Trump ushers in an era of barbarism, says Pedro Serrano after Maduro's kidnapping in Venezuela.

247 - The operation carried out in the early morning of 3 January 2026, in Caracas, which resulted in The kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by United States security forces., brand, according to the lawyer Pedro Serrano, the definitive entry of the world into a phase of "barbarism" in international relations.It is the absolute barbarity that we are heading towards in the world now in 2026."He stated. The statements were made in an interview given to..." TV 247, in the program presented by Leonardo Sobreira with the participation of the journalist Paulo Moreira Leite, in a broadcast recorded on the afternoon of the 5th, in São Paulo.

Right at the beginning of the conversation, Sobreira described the episode as an “unprecedented, unprecedented” action, and asked Serrano to classify it from the perspective of international law. The professor replied that the argument of “democratic legitimacy” could never justify the violation of a State's sovereignty.The so-called democratic legitimacy can never be an argument to justify invading a country and kidnapping its president, no matter how authoritarian he may be.", said.

State sovereignty does not depend on the government, explains Serrano.

Serrano argued that, since the Westphalian pacts in the 17th century, public international law has been organized based on recognition. of StateNot from the government.A state recognizes the existence of another state, not of a government. Government is a matter for each state.”, He stated.

The legal expert emphasized that sovereignty, from a legal standpoint, means that a state is the greatest power within its territory and equal to others on the international stage. Therefore, external interference using the pretext of an "authoritarian regime" would open the door to arbitrariness.Otherwise, we'll end up with the "friendly dictator" and "enemy dictator" criteria."He warned, citing that there are dozens of countries considered authoritarian in the world without this generating similar interventions."

"Act of war" and the erosion of public international law.

For Serrano, the kidnapping of Maduro cannot be interpreted as an isolated action, nor as a legitimate measure to combat crime. He was emphatic:This is unacceptable under public international law.And he concluded that the inevitable result is the destruction of the minimal rules that still limited the arbitrary power of the nations.

“The result of this is the erosion of public international law as a criterion for relations between nations,” he stated. Then he delivered a harsher diagnosis:It is the absolute barbarity that we are heading towards in the world now in 2026. That is what it represents.".

Serrano recalled that international law, even though fragile, still exerted "moral cohesion" and functioned as a set of rules to limit brute force. According to him, this mechanism had been eroded since previous episodes, such as when Europe and the United States recognized the government of Juan Guaidó in Venezuela.It ceases to be recognition of one state by another and becomes recognition of a government as a form of intervention.”, pointed out.

"Trump behaved like the American emperor."

In the jurist's assessment, the action ordered by Donald Trump, current president of the United StatesHe stated that this violated not only international law but also domestic American legality. He asserted that a military invasion, by definition, is an act of war and would require congressional authorization.American law is clear: he could only have adopted such an act if he had authorization from Congress.", said.

And he gave an incisive summary of what he considers the change in political regime that is manifested in the episode:The president of the Republic behaved not as president of the Republic, but as the American emperor. It was a dictatorial act in the broadest sense of the expression.".

Serrano further stated that Maduro's human rights had been violated, as he was arrested on unproven charges and without due process.No evidence was presented. In other words, it's an arrest... absolutely offensive to his human rights."He said.

Maduro's defense and his chances in the US Judiciary.

When asked about the possibility of Maduro returning to the country, Serrano was pessimistic. For him, the only concrete way forward is for the US justice system itself to decide in favor of the Venezuelan president's innocence.There's only one way for him to return to Venezuela: the American justice system must decide he's innocent. There's no other way.”, He stated.

Still, he said he believes the United States judiciary retains a degree of autonomy and that the Venezuelan state could hire "excellent lawyers" to defend its president.Maduro declaring his innocence, especially since there's no proof of what he's been accused of so far... I believe so.”, commented.

Serrano also cited reports of attacks against Maduro's family members during the operation.The president's wife was assaulted... she has marks of aggression.“He said, stressing that there had been an ‘intense violation’ of human rights.”

"The democratic world silenced" and the risk of new attacks.

The legal expert expressed strong concern about what he called the silence of democracies in the face of the episode.What surprises me... is the silent democratic world.He stated that the President of France had initially been in favor of the act, although he later backed down.

According to Serrano, the logic of passivity is dangerous because each country believes it can escape imperial escalation.Each country there thinks it's going to get away with it, but it's not going to.“He warned, citing threats that Trump had allegedly made to other territories, such as Greenland.

"Denmark, folks, is under threat. No one will escape Trump's imperial fury.“He said, describing the US president as someone who combines 'insanity and authoritarianism' and has become 'a threat to the world'."

The fragility of South America and the need for unity.

Serrano emphasized that South America does not have the military capacity to directly confront the United States and, therefore, has always depended on international law for protection.The only strength we have is international law, which protects the weak."He said.

He criticized the normalization of inequality between countries, including within segments of Latin American society. According to him, part of the population accepts the superiority of the United States as something inevitable, which weakens political resistance.People have to somehow accept that the United States is an unequal country compared to our countries... and a large segment of society accepts this, normalizes it.”, He stated.

In the end, he argued that only broad international coordination would be able to contain the escalation.If we can unite, unite the democratic forces—Europe, Latin America, Africa, Asia—we have the strength to confront Trump. Divided, we have no strength at all. Every hour, one of us will fall.”He concluded.

The interview ended with thanks and wishes for a happy 2026, but with a warning that runs throughout the jurist's speech: the kidnapping of a president in foreign territory, without international authorization and with contested justifications, is not just an extraordinary event — it is, for Serrano, a sign that the world has entered a stage where law gives way to brute force.