Let\u2019s face it. What\u2019s a bloke got to do to win the Nobel peace prize these days? I mean the much-coveted inaugural Fifa peace prize is all very well \u2013 The Donald is slated to win that one in perpetuity \u2013 but it\u2019s the Scandi laureate that is the real deal. The one that people will remember. And what more could the US president have possibly done to secure the \u00a31m prize last year than to end at least eight global conflicts. Including ones between countries that didn\u2019t even know they were at war with one another. Still, the Albanians and the Azerbaijanis must be very relieved to have taken part in a war in which no shots were ever fired.<\/p>\n
But Donald Trump is nothing if not a trier. He wants that Nobel prize badly. So his new year resolution for 2026 has been to adopt the Donroe doctrine of selective regime change. Start a small war in order to prevent a much bigger one. A service to the rest of the world. I mean, no one much liked Nicol\u00e1s Maduro \u2013 least of all most Venezuelans \u2013 so he won\u2019t be much missed when he is kidnapped and thrown in a New York slammer.<\/a><\/p>\n A few people might quibble that if the US was really cracking down on \u201cnarco-terrorism\u201d, then The Donald might have gone after the former Honduran president who had already been convicted in a US court. <\/a>Though for some reason, Agent Orange chose to pardon him instead. Probably just an oversight. An easy mistake to make. After all only a diehard cynic would imagine the coup had anything to do with Venezuelan oil reserves. Keir Starmer will be kicking himself. All he had to do to keep his promise of reducing everyone\u2019s energy bills by \u00a3300 was to invade Venezuela, remove Maduro and install a more amenable government.<\/p>\n Fair to say that the US attack caught the entire world on the hop. And if it gave the Nobel committee plenty to think about ahead of this year\u2019s deliberations, it also gave many global leaders a headache. Not least the UK prime minister. How to criticise the US without appearing to criticise the US? If the US can do this to Venezuela<\/a>, what\u2019s to stop The Donald from doing the same to us? In the new world order where American interests are all that matter, careless talk costs lives. The stars and stripes flies proudly over Downing Street.<\/p>\n So for the past few days, Starmer has been on full sycophant alert. Refusing to say whether he thought the US had broken international law by its rapid-fire invasion and kidnap. Even though the UN charter is completely clear that international law has been broken, Keir\u2019s mantra has been \u2018See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil\u2019. He doesn\u2019t know all the facts even though The Donald has been happy to share them with every visiting journalist. Trump has no qualms about what he has done. He\u2019s thrilled to bits with himself.<\/p>\n But Starmer has gone out of his way to be as uninformed as possible. Whenever any of his advisers try to get him up to speed, he interrupts and changes the subject. Basically none of this is any of our business, he says repeatedly. If the Americans want to invade Venezuela then it\u2019s their shout. International law can be whatever The Donald wants it to be. And yes, it is completely different to Russia\u2019s war with Ukraine and China\u2019s claims on Taiwan. How so? Because it is. Stop asking difficult questions. International law varies depending on whether we like the country being invaded. What\u2019s not to understand?<\/p>\n Conveniently for Keir, the Tories also have taken to applying moral relativism to international law. The law can be whatever we need it to be at any given moment. All that matters is doing nothing that might upset the Americans. So Kemi Badenoch<\/a> has also gone out of her way to take as little interest in the legal niceties. At times like these, a sensible politician learns to look the other way. And as Kemi herself has admitted, she hadn\u2019t been entirely sure where Venezuela was on the map \u2013 somewhere in Africa maybe? \u2013 and she wasn\u2019t in any hurry to find out. These things would work themselves out somehow. Far be it from her to cast judgment.<\/p>\n Other politicians were a little clearer-eyed. Labour\u2019s Emily Thornberry \u2013 along with the Lib Dems and other Labour MPs from the left of the party \u2013 were adamant that two separate things could both be true. You could dislike Maduro and be pleased to see the back of him and be concerned that his removal had broken international law. If the law doesn\u2019t matter then it\u2019s a free-for-all race to the bottom which will be won by the US, Russia and China. Weirdly, Nigel Farage<\/a> was also clear that international law had been broken. Though he seemed to think this was a good thing. A Brexit bonus was the destruction of a safe world order.<\/p>\n Monday was also time to spare a thought for the hapless Mike Tapp. The junior Home Office minister who is the Alan B\u2019Stard of the 2024 intake. A man who is quite happy to say and do anything he is told by Downing Street. Even if it makes him sound like a complete halfwit. At best. On Monday, he ventured into quarter-wit territory in an interview with Sophy Ridge on Sky News as part of the morning media round.<\/p>\n