In today’s episode of **What’s going on with BRICS**:
**BRICS Snatch**
**Leaders?**
**Kidnapping**
**New Normal?**
If you’re new to the channel, hey, take a moment, subscribe to the channel, then hit the bell to be alerted about new episodes when they drop.
Coming to you today from [location to be filled by owner].
### What’s in the News
1. **US capture of Maduro – a bold precedent**
- January 3, 2026: US airstrikes and special ops raid led to Maduro’s capture on narco-terrorism charges.
- Venezuela condemns as “imperialist aggression”; explosions hit military sites, chaos ensues.
- Ties to 2025 NSS Trump Corollary – US enforcing Monroe Doctrine in its “backyard.”
2. **Could BRICS do the same to Western leaders?**
- Hypothetical: BRICS states (e.g., Russia, China) could fabricate charges (e.g., war crimes in Ukraine/Taiwan) and attempt a snatch-and-grab on Trump, Rubio, Starmer, von der Leyen, Kallas, Luxon, or Merz.
- But practicality low: Western leaders heavily protected; operation would require massive resources and risk full-scale conflict.
- Precedent: US action echoes past grabs like Noriega (Panama 1989) – shows powerful nations sometimes act unilaterally.
3. **International law on state-sponsored kidnappings**
- Illegal under UN Charter Article 2(4) – violates sovereignty and prohibits force against another state’s territory.
- Precedents: Israel’s 1960 abduction of Eichmann from Argentina (condemned by UN but trial proceeded); US 1990 Alvarez-Machain case (Supreme Court allowed trial despite Mexico abduction).
- Principle: “Male captus, bene detentus” – wrongfully captured, lawfully detained – courts sometimes ignore abduction if jurisdiction holds.
4. **Does this normalize kidnapping under “new rules”?**
- Not really – US justifies as self-defense/counter-narcotics, but sets risky precedent for tit-for-tat.
- Hypocrisy highlighted: US intervenes in Russia’s (Ukraine) and China’s (Taiwan) spheres, yet invokes Monroe to bar them from Americas.
- Quid pro quo risk: BRICS could see it as green light for symmetric actions – e.g., Russia in Eastern Europe or China in Asia.
5. **BRICS response options – direct and indirect**
- Direct: SCO condemnation, UN resolutions on sovereignty; joint military aid to Venezuelan resistance.
- Indirect: Economic sanctions on US interests; cyber attacks; accelerate de-dollarization to weaken US leverage.
- Hypothetical: Proxy operations or abductions in response – but escalation to war possible.
6. **Danger for the US – high stakes blowback**
- Risks global isolation: Alienates Latin America, boosts anti-US sentiment.
- BRICS narrative win: “US hypocrisy” amplifies multipolar messaging.
- Military overstretch: Venezuela resistance ties resources; broader conflicts (e.g., Russia escalates Ukraine) loom.
7. **Western allies’ silence exposes double standards**
- No illegality declarations or sanctions from Starmer (UK), Luxon (NZ), Albanese (AU), von der Leyen/Kallas (EU).
- Contrast to Ukraine: Swift sanctions on Russia for “illegal aggression.”
- Call-out: Sovereignty only matters when it’s not a US ally acting – pure hypocrisy.
OK team, so what does all this mean? Well, it means the Maduro capture tests international norms – US flexes power, but risks normalizing grabs that could boomerang on Western leaders, handing BRICS a hypocrisy hammer in multipolar games. High danger ahead. 🌀
