuelans will be both fearful and hopeful for the future. But this episode shows the US shift to the Western Hemisphere, leaving European security more exposed and US willingness to interfere in foreign states with serious implications for our NATO ally Denmark. So, does she agree what the UK can now usefully do is use any influence we have to pursue a transition to democracy for Venezuela and to learn from this event, accelerating our UK defence and national security commitments?

Foreign Secretary.

Um, my old friend is exactly right about both the fear and hope felt by many people in Venezuela. That is the view that we have had reflected back to us as well over the weekend, uh, too, and that is why we are certainly doing everything we can in the unusual position that we are in, given our experience and relationships, in order to promote and support that transition to a democracy. I do also agree with him about the importance of us increasing our defence investment. It is why we have now the biggest increase in defence investment since the end of the Cold War.

Sir John Whitfield.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Um, the Maduro and Chávez regime was characterized by widespread human rights abuse, criminality, and economic destitution. And many Venezuelans are rightly and understandably celebrating its end. But I have to say to the Foreign Secretary that after over half an hour, it is still not clear whether the UK government actually agrees with what has been done. She referred to the discussion taking place in the UN Security Council at the moment. Can she say what the position of the UK will be at that meeting?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, I set out our position at the beginning of the statement, which is that we supported and have long supported a peaceful transition to a democracy from an authoritarian regime. We shed no tears for the removal of Maduro, but we also want to see the, uh, establishment of a democracy and a transition, a peaceful transition to a democracy, which we do not yet have in Venezuela. That is what we will work towards, and we will always argue for the upholding of international law.

Question.

Members will be aware that there are very many of you wishing to contribute to this statement. There's another statement to come and an important debate later. Please, can I encourage you to make questions short?

Tan Dhesi.

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Whether it's Venezuela, Greenland, Ukraine, Palestine, or Taiwan, the UK government is right to champion international rule. But we must face facts. The global rules-based order is crumbling before our eyes, as increasingly nations disregard those rules and national interest trumps long-standing alliances. And in this new era of strongman politics, whether we like it or not, military strength is the ultimate guarantor of our security and sovereignty. Mr. Secretary of State, what steps is the government taking to accelerate investment in defence and send a clear signal so that we are respected by both friend and foe globally?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, uh, my friend is right to say, and I said in the speech just before Christmas, that the, uh, global rules-based order is under pressure from different directions. However, we believe it remains important. It is particularly important, and it is in our interests, uh, and the nature of our country and history. It is in our interest, but it is also a fundamental part of our values, and we believe that international law and the rules-based order are fundamentally a foundation for peace and security across the world. We do have to, uh, engage with the world as we find it, not as we would like it to be. That does mean continuing to advocate for international law, uh, both, uh, with people right across the world, including directly with our allies, but it also means increasing our investment in defence, because fundamentally, protecting our national security has to be the most important priority for government.

Tom Tugendhat.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Surely the real story coming out today and over the last few days is the revelation that we should all have known that this country has opted out of protecting in the international rules-based system. We have not significantly invested in defence, and even the commitment that the Foreign Secretary speaks of does not keep pace with defence inflation. So, doesn't this really reveal a simple truth that, as the Prime Minister revealed on Sunday, he hasn't even spoken to the American President? The Americans did it without us because the Americans don't give a damn what this House thinks.

Foreign Secretary.

Um, I guess I would just have to ask, who was it who didn't significantly invest in defence over the last 14 years? It's this government which is substantially increasing investment in defence and also chairing the coalition of the willing and also showing leadership on the international stage as well. And what has struck me, becoming Foreign Secretary and having discussions with governments all across the world over the last few months, is how much those governments are saying how welcome it is that Britain is back.

Madame Deputy Speaker, Maduro was an illegitimate president. From Caracas in the New York Times today, Colette Capriles describes a struggle for survival, a primitive capitalism, a web of bosses, private loyalties, corrupt practices, and institutional ruins that replaced public life in Venezuela. So, can I ask the Foreign Secretary, what can the UK do to support the development of strong civic institutions there that can help build a new Venezuela?

Foreign Secretary.

Um, my older friend is exactly right, because look, there is a risk, a real risk of instability in Venezuela now, and building civil society, giving people in Venezuela the hope rather than the fear now, ensuring there is stability, but also building up capacity, working with opposition parties and with other organizations, is now going to be crucial. That is something we are strongly advocating for. It is something that I have discussed with the US Secretary of State and said that we will continue to make a priority, based on the work that our excellent Chargé d'Affaires has been doing over many years, but now we need to do it, uh, extensively, including in, uh, discussion with opposition parties.

Pete Wishart.

It's hard to find an occasion when a British Prime Minister has looked so irrelevant and spineless on an era-defining international issue as this one does on this occasion. We are witnessing an existential threat to the international rules-based order, and the Prime Minister can't even rouse himself to give it even the meekest of defences. France, Spain, Brazil, Mexico, and the UN Secretary-General have all been clear that the Trump administration has violated international law. When will the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary find their voices and join that chorus of condemnation?

Secretary.

Well, um, what I would say is the, uh, Prime Minister's response has been very much in line with leaders of countries not just across Europe, uh, but across the world as well. And we continue to stand up for and highlight the importance of international law, but also to focus on the realities in Venezuela, where there has been huge damage done over a long time, including, uh, with the interference by Iran and by Russia in Venezuela as well, and to focus on what should be all of our priorities now, which is getting a democratic transition for Venezuela.

Bill Cash.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. We speak today from the heart of our democracy, where power transfers peacefully according to the will of the people. Uh, so I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement, and does she agree with me that democracy is the right of all people, no matter where they live? And does she further agree with me that it's for Venezuelans to decide what their future holds?

Foreign Secretary.

I completely agree with, um, my honourable friend, and the people of Venezuela have been denied that democratic right for far too long. Election results have not been respected, and they have faced some of the most horrendous political repression, including on an industrial scale. The July 2024 elections were clearly not respected, and the official results were never published. That is why we have continued to work with, uh, the, to talk to the opposition parties and also to talk to others in Venezuela about the importance of getting that democratic transition in place.

Sir Andrew Mitchell.

Of course, Madame Deputy Speaker, quite a lot depends on what now happens. But Mr. Maduro stole the elections in Venezuela in plain sight. He is a narco-terrorist and has destroyed the lives of tens of thousands of American citizens and more widely, and made huge amounts of money out of it. Isn't the world a better place with him before the courts in New York? And in this case, do not the ends justify the means?

Foreign Secretary.

So, I think that Venezuela is, uh, in a stronger position without Maduro leading them, despite given especially given the, uh, the horrendous human rights abuses, the huge damage to their economy, uh, as well. But he said at the beginning, the, um, the implication from what he said was that this is important about what happens next. And what happens next really does matter, and that is where the UK is determined to do everything we can to make sure that that is a transition to a democracy and to stability as well, because I don't think Venezuela will have stability without a proper democratic transition.

John McDonnell.

Um, the Secretary of State has said that the role of the government has been to uphold international law. Part of upholding international law is to call out crimes when they're witnessed. And what we've seen here, Article 2.4 of the United Nations Charter is very explicit about the illegality of entering into a foreign state with armed force. And that's why I have to say I found it shameful that the Prime Minister and ministers today in the news rounds have refused to condemn this action, because in not condemning the action, I think Trump will interpret that as the green light to go in wherever to to steal the national assets of those countries. And as a result of that, we're all in a more dangerous place.

Well, what I would say to my friend is the importance of promoting international law in the most effective way also means promoting the, uh, rules-based order and the rules-based alliances that we have. It means being able to raise issues around international law both publicly and privately in a way that has the greatest results to defend the rules-based order. That is what we will continue to do, and that frankly is what is in the UK's interest.

Alistair Carmichael.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Venezuelans are relieved to be free of Maduro tyranny. However, Venezuela risks remaining a failed state rather than a free state unless the international community comes together. Oil companies are not state builders, nor are they capable of democratic capacity building or enabling political transitions. I was surprised there's no mention in the Foreign Secretary's statement of plans to evacuate British nationals if possible, nor how many British nationals are in country. I also asked what phone calls the Foreign Secretary has had since this action with the leader of Commonwealth country and nation Ghana, to whom we have an important relationship, and if she hasn't spoken to that leader, why?

Foreign Secretary.

So, um, as I set out, I think in my statement, there are estimated 500 British nationals in, um, Venezuela. We did look at all necessary possible crisis responses over the weekend. We stood up the crisis facility in the Foreign Office to ensure that we were ready to, uh, respond if necessary at any point. Uh, it did not go beyond the response that we did put out around changing travel advice. Uh, and over the weekend, British nationals were advised to, uh, to shelter in place, um, uh, while it was, uh, assessed what might be happening next. We have had some consular contact, but it has been very limited, and we have obviously been available to any British nationals who want our support, as we would continue to be. We are also in contact with Commonwealth countries and also with, uh, overseas territories, in particular, my, uh, honourable friend, my friend is following up with overseas territories who are particularly affected by instability in the region.

Rachel Blake.

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. I'm grateful for the Foreign Secretary's, uh, remarks, and she's talked about instability in the region and the need for grassroots investment in order for there to be a peaceful transition. Can she share with us the assessment that she has made about the impact of economic instability in the region and the role of businesses in the region, and how that, uh, instability could, could feed into and damage the possibility of a peaceful transition?

Secretary.

Um, my friend is exactly right, because the, uh, nature of the economic crisis in Venezuela over the last decade has pushed huge numbers of Venezuelans into extreme hardship. It is one of the reasons why so many Venezuelans have left the country. An estimated one in four Venezuelans have left the country over the last 10 years as a result. And this should be a country with a strong economy. It is very important to build that up. But crucially, that has to be to the benefit of the people of Venezuela, not to the benefit of criminals or corrupt regimes.

Richard Fuller.

Madam Deputy Speaker, this is about being principled. What if we were to learn from the White House that Greenland had been the source of cocaine or fentanyl flowing to the United States? Even if we don't expect a fabricated pretext on Greenland or imminent US intervention there, will the government please condemn the unilateral action in Venezuela by the Trump administration before we see a complete breakdown of the rules-based order?

Well, um, I think he will have heard in my statement me, uh, setting out very strongly our position on Greenland, on Denmark, uh, and we will continue to do so, because we are very clear this is about, uh, the NATO alliance. This is about the rules-based order, and this is about our close ally.

Andy Slaughter.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. They welcome the Foreign Secretary's statement that she will abide by international law, and I would not expect her to publish the legal advice she's received from the law officers and others. But I would expect her to set out the government's own analysis of whether and how the acts of US forces towards Venezuela comply with the rule of law. So will she now do that?

Well, you will know, my friend will obviously know the, uh, constraints in the ministerial code in terms of discussing, um, legal advice. Uh, we, as I said, have set out that it is obviously for the US to set out publicly their legal basis for the actions that they have taken. We have, uh, raised the issue of international law. I have directly raised that with the US Secretary of State, set out our views and our concerns, and the importance of urging all partners to abide by international law.

Simon Hoare.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The essay question is not whether Mr. Maduro was a good man. That is a clear no-brainer. The essay question here, as others have asked, is whether the actions of the US President were legal, and America cannot be expected to mark her own homework. So two questions to the Foreign Secretary, if I may. The first is, what body or bodies would she identify as being the responsible body to adjudicate on the legality of the American action? And secondly, the Vice President of Venezuela has this afternoon been sworn in as the new president. Her hands are as tainted with the previous regime as Maduro's. What read-across should this House have from that incident?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, the UN Security Council has been discussing the issue about Venezuela today, and I'm sure those international discussions will continue on the issue of, uh, the Vice President being sworn in. We continue not to recognize the legitimacy of the Venezuelan regime. We do want to see stability and a transition to democracy. And we are urging the Vice President to take now the steps for that transition and to a democracy that respects the will and the human rights of the Venezuelan people.

Karen Moon.

Madame Deputy Speaker, I accept that Venezuela is a brutal, uh, and failed and highly dangerous state. But across Eastern Europe, the implications of this action will be deeply destabilizing. Can I ask the Foreign Secretary, in her discussions with the US Secretary of State when she mentioned international law with him, did she reference the message that this action sends to Putin and Russia's ambitions in Europe?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, uh,

What my honorable friend will know is that we continually discuss the threat from Russia and the importance of the transatlantic alliance supporting Ukraine with the US, and I have discussed that many times with the US Secretary of State. The Prime Minister has discussed that continually with the US President, and we are clear about the importance of defending Ukraine. The Prime Minister will tomorrow be part of the coalition of the willing, which is exactly about supporting Ukraine, and we have to ensure that as we build those international alliances, we do so in the most effective way to support Ukraine. I can also assure him that I raise the issue of international law and the concerns that we have with the US Secretary of State.

Robinson. >> Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think it's clear that the Foreign Secretary supports the end, if not the means, and I think it is clear that she accepts the outcome, though she can't bring herself, nor the government, to condone the actions of President Trump. But today, we learned that the Chinese have warned against both touching the oil resources of Venezuela and also demanded the return of President Maduro. Does she see that as saber-rattling, or is she concerned?

Well, um, what I would say is that I know that there have been many um, uh, concerns about the uh, engagement, um, particularly as well of Iran and Russia in the um, oil industry in Venezuela. Um, he referred to issues around China and the position of the Chinese government. What I would just say is, I think the oil industry in Venezuela should be benefiting the people of Venezuela, not other countries, not uh, corrupt regimes, but actually the people of Venezuela.

Stella, thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker.

The truth is, the warning signs that the rules-based order is at risk have been there for some time. In her evidence to the Congress during the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, the former White House adviser on Russia and Europe, Fiona Hill, claimed that an informal offer was made by Russia to withdraw their support for Venezuela in exchange for America withdrawing its support for Ukraine. In the light of these events, will the Foreign Secretary confirm in her conversations with our American counterparts that this specific allegation has been raised, and what response she had?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, I think um, we continue to have very uh, important discussions with the US about Ukraine and about support for Ukraine. And many of those discussions have been about the security guarantees that the US would provide as part of a peace agreement for Ukraine. Those security guarantees involve the US providing that support, working with other European countries. That uh, will continue to be a central objective of our foreign policy.

Now, >> so Bernard Jenkin, >> you, Madame Deputy Speaker, to those who still harbor illusions about an idealized world of international rules which will be abided by all, shouldn't we just say, well, welcome to the real world, uh, where might very often proves to be right, and we have to face the circumstances that we are in. Can I therefore give my support to the government's ambivalence, um, as supported as, as supported by my right honorable friend, who I think also rightly criticized the slow pace of rearmament, and that's all she disagreed with the government about. Um, but can she now avoid blowing the bridges that we have with the United States and use that influence? And doesn't she agree it really would be stupid to slag off President Trump now when we want to have influence over what he does next?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, um, let me, I need to sort of address some of the bigger, the bigger points that he's raising about uh, the international rules-based order and uh, the sort of global power politics. We obviously, and he and I are old enough to um, have uh, sort of the experience and reflections on the Cold War, which was all about the great power politics and the difficulties. Also, at a time when post the Second World War, we had worked hard to develop a rules-based order alongside those big military global tensions. So, this has been a part of global history for a long time. The tensions between how you maintain an international law and an international rules-based order, and also how you engage with the different competing interests, sometimes from some of the biggest countries in the world, sometimes from some of the smaller countries in the world who have particular power in particular areas. In terms of the UK's approach, we continue to believe in the importance of a rules-based order and the importance of that kind of international framework. We also engage with the world as it is, the world as we face it, and we need to be able to do, do so and to be agile in responding to that.

Hussein. >> Uh, thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Regardless of what is said in this place, it is clear for all to see that Trump's illegal actions in Venezuela are a blatant violation of international law. And now he has Greenland clearly in his sight. And frankly, the response from the international community and our own government has been shameful. How can we pretend to defend international law? Madame, how can we pretend to defend international law when we refuse to even condemn the most blatant of violations and do not apply equally? The reality is we are sending a green light that the rules, international rules, no longer apply. And let's call this what this is. Trump's actions are not about democracy. It's about oil and old-fashioned colonialism. So, I give the Foreign Secretary the opportunity again, if she truly believes and wants to stand up for international law, she should stand up on that dispatch box and condemn these illegal actions. And if she does not, then she should admit.

I think we've got the gist. We really do need to have shorter questions, or everyone is simply not going to get in.

Foreign Secretary.

Yeah, I would just uh, remind the honorable member, the Maduro regime was a deeply authoritarian and corrupt regime which allowed countries like Russia and Iran and Hezbollah to uh, intervene to increase their influence in that country. We should not shed a tear for the end of the Maduro regime. What we should do is work for democracy. That is in our values. That is what we will continue to do. And we will also continue to stand up for international law.

Alistair Carmichael. Deputy Speaker, last time I saw this degree of agreement between the government and opposition front benches in relation to foreign policy was in the run-up to the war in Iraq. And we all know how that ended. But can I welcome what the Foreign Secretary says about being clear that the leadership of Venezuela must reflect the will of the Venezuelan people? So, when she spoke to Secretary Rubio, did she condemn President Trump's assertion that he should run Venezuela for the foreseeable future?

Secretary.

Well, um, I think what we've seen happen in practice is obviously the US do not have uh, boots on the ground in Venezuela, and the Vice President has been sworn uh, in. We are continuing not to recognize the Vice President as a legitimate uh, regime in Venezuela and continuing to press for a democratic transition. I discussed with the US Secretary of State the importance of a democratic transition, the importance of working with the opposition, and also the role that the UK could play in doing that, because I think ultimately, this has to be about making sure that the will of the Venezuelan people is respected.

Sonia Kumar. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. United Nations Charter states, Article 2.4, Four: "All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against territorial integrity or political independence of any state."

>> Yeah.

Does the Secretary of State agree that even when a president lacks democratic legitimacy, any peaceful transition in Venezuela must be in the hands of their people and not dictated by foreign governments, who must follow international law?

>> Yeah. Um, I think the peaceful transition is essential, and it has to be to democracy, and it has to be about reflecting the will of the Venezuelan people. That is why I have spoken today to Maria Karina uh, Machardo, and that is what we will continue to press for uh, and the uh, our embassy in Caracas will continue to press for.

Dr. Andrew Murrison. >> Will the government use any influence? Its silence on Venezuela is buying to impress on President Trump that whilst it may be expedient for the UK to acquiesce in the removal of a hideous old tyrant, Nicholas Maduro, hemispheric, hemispheric protocol colonialism that threatens UK interests or the integrity of any Commonwealth country or any European neighbor would destroy the special relationship that has existed between our countries since the Second World War.

Um, so I think the honorable member is effectively referring to Greenland and to uh, Denmark. Uh, let me just be really clear. This is part of Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, and uh, we have said so extremely strongly. We will continue to do so. The Prime Minister has said so today, and I have been in touch with the Danish Foreign Minister today. You will have seen the strong statements not just from the Danish Prime Minister, but from other uh, leaders, um, particularly across the Nordic states as well. This is immensely important to us. We are all NATO allies. We need to all work together. That is part of how we strengthen our security.

Peter Prisk. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. So, there is a central question here which is simply put: If we do not condemn the American actions in Venezuela, what is to stop dictators around the world acting in a similar way against our allies and our interests? Does the Secretary of State agree that rules do matter?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, I think I have been clear that not only that rules matter, that international law matters, and also that we need to ensure we look at the different circumstances of different situations and rightly uh, approach each one in turn. It is why we have set out the position that we have today on Greenland. And I do also say, I do really caution honorable members against creating equivalents between different situations in different parts of the world, very different circumstances in very different countries. We have to be uh, realistic about the differences between them um, in the approach that we take.

Jeremy Corbyn. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Has the Foreign Secretary had an opportunity to study the United States national security statement that they made at the end of November, in which they appear to give themselves the right to intervene in any country in the Western Hemisphere in order to exploit raw materials and minerals? Is she not concerned that threats, overt threats, are now being made against Colombia and Cuba, as well as the illegal kidnapping of Maduro? Is she going to make any representation, representation to the USA about that as well?

Secretary.

Well, um, let me just say on uh, Colombia, for example, we have worked closely with the government of Colombia. We are continuing to be the um, the penholder on Colombia at the uh, UN, and continue to work closely uh, with them. We also have made representations around aspects around the national security strategy where we take a very different view to the US. All I would say to the um, honorable gentleman, I know he has a long history in this area, but it has included support for the Maduro regime, which is now being investigated for crimes against humanity.

Paula Barker. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Compliance with international law is not an either/or. And I'm extremely concerned that the action of the United States shows utter disdain for international law and leaves enormous uncertainty over the future of Venezuela. It removes a leader whose rule was corrupt and cruel, but rather than celebrating, many people there are now stocking up on food and medicines out of concerns of what comes next. Trump's rationale around stopping drug trafficking rings hollow, following his pardon for ex-Honduran President Hernandez. So, what specific actions will the government take to stabilize the situation so the Venezuelan people can decide their own future, and also to ensure President Trump does not act on his threats against Colombia, Cuba, and Greenland?

Foreign Secretary.

Um, well, I think um, uh, the uh, I've responded obviously on the other uh, countries as well, but look, the um, the critical issue now is to ensure that Venezuela can be on a track towards democracy that respects the will of the Venezuelan people, but also the human rights of the Venezuelan people. And the first step on that has to be the ending of political repression and the release of political prisoners. So, that is an issue that I have discussed with uh, the uh, leader of the Venezuelan opposition. It's also an issue that I have raised with the US Secretary of State as well, and it is an issue that we will be pursuing through our embassy, where we do have particular weight and expertise.

David Mundell. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can the Foreign Secretary say a bit more about engagement with the Commonwealth? Because not only are two Commonwealth countries immediately adjacent to Venezuela, there is an important Commonwealth network across the Caribbean. And surely there must be a danger at this moment that some of those countries might think that their interests are better served by looking to the United States than to the Commonwealth and the UK.

Secretary.

Um, we do continue with very strong uh, engagement with the Commonwealth and are continuing so as well in the um, the light of the weekend's events, too. There are Commonwealth countries and also um, overseas territories that have been heavily affected by the instability in the region, including the instability driven by the u, Maduro regime, the scale of the narco-trafficking, but also and the criminal gang operations, and also the scale and pace of migration as well that has been very destabilizing. We are engaging with them as well to be able to work with them on ensuring that there can be stability in the region, because that is in everyone's interests.

Calum Smith. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. There can be no question that it is for the people of Venezuela to choose its future, and for the international community to support democracy and uphold international law. Whilst there's no denying the illegitimacy and brutality of Maduro's regime, does she share my fears that such unilateral action sends a dangerous message to despots and tyrants throughout the world that might is right, and it endangers peace and democracy throughout the world?

So, I think we obviously uh, have to keep in mind this was an authoritarian dictator who is being investigated by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity, and therefore, that is why the Prime Minister said we shed no tears for the removal of uh, Maduro. But we also believe in the international rules-based order and in the importance of countries respecting that, and we have raised that with the Richard Ty.

>> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Maduro was an enemy of the West, and whilst there is disagreement in this House about the means, I think there is much agreement that actually the Venezuelan people are better off without Maduro. But can I ask the Foreign Secretary to comment more about the constructive influence that the UK and other Western allies can have to ensure an early return for the Venezuelan people to a democracy?

>> Yeah. Yeah.

Foreign Secretary.

Well, um, I think the most important issue now is to ensure that Venezuela can be on that track to democracy. That means there has to be stability right now. We need to prevent uh, further instability or criminality, but also means that that starting with the end to political repression, the release of political prisoners who are held across Venezuela. Those are some of the things that opposition parties are calling for as the urgent first steps. Those are the things that the UK will press for, and we will press for directly in Venezuela and in our relationship with the US as part of this process going forward.

Matt Weston. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. There's clearly no question about the illegitimacy of Maduro's presidency, but there are questions about uh, President Trump driving a coach and horses through the global rules-based order. How should we, the UK, now view the United States national security strategy in the light of this recent action?

So, the US set out their national security. We separately set out our national security strategy, uh, which is different, clearly, from theirs, and I have raised um, with the US some particular issues around the US national security strategy. It is for them, obviously, to set out their priorities as a uh, democratically elected government. But I think this comes back to the issue about, we believe in the importance not just of hemispheres of interest, but actually of the transatlantic alliance, and that has been a cornerstone of UK security. We have this unique security partnership with the US that remains important, that alongside the international rule of law.

Afra. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. I welcome the removal of Nicholas Maduro, who for too long oppressed the people of Venezuela, but history shows that the aftermath of intervention can be as consequential as the intervention itself. What specific steps is the Foreign Secretary taking to ensure that there is no vacuum for instability or hostile actors to exploit, both within Venezuela and across the wider region, particularly other hostile state actors such as Iran, Russia, China, and Iran?

Foreign Secretary.

Um, I, that's an extremely important issue, and that is exactly the issue I have discussed with US Secretary of State Rubio yesterday, as to how we ensure that there is stability in Venezuela, and that stability is then on the pathway to um, democracy, because uh, the, and look, I don't believe stability will be maintained if there is not that route to democracy and the plan and the transition to democracy. But equally, it is hugely important to ensure that we do not have greater destabilization, including by countries like Russia and Iran, but also by the criminal gangs that have been so deeply destructive and were allowed to become so powerful under the Maduro regime.

We're into Josh. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I welcome the confirmation that this government supports international law and now wants to see a safe and peaceful transition to a legitimate government that reflects the will of the people in Venezuela. But would the Foreign Secretary at least agree with me that if Donald Trump's unilateral action was in breach of international law and the UN Charter, it has created a very dangerous precedent?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, the reason that we stand up for the UN Charter and international law is partly because it reflects our values, and partly because it reflects our interests, and because that UN Charter, that international law framework, really is uh, the underpinning of peace and security across the globe. Of course, throughout its history, throughout the history from the UN Charter, throughout decades of history, that has always been uh, tested and strained with the reality of different kinds of international affairs all over the world, and will continue to be so. But we still believe in the importance of advocating for international law and to doing so with our closest allies as well.

Ellie Charles. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The US attack on Venezuela is clearly a breach of international law. Now, of course, Maduro's violent, repressive regime must be held accountable, but the Venezuelan people need and deserve international support that upholds international law, not the unilateral, unlawful US oil imperialism that we've seen. So, does the, does the Foreign Secretary recognize that a key function of the Foreign Secretary, any Foreign Secretary, is to defend and uphold international law? Does she recognize that a year of pandering to and pussy-footing around Donald Trump has had no restraining effect, instead has emboldened him? And will she condemn that illegal US action?

Secretary.

Well, let me say just what's in the interests of the people of Venezuela, because that was where she started her discussion. And what I think is in the interests of the people of Venezuela is not the Maduro regime, but a transition to democracy. We have worked for many years for a peaceful transition to democracy in line with international law, and that continues to be our policy. But we will work with the reality on the ground. We will work with all of those involved, and we will use the particular assets that we have with our experienced embassy in order to promote the transition to democracy in as safe and stable a way as possible. That's exactly why we are in touch with the Venezuelan opposition.

John Trickett. >> Thank you very much, ma'am. And can I uh, say there were three conditions which the Foreign Secretary set to judging the transition: that it be peaceful, uh, that it be complying with international law, and that it had the support of the Venezuelan people. All of those three conditions were broken by a lethal attack by a foreign power, planned not in Caracas, but in Washington, and in breach of the UN Charter. But can I ask the Foreign Secretary to turn her mind for a second to advise the House on her reaction to the President's idea that he's going to seize the Venezuelan oil and turn Venezuela state into a colony? None of those things can be part of any Labour government uh, supporting them.

Well, um, I would say to my honorable friend is the Maduro regime did not have the support of the Venezuelan people. That was the consequence of the July 2024 election, uh, for which they have continually refused to publish the results because of all of the evidence uh, that Maduro had lost the election. And also, we have been very clear that the oil in Venezuela should be to the benefit of the Venezuelan people. That is what's most important now.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Foreign Secretary has repeated time after time today that she believes in the rules-based system. Therefore, will she argue for that vociferously at the United Nations so that the world knows what British values are? Will she also discuss with the American administration a realistic plan to get Venezuela into a democracy and make it clear, as she's just said, that the oil benefits the Venezuelan people and no one else?

Secretary.

Um, so I think yes is the answer to his questions. We are continuing to uh, raise and promote international law through the uh, United Nations and the Security Council. Also continuing to raise the importance of international law with the US administration on a range of different issues, and also continuing to argue for a democratic transition in which Venezuelan assets should be used for the Venezuelan people. After the next contribution, I'm going to come to Steve Darling from the Liberal Democrats.

Kim Johnson. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. If the Foreign Secretary believes that the rule-based order is important, then why has she and the Prime Minister not condemned the actions of Trump, and does she agree with me that he's nothing more than a megalomaniac and this is imperialism by another name?

Secretary.

Well, um, again, what I would say is the Maduro regime has been deeply damaging for the people of Venezuela. We don't shed a tear for the end of the Maduro regime. We do believe, however, that it is essential that we get a peaceful transition to democracy in line with the rule of law and in line with international law. That is what we have continued to argue for uh, over many years and are continuing to argue for now, because that is what is in the interests of the Venezuelan people.

Steve Darling. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. And with Donald Trump taking a leaf out of the Putin playbook and becoming an international gangster in the Americas, what assurance can the Secretary of State say give this chamber that the coalition of the willing to protect Ukraine will become the coalition of the capable to defend Ukraine?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, um, again, I really would advise members against somehow suggesting there is equivalence between what happened this weekend and Putin's brutal invasion of Ukraine, the kidnapping of uh, thousands of children in Ukraine, the uh, targeting of a democratically elected president, Zelensky, and the continued war in Ukraine, where we will continue to work with the US in defense of Ukraine. That is why we are pursuing the issue of security guarantees as part of NATO, as part of our transatlantic alliance, which is immensely important to the security of the UK and to the security of Ukraine.

Steve Wetherton. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. President Trump has behaved like a member of a criminal gang, bombing Venezuela, a sovereign country, kidnapping its head of state and its family and killing many in the process. Where next? Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, Panama, Greenland, here? Does my right honorable friend agree that if we do not stand up to deviants and bullies like Trump, they will only be emboldened to repeat their illegal acts elsewhere?

I'll just point out to my honorable friend that Maduro was not a recognized head of state by the UK government and by many governments, not least because of the deep corruption, the uh, refusal to respect the July 2024 election, and the deep damage that he had done, including now being investigated for crimes against humanity. And also the impact. He talked about the impact on neighboring countries. Neighboring countries have also suffered deep damage as a result of the Maduro regime allowing criminal gangs to operate so extensively from Venezuela, and also the rapid migration of so many people from Venezuela as a result of the crisis.

David Reid. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I've listened to the Foreign Secretary now for the last hour and a half, and I'm still completely unclear what the government's foreign policy position is on Venezuela. So, I'll ask a more direct question. Does the Foreign Secretary agree with the United States' Monroe Doctrine?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, um, the US has set out, I think, very different versions of the uh, Monroe document has been interpreted, doctrine has been interpreted in very, very many different ways over decades and through generations in uh, different ways, and historians will dispute that. What I can set out is the UK's approach and our foreign policy approach, which is to stand up for Britain's interests in security and prosperity, and also our values. That is why we not only stand up for the international rule of law, but why we also maintain the crucial security alliances which are based on laws and values, such as NATO and our transatlantic partnership.

Justin Madders. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. I think the Foreign Secretary set out how it's possible not to shed a tear for Maduro's removal, but also to be concerned about upholding international law. And in that regard, this should not be seen as a green light for Greenland. So, with that in mind, could she confirm to the House that when she spoke to Secretary of State Rubio, she specifically uh, registered the UK government's position in respect of Greenland?

Secretary.

Um, so I have been in touch with the US Secretary of State about our position on Greenland. And the Prime Minister has also made it extremely clear today. Um, and uh, obviously have made it very clear to the House, um, this uh, we feel this very strongly. It is important that Greenland is part uh of Denmark, and also that the future of Greenland is for the people of Greenland and nobody else.

Ben Lake. >> Foreign Secretary, I shed no tears for the fall of the Maduro regime. However, I do fear for the precedent that President Trump's actions have set over the weekend. Can I ask the Secretary for an assessment for global stability if dictators and despots across the world take a very simple lesson from the US's actions this weekend, that might is right?

Foreign Secretary.

Well, what we have seen obviously is a uh, dictator uh, in Maduro who is no longer running his country, and he, and I rightly, neither of us will shed any tears for that. It is important, however, that we uphold uh, international law and the rules-based order, and also our values, and those values include recognizing the democracy and sovereignty for the Venezuelan people, which has frankly not been respected by the Maduro regime over very many years.

Ian Lavery. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. The whole world is asking now, who's next? Who's on this list? Is it Cuba, Mexico, Panama, Greenland, Canada, or Colombia? The attack on Venezuela has sparked a wave of regional instability, including in Colombia. The Colombian Peace Agreement, Madame Deputy Speaker, is under threat, exacerbated by the rhetoric from President Trump, who outrageously smeared pro-Gaddafi and threatened further military intervention targeting Colombia directly. Given the UK's role as UN Security Council penholder for the Colombian peace agreement, will the Secretary of State make immediate representations to her US counterparts to cease these reckless threats against a close UK partner?

Secretary.

Well, what I would say to my honorable friend is the instability in the region um has uh, has been heavily exacerbated and driven by the Maduro regime, by the pay, the scale of migration, by the trafficking and the operations of criminal gangs, and also by the escalating uh, influence from Iran, from Hezbollah, and from Russia in the region as well. On Colombia, he rightly says, "We are the penholder, and we support the peace uh, process that was agreed, and we have worked closely with the Colombian government on sustaining that peace process. We believe that is extremely important. We will dare that through the UN and through with all our allies, and we will continue to do so."

Ben Spencer. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. As chair, the Chair of the All Party Group on Nordic Countries, I'm very grateful to her and the Leader of the Opposition's comments regards to um, Denmark and Greenland. I'm also very grateful that she's confirmed just a few moments ago that she and the Prime Minister have been raising directly the issue about respect for sovereignty for that key NATO ally. Why then did it take so long for the Prime Minister to publicly espouse his support, so delayed after the Swedish and Finnish and other countries have done so?

Secretary.

Um, well, he did so this morning when he was asked about it.

Alan Glynn. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. The UK's overriding interest should be to maintain international law and to keep as many countries as possible in the global rules-based order, and ensuring that what's happened in Venezuela is not a gift to Russia or China. Is the Foreign Secretary sure that we can maintain our position at the Security Council and promote our values, interests, and the rules-based order?

Secretary.

And that is what we need to continue to do. The, the approach of progressive realism that uh, my predecessor set out as part of our manifesto was about how we pursue our values, but also how we recognize the world as it is, not which is sadly often not the way we want it to be. How we continue to pursue those values in the most effective way, both publicly and privately, through our alliances, and how we make sure that our foreign policy and our decisions are guided by international law.

Tim Farron. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Britain is historically America's best friend, and best friends tell their friends when they are acting appallingly. They don't go into toadying mode. As my right honorable friends have mentioned already, in 2003, in this House, a Labour government voted with Conservative support to illegally invade Iraq. And the consequences was the undermining of international law, the emboldening of despots around the world, and Britain's security and safety and significance massively degraded. Have we learned nothing from that lesson of nearly 25 years ago? And have we not learned the one lesson above all of history? And that is, if you appease bullies, you soon become their victims.

Well, uh, let me just say again to the honorable member, I think the um, continual sort of uh, false equivalence with other uh, issues around the world does not help any of the arguments and the issues that we are dealing with. We have an important issue now in terms of what happened in Venezuela. The operations that took place over the weekend, the UK was not a part of. We have set out a different foreign policy approach to Venezuela based on peaceful transition, support for democracy, and the uh, promotion of the uh, international law, which we will continue to do. But it is right that we do that in response to the world that we are in, to the alliances that we need to build in order to pursue our values and our interests, and in this case, in the case of Venezuela, to pursue democracy for Venezuela.

Alex Sobel. >> Madam Deputy Speaker, democracy and human rights are sacrosanct. A new great game is replacing the international rules-based order where might beats what is right. Does the Secretary of State share my concerns that our allies in Ukraine, Taiwan, and elsewhere are less secure now than they were a week ago?

So, what I would say to him is, I think throughout our history there have been tensions, and throughout the history since the Second World War there have been tensions between the issues around the uh, rules-based order, the international law that we have uh, championed throughout, but also, for example, during the Cold War, the big tensions between major countries, and some of the debates now that take place around global powers, and also around uh, different hemisphere spheres of interest as well, in terms of how the UK should navigate through that. We continue to maintain and uphold the importance of international law, and also the importance of the rules-based order and the international framework of law, because we believe it is in our interests, and we believe it is the right thing to do, and we will continue to do that. But as part of that, we also have to maintain those rules-based alliances, the alliances that are built on our values and underpinned by our values and laws, including the NATO alliance, including the transatlantic alliance, and that is important too, and that I think is crucial when it comes to Ukraine, something that I know he has uh, strong, strongly worked on for a long time.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. 30% of the US Naval's fleet is positioned off the coast of Venezuela at the moment. These have been redeployed from many locations, particularly where there's joint UK-US deployments, such as Bahrain, where the Fifth Fleet have sent most uh, their uh, ships over to Venezuela. There's 90% of the data cables between Europe and Asia. We are being left exposed in certain areas if this goes past the middle of January. What risk assessments are we taking to look that ensure that our troops are not exposed more than they need to be?

Well, um, on the issue of the um, undersea cables, this has been an important issue that we have looked at, not just in terms of UK defense, but also uh, internationally as well. It is something that we discussed at NATO, something that we discuss as part of our alliances as well. Uh, and it is why I think we do need to take much more seriously the operations of things like the the Russian shadow fleet, some of the Russian operations in uh, our waters, and we will continue to do so.

Melanie Ward. >> Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. There's been much discussion of international law today, but of course, what matters is that it is upheld. At such a dangerous time in the world, our own country is less safe when it is not. And so, in the context of both Venezuela and Greenland, will the government reaffirm its commitment to the UN Charter as a key instrument of international law? And will it vote accordingly at the UN Security Council?

Here, here.

Um, we do continue to support the UN Charter. It is the foundation of our peace and security. Uh, and we will continue to support it and, uh, its principles in all of our international debates.

Lisa Smart. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I welcome the Foreign Secretary's clarity on the UK's approach to Greenland, uh, that it's up to Greenlanders and Danes to determine their future and no one else. I wonder if she could be equally clear on whether any US bases in the UK will be permitted to be used for any potential military action towards Greenland.

Um, well, we don't want to see any military action on Greenland, and that should not arise because this is a fellow NATO country. We are NATO members, and uh, altogether we should work on our security together.

Just as an update to members, uh, I'm only going to run this statement until quarter past. So questions and answers will need to be very short if everyone's going to get in, and the second statement will probably only get about 45 minutes.

Clive Efford. >> Speaker, that my honorable friend for BL and Ashton has already raised the issue of the threat to Colombia, and the, the Secretary of State has set out quite correctly that we are the penholder at the United Nations for the peace accord that was achieved in 2016, achieved after protracted negotiations between warring factions, and it's heavily based on our own, our own agreements in Northern Ireland. Will the Secretary of State assure me that she's stressing to her counterparts in America the threat to peace in Colombia that if we were to unravel that peace accord in any way, in in response to what's happened in Venezuela here?

Um, I can um, assure my honorable friend that uh, we continue to support and uphold the 2016 peace, the peace accords, and also, as the penholder, as he rightly says, we work closely with the Colombian government um, on this and on how to deal with a range of threats to their stability. I would also recognize, of course, the Maduro regime did contribute to that instability in Colombia as a result of both the migration and the criminal uh, operations. But we will continue to work with the Colombian government.

Bernie Jackie. >> Thank you, Speaker. Uh, in November, I asked the government what our position would be if the US took military action in Venezuela in light of the new US national security strategy, which clearly outlines the US administration's position regarding the Western Hemisphere and denial of influence to non-hemispheric competitors? Uh, the answer wasn't clear. So, following her discussion with Secretary Rubio, what assessment has she made that Venezuela may be the first domino in a chain across Central America that ends with Mexico? And also, if we don't now recognize Deli Rodriguez as the legitimate president, is she one of the individuals we've already sanctioned?

Secretary.

Uh, so the um, uh, we want to see regional stability. We want to see calm and stability across the region and partnership working between nations. Um, I think that um, is crucial in terms of the um, uh, the DR Rodriguez has clearly been part of the Maduro regime for a long period of time, and that is why we believe that there needs to be a transition to democracy in Venezuela uh, that engages all of the different opposition parties and all of the different players within They.