Let me be clear — I’ve spent a lifetime watching power exercised, challenged, and abused. I thought I’d seen every variation of it. But what unfolded this week? That wasn’t diplomacy — it was coercion dressed up as authority. In this world, few events shake us to our core quite like witnessing the violation of what we hold sacred in international relations: sovereignty and the rule of law. Yet, when I reflect on what happened, I realize that this was far more than a clash of political ideologies or a strategic posturing of interests. What unfolded before us was a stark reminder of the dangerous, insidious temptation to confuse force with legitimacy.

In my years of observing global affairs, I’ve seen public figures stand firm on issues of international importance, wading into the murky waters of diplomacy, rhetoric, and compromise. I’ve seen leaders defend principles of democracy and human rights — sometimes successfully, sometimes not. But the announcement that followed the detention of Venezuela’s sitting president and the declaration of external control over the country’s future was not just a matter of international politics. It was a dangerous overstep that challenged the very foundation of how we define and defend the world order.

When a nation defends democratic principles, you can see it. It isn’t just in speeches or grand declarations. You see it in restraint, in transparency, and in accountability. These are the hallmarks of true leadership. When those in positions of power act with integrity, they defend the values that bind us as a global community — the values that allow us to resolve differences without resorting to force, and to ensure that countries remain sovereign and self-determined. But when a leader seeks to seize another country’s leadership and proclaim stewardship over its people, that is not protection. That’s a choice — one driven not by genuine concern for the people, but by the desire to assert dominance.

The recent events in Venezuela represent this exact choice. There is no ambiguity about it. The move to impose control over the country’s leadership was deliberate, calculated, and unmistakable. And don’t tell me otherwise. The world watched as the rhetoric surrounding Venezuela’s situation unfolded — full of bravado, dismissive toward international norms, and steeped in a tone that many would describe as arrogant. What followed was not a display of resolve; it was the act of ego wrapped in the guise of leadership. And if this is the type of strength we are now willing to glorify, then something has gone terribly wrong with how we define leadership in today’s world.

I’m not here to throw around insults or to inflame an already tense situation. We all know who I’m referring to. And yes, you could easily point to the former President of the United States, Donald Trump, without me explicitly saying his name. But my concern here extends beyond the personality of one leader or another. It’s about the institutions charged with upholding international law and ensuring that the world operates within the bounds of justice. This moment, and the actions that followed, represent a missed opportunity — an opportunity to defend the principles that we claim to hold dear: sovereignty, due process, and the dignity of nations.

We, as a global community, constantly speak of stability, order, and the protection of people. But in practice, time and again, we see unilateral actions pushed through and justified as “decisive leadership.” This is not leadership. It isn’t governance when the rule of law becomes optional and when respect for nations is drowned out by the spectacle of political theater. What happened in Venezuela was not a legitimate political maneuver — it was the exercise of raw power, intended to impose an outcome, without regard for the people who will live with the consequences long after the cameras have moved on.

If this is the direction global politics is heading, then we are heading toward a very dangerous future. A future in which the arrest of a foreign head of state and the declaration of external control are deemed acceptable conduct, no matter the justification. It is a future where sovereignty is diminished and nations are treated as possessions, rather than self-governing entities. This is not an exaggeration — this is the reality we now face.

Yes, power can impose outcomes in the short term. Yes, declarations can dominate the news cycle and appear to achieve some level of victory in the court of public opinion. But make no mistake about it — my concern is not about the political game that is played in the media. My concern is for the people of Venezuela, who were not consulted or asked for their consent in this matter. They are not pawns in some grand geopolitical strategy. They are a nation, with a voice, and they deserve the dignity and the agency to shape their own future.

The arrest and detention of Venezuela’s president, the subsequent interference in the country’s political system, and the declaration of control over its future is a painful reminder that there are forces in this world willing to overlook everything that international law stands for in the pursuit of power. It leaves a bitter taste not because of the manner in which it was announced, but because of the deeper implications it carries. It is not the headlines that should concern us most — it is what those headlines reveal about the state of global politics today.

What this incident revealed was the erosion of respect for international norms, the dangerous embrace of unilateralism, and the troubling normalization of coercion dressed up as authority. Until the global community draws a firm line between leadership and overreach, ordinary people, who will feel the impact of such decisions far longer than any headline lingers, will continue to bear the weight of these decisions.

I am not saying this out of anger. I am saying it because I care deeply about justice. I care about the principles that the international community has spent decades — even centuries — trying to uphold. These principles matter. They matter not only because they define the nature of our global order but because they ensure that people around the world can live with dignity and the freedom to shape their own futures.

What we are witnessing today is a world where the lines between leadership and coercion are becoming dangerously blurred. And unless we are willing to stand up and demand that international law, sovereignty, and the dignity of nations are respected — regardless of the power dynamics at play — then we risk losing everything that has made the international system worth defending.

Joanna Lumley, in her recent statement, said it best when she warned that “this wasn’t about one decision or one headline.” It was a moment that challenged the soul of international order. And if we allow it to pass without reflection, without a firm stand against overreach and coercion, we risk losing the very principles that we claim to stand for.

It’s time to draw a clear line. We must ensure that the world sees leadership for what it truly is: a commitment to respect, to justice, and to the empowerment of nations — not an ego-driven, unilateral assertion of power. If we don’t, then it will be the people, like those in Venezuela, who will pay the price. And their suffering will be a reminder of what happens when we confuse power with legitimacy.