UN Jan 5th, 2026: Venezuela Dominates Briefing as Press Presses Limits of Law and Power

By: ATN News Team

UNHQ, New York: A sharp back-and-forth between UN officials and reporters on Monday exposed how stretched the international system has become in the wake of the U.S. military operation in Venezuela, as journalists repeatedly pressed the Secretary-General’s office on legality, precedent, and the UN’s ability to restrain powerful states.

At the daily briefing, UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric relayed the Secretary-General’s message to the UN Security Council, warning that the operation risked intensifying instability in Venezuela and could set a precedent that weakens the rules governing relations among states.

The remarks, delivered earlier to the Council by the Secretary-General’s political chief, emphasized that the UN Charter prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any member state. Dujarric said the Secretary-General believes a wider crisis can still be avoided if Venezuelan actors engage in inclusive dialogue and if regional and international players act with restraint.

Media Pushes on Condemnation and Credibility

The briefing quickly moved beyond prepared statements, with reporters pressing the UN on why the Secretary-General stopped short of explicitly condemning Washington’s actions.

Several reporters pointed to the Secretary-General’s blunt language after Russia invaded Ukraine, asking whether the softer wording this time reflected an uneven standard.

Dujarric pushed back, insisting the Secretary-General’s position has been consistent: respect for international law and the UN Charter is not optional. “The power of law must prevail,” he said, declining to parse the wording further.

He also rejected claims that the UN recognizes or legitimizes governments, stressing that the organization deals with member states and credentials, not political endorsements.

Questions about the UN’s relevance followed. One reporter asked bluntly how the organization remains credible when it cannot stop or punish unilateral military action by major powers.

Dujarric responded that the UN is not a single actor but a system — one that includes humanitarian workers on the ground, human rights mechanisms, and diplomatic forums — even when the Security Council is divided.

Humanitarian Reality Behind the Politics

Away from the legal debate, UN officials returned repeatedly to humanitarian consequences.

In Venezuela, 7.9 million people — more than a quarter of the population — now require urgent assistance. Aid operations continue, but funding remains critically low, with only 17 percent of last year’s appeal met.

In the Gaza Strip, officials reported a rare point of progress: more than 10,000 metric tons of aid entered the territory last week, and for the first time since late 2023, food stocks are sufficient to meet minimum caloric needs.

Still, access remains fragile. UN officials warned against measures that could reverse recent gains, including Israel’s suspension of several international NGOs operating in the occupied territory.

In Sudan, drone strikes in Darfur and Kordofan reportedly hit markets and clinics, killing civilians and displacing hundreds.

In Ukraine, weekend attacks damaged homes, hospitals, and power infrastructure, leaving thousands without electricity in sub-zero temperatures and forcing evacuations of children from frontline areas.

A Broader Signal

The tone of Monday’s briefing reflected more than a single crisis.

Repeated questions about the Monroe Doctrine, claims of self-defence, and uneven application of international law revealed a broader anxiety in the room over where global rules still hold — and where they no longer do.

Dujarric conceded that deep divisions inside the Security Council limit its ability to act, but he said the UN’s purpose has not changed: defend the Charter, protect civilians, and keep humanitarian aid moving, even when politics runs ahead of agreement.

As the briefing ended and reporters drifted out, the takeaway was clear. The system is under pressure, the rules are being stretched, and the real cost is felt not in legal debates, but by civilians living at the intersection of power and principle.