Neelam Rahim | neelam@radioislam.co.za
4-minute read

📷 South Africa has approached the UN Security Council, condemning US actions in Venezuela as a “manifest violation” of international law, warning of dangerous precedents for global sovereignty.

South Africa has sharply condemned the United States following what it describes as a blatant breach of international law in Venezuela, warning that the actions threaten the foundations of global governance and state sovereignty.

Pretoria has formally taken the matter to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), accusing the US of violating the United Nations Charter after a reported military strike in Venezuela resulted in the capture of a sitting president and public statements suggesting foreign administration of the country.

Speaking to Radio Islam International, Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said South Africa views the developments as a “manifest violation” of international law, with potentially far-reaching consequences.

“Under no circumstances is there a justification for a country to invade another country and remove the head of state, effectively effecting regime change,” Phiri said. “This is a manifest violation of the United Nations Charter.”

Phiri drew a parallel with South Africa’s own struggle against apartheid, rejecting claims that branding a leader as a criminal legitimises foreign intervention.

“When South Africa was under an illegitimate apartheid regime committing crimes against humanity, it was never deemed appropriate for external forces to extract that regime from power. That was for South Africans to resolve themselves, and ultimately we did,” he said.

He warned that similar interventions elsewhere have consistently led to instability rather than peace. “We’ve seen this before, in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan. These actions do not yield the outcomes they promise, but instead fuel instability and often become extraction exercises for resources,” Phiri said.

According to DIRCO, such actions risk creating a dangerous precedent where powerful nations bypass international law with impunity. “This sets a very dangerous standard for how international law is applied,” Phiri warned.

The US has defended its actions by describing them as a law-enforcement operation rather than an act of war. However, Phiri rejected this justification, citing Article 2 of the UN Charter.

“International law does not allow a country to enforce its domestic laws inside another sovereign state,” he said. “If a sitting head of state is wanted, there are international courts and multilateral mechanisms to address that. You cannot simply extract a president from another country.”

Concerns have also been raised over remarks suggesting the US could temporarily govern Venezuela. Phiri described such claims as unprecedented. “There is absolutely no legal basis for a foreign power to run another country. It is a complete violation of sovereignty and dignity,” he said.

While South Africa has called for an urgent UNSC meeting, Phiri acknowledged the likelihood of a veto by permanent members. Nevertheless, he stressed the importance of raising the issue.

“The international community must stand up to vindicate international law,” he said, adding that the Security Council’s structure remains deeply flawed. “It reflects the world of 1945, not today.”

Phiri reiterated South Africa’s call for urgent UNSC reform, noting that Africa and Latin America home to large portions of the global population remain unrepresented among permanent members.

“This is no longer only about Venezuela or the United States,” he said. “It’s about whether international law applies equally to all, or only when it’s convenient.”

As South Africa presses for accountability, broader questions loom over the credibility of global institutions and the protection of smaller nations in an increasingly unequal international system.

Listen to the full interview on The Daily Round Up with Moulana Ibrahim Daya and Chrispin Phiri.