President Donald Trump's invasion of Venezuela last weekend has brought about comparisons from Republicans to the 1989-1990 operation in Panama, in which the U.S. military captured Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega. However, one conservative Iraq War veteran says the comparison is wrong in more ways than one.
In a Monday interview with the New York Times, David French — a Times contributor and former U.S. Army Judge Advocate General (JAG) officer — insisted that while he was not a fan of ousted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, he was not "pleased in the way that it was done." He emphasized that "my concerns about the latter far outweigh my happiness or satisfaction about the former."
French called the capture of Maduro an act of "aggressive war," in that the U.S. military engaged in an operation against another sovereign nation that had not attacked the U.S. or done something that required an act of "collective self-defense." He clarified that "going in and seizing the head of state with military force is an act of war."
The former JAG officer observed that the administration and its Republican supporters were "relying a lot on the 1989 invasion of Panama" as justification for the Venezuela invasion, which he called "a real problem." French asserted that the differences between the two operations were stark, as Panama under Noriega had declared war on the U.S. and even killed a U.S. Marine while injuring another and captured one more. And while Congress never authorized the operation that led to Noriega's capture, French pointed out there was at least "bipartisan consensus" to take action in Panama.
"Why is this such a problem? What a short circuit of the entire process of declaring war: We don’t need an authorization for the use of military force against Saddam Hussein; let’s just indict him for trying to kill George H.W. Bush, and then use the 101st Airborne and First Marines to protect the FBI when they arrest him. No, that’s absurd," French said. "That’s a self-reinforcing bootstrapping of war-making power into the executive, at the expense of the Constitution."
In a statement posted to the Pentagon's website, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called the capture of Maduro a "law enforcement mission" by arguing that Maduro was engaging in "narco-terrorism and drug trafficking." French didn't buy that explanation, calling it "totally absurd."
"It doesn’t pass the straight face test. If you use the U.S. military to enter into a foreign capital and seize the head of state, I don’t care if you have a couple of FBI agents with you," he said. "This is an act of war."
Click here to read French's comments in the Times.
