After the United States detained Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro during a military operation over the weekend, and amid renewed remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump asserting claims over Greenland, Defense News sought reactions from analysts across Europe and beyond. Experts were asked to assess the implications for the international rules-based system, NATO, and Europe’s strategic position. The following viewpoints were collected through interviews, email exchanges, and social media posts.
Impact on the rules-based international system
Jean-Pierre Maulnay, deputy director of the French Institute for International and Strategic Affairs (IRIS), described the U.S. move as a clear breach of international law designed to preserve global stability. He warned that, beyond legal violations, the political fallout could be severe for Europe, undermining the credibility of Western democracies as models of lawful governance.
Sven Biscop, acting director-general of the Egmont Institute, argued that by forcibly removing Maduro, Washington has deliberately placed itself outside the existing international framework. Rather than supporting a multilateral system in which all states participate, he said, Trump appears intent on reshaping global politics into a power balance dominated by the U.S., Russia, and China.
Another analyst stressed that if Europe truly wishes to defend a rules-based order, it must be prepared to act independently. Fear of provoking Washington should no longer dictate European responses, particularly since Trump’s National Security Strategy already frames the EU as an adversary. The cautious reaction to Maduro’s capture, the analyst added, reflects a serious misreading of the broader strategic stakes.
Giuseppe Spatafora of the European Union Institute for Security Studies noted that the operation could encourage other countries to consider forcibly removing hostile leaders, even if few possess the technical ability to do so with similar precision.
Tong Zhao, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, warned that such actions by the United States are likely to embolden authoritarian governments. By lowering the perceived boundaries of acceptable conduct, Washington risks encouraging more aggressive behavior once global opinion becomes more tolerant of norm-breaking actions.
Fabian Hoffmann, a doctoral researcher at the Oslo Nuclear Project, invoked the famous observation attributed to Thucydides—that power dictates outcomes for the weak—and cautioned European leaders to take the lesson seriously in the current climate.
Jessica Berlin of the Center for European Policy Analysis argued that international law cannot be applied selectively. She wrote that celebrating an unlawful U.S. operation in Venezuela while criticizing Russia’s war in Ukraine or China’s pressure on Taiwan undermines the very concept of the rule of law.
Consequences for NATO
Hans Peter Michaelsen, a former Royal Danish Air Force officer and defense analyst, said the transatlantic alliance now appears valuable to Washington only insofar as it aligns with U.S. interests. As a result, European NATO members should pursue much deeper coordination and function more cohesively as a European pillar within the alliance.
Maulnay added that the credibility of the U.S. security guarantee under NATO is increasingly questionable.
Biscop echoed this concern, suggesting that while NATO may persist institutionally, it carries little strategic weight for Trump, who views Russia less as a threat and more as a potential partner.
Roger Hilton of GLOBSEC cautioned that visible disputes among NATO allies should be avoided, as public discord only benefits Moscow.
Implications for Europe
Nathalie Tocci, director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali, argued that Europe should respond with the same firmness shown by several Latin American countries. By remaining ambiguous or silent, she said, Europe risks behaving like a dependent actor and inadvertently feeding Trump’s expansionist instincts.
Spatafora emphasized that Europe’s interests extend beyond Greenland. The Caribbean includes EU territories such as Aruba, Curaçao, and French Guiana, and Europe is the primary destination for much of the cocaine trafficked from Colombia and Venezuela via the South Atlantic. He warned that instability or state collapse in Venezuela—or similar actions against other countries—would have serious consequences for Europe.
Maulnay added that the episode further diminishes prospects of persuading Russian President Vladimir Putin to engage in meaningful peace negotiations over Ukraine, posing a major threat to European security.
On Greenland
Spatafora noted that Greenland remains a strategic concern, even in the absence of recent U.S. military moves. He argued that European governments should make clear to Washington that any attempt to engineer political change in Greenland would be extremely costly—damaging allied cooperation and strengthening Chinese and Russian influence in the Arctic. He concluded that U.S. strategic objectives in the region could be achieved more effectively through collaboration with Denmark and Europe, a point that may need to be demonstrated through concrete actions rather than rhetoric alone.
