Foreign secretary Yvette Cooper has never been the brightest light. But she’s dropped a clanger even by her lofty standards. Because the difference between Nicolas Maduro’s International Criminal Court (ICC) case and Benjamin Netanyahu’s is absolutely critical. Cooper was being questioned on the US’s illegal bombing of Caracas and kidnapping of the country’s president on 3 January 2026.

Maduro remains in US custody, presumably awaiting some sort of show-trial.

Yvette Cooper being… Yvette Cooper

Labour MP Kirsteen Sullivan asked Cooper on 6 January:

While there is no denying the illegitimacy and brutality of Maduro’s regime, does the Foreign Secretary share my fears that such unilateral action sends the dangerous message to despots and tyrants throughout the world that might is right, and that it endangers peace and democracy throughout the world?

Pretty mealy-mouthed stuff on one level. Melty centrists love to get their little caveats in. We’ll come back to the function of this ‘dictator’ framing shortly. Yet at the heart of the question there is something of value.

But true to form, Cooper replied:

We obviously have to keep in mind that this was an authoritarian dictator who is being investigated by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity, which is why the Prime Minister said that we would shed no tears over the removal of Maduro, but we also believe in the international rules-based order and the importance of countries respecting that. We have raised that with the US.

There are several things happening here. One is that the UK is currently supporting and arming a regime led by a man wanted by the International Criminal Court. But we’ll get to that…

The UK has no problem with dictators

Firstly on Maduro, whether he is a dictator or not does not legitimate kidnapping him. This is the sort of canard wheeled out by legacy media every time this sort of thing happens. It exists in the same register as “do you condemn Hamas?”. This pompous line of questioning is there to muddy the waters. Maybe Maduro is a dictator. Maybe he isn’t. You still cannot kidnap him. Here endeth the lesson. Or not quite…

Secondly, the US did not kidnap Maduro on the basis he was a dictator. You’d think Yvette Cooper, who holds one of the highest offices of British government, might have read the US indictment. It is publicly available and cites a hallucinatory mix of drug trafficking allegations and charges of ‘possessing machine guns’ as the reason for the kidnap operation.

Thirdly, the US – and UK for that matter – has does not now and has never had any issue with dictators per se – as long as they align with US and/or UK foreign policy goals. That is the key context. And this one is even simpler to clear up. Google Saudi Arabia and go from there.

Maduro at the ICC

And let’s clarify something else The UK and US also have no issue snuggling up to people who are being investigated by the International Criminal Court (ICC) any more than dictators. Case in point: Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant. These are just two prominent members of a pretty big group of Israeli leaders who’ve been butchering men, women and children in Gaza for over two years.

It is absolutely true Maduro has a case against him at the ICC. You can catch up on it here. The case is about allegations of having opponents disappeared, among other things.

The ICC says:

In 2020, the Office concluded that there is a reasonable basis to believe that crimes against humanity, particularly in the context of detention, have been committed in Venezuela since at least April 2017.

Naturally, if you subscribe to any sort of universal principle of justice, you’ll want that case to be heard. End of story. That’s whether you’re a Tory, a liberal, a socialist or a left-wing nationalist from Latin America. The point of universal principles is that they are, brace yourself, universal.

Universal principles of justice

It seems like some people in the Venezuelan government agree. In fact in 2021, the ICC’s chief prosecutor praised Maduro and his people for their cooperation:

It was particularly notable that the President of the Republic, H.E. Mr Nicolás Maduro Moros engaged with me directly over three days in meetings totalling almost 10 hours. Whilst the discussions were candid, they were at all times courteous and conducted in a constructive spirit. I extend my thanks to the President, other officials and stakeholders for engaging with my delegation and I in this manner throughout our visit.

There’s a suggestion that cooperation has cooled since. In 2023, the ICC prosecutor wrote:

…it appears that Venezuela is not investigating the factual allegations underlying the contextual elements of crimes against humanity, and that the focus of the domestic investigations appears to generally be on direct and/or lower level perpetrators.

And here’s one more key point. Venezuela is signed up to the Rome Statute. That is the body of law which created the ICC. And, as the ICC states:

Venezuela ratified the Rome Statute on 7 June 2000, and has since been a State Party.

Which is more than can be said for Israel, which is up next.

Netanyahu at the ICC

Israeli politicians like Netanyahu also have a case against them at the ICC. His arrest warrants are for genocide and crimes against humanity. Like the US – and unlike Venezuela – Israel is not signed up to the ICC. And it’s response to the charges against it has been distinctly uncooperative. In fact, it’s been outright aggressive. And so have its allies in the US and UK.

Here is the case against Netanyahu. He isaccused of:

war crimes of starvation as a method of warfare and of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts from at least 8 October 2023 until at least 20 May 2024.

What has Israel’s response been? Well for one thing they argue the ICC has no jurisdiction:

“We said it from the start: The International Criminal Court in The Hague (ICC) doesn’t have, and never had, jurisdiction to issue arrest warrants against Israel’s Prime Minister and its former Minister of Defense. Israel is not a member of the ICC and is not party to the ‘Rome Statute.’”

In short, they chose to not engage at all – unlike Maduro’s government.

UK and US rejection of ICC: Yvette Cooper isn’t the first

The UK response supported Israel full tilt. It opposed then retracted opposition to the arrest warrants. And former PM David Cameron later threatened to defund the ICC entirely.

The US went even further. Donald Trump even sanctioned the ICC as part of an aggressive defence of the settler-colonial state. The US went after property and businesses owned by four ICC officials and their associates.

The US Department of State added:

These prohibitions include the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any blocked person and the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

So there you have it. Yvette Cooper, not for the first, is mix of flat wrong and likely deliberately evasive. Nobody want to be that kind of lefty writer whose whole personality is just pointing at things and yelling “HYPOCRISY”. That sort of thing isn’t good enough for what we face today: a world on the brink of war, climate collapse, spiraling inequality and a rogue state US kicking doors in with renewed energy. But, My Lord, it needs to be done here.

If we’re to dig ourselves out of this mess, we need to get back to the sort of principles we used to advance. Universal principles like self-reflection, empiricism and a commitment to truth, justice and reason. All of the things Yvette Cooper and her ilk seem to be incapable of.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

From Canary via This RSS Feed.