Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
“The United States killed four people in a strike against a vessel allegedly carrying illegal drugs just off the coast of Venezuela, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Friday, at least the fourth such attack in recent weeks…
“Hegseth said Friday's strike was carried out in international waters and that all of the people killed were men. He said the vessel was transporting ‘substantial amounts of narcotics - headed to America to poison our people.’… A large U.S. military buildup is taking place in the southern Caribbean. In [addition] to F-35 aircraft in Puerto Rico, there are eight U.S. warships in the region, carrying thousands of sailors and marines, and one nuclear-powered submarine.” Reuters
“Trump has determined the United States is engaged in ‘a non-international armed conflict’ with drug cartels, according to a document notifying Congress of its legal justification for deadly U.S. strikes on boats off Venezuela.” Reuters
Here’s our prior coverage of the campaign against Venezuelan cartels. The Flip Side
The left is critical of the strikes, arguing that they are illegal.
“Hegseth swears that the boat he blew up for sure for real this time had narco-terrorists, who were headed full throttle direct to America with drugs, and was for sure not fishermen or some brothers out for a pleasure cruise… But just like the previous 17 people killed by US boat strikes, there’s been no official confirmation of the identity or occupation of the deceased, or evidence produced…
“The vast majority of drugs in the US come in by land or plane via Mexico… Not only were these boats not anywhere close to entering American territory, they’d have to pass by multiple other countries to even get in the vicinity of the Gulf of America… [Finally] 17 out of 18 US intelligence agencies assessed that Tren de Aragua is actually not run by Maduro and/or the Venezuelan government.”
Marcie Jones, Wonkette
“Even if the boat were carrying members of a designated terrorist organization, even if these 11 people were trafficking drugs, and even if those drugs were indeed bound for the United States, this strike was nothing more than murder. Self-defense can be used only to repel an armed attack—drug trafficking cannot be considered, in any world, an armed attack… [These attacks] signal a US empire increasingly willing to dispense with even the perfunctory legal legitimation that past presidents leaned on.”
Jake Romm, The Nation
“Say what you will about the many failures of America’s global war on terrorism, but it’s undeniable the U.S. military became frighteningly proficient at penetrating and taking apart organizations over the past quarter-century. Instead of systematically killing low- and midlevel henchmen in pinprick airstrikes, U.S. forces learned that more information could be gleaned through capturing those suspects…
“A phone from a suspect’s pocket in Iraq, for instance, would often include enough information, such as phone numbers and text conversations, so that a follow-on raid on other operatives could be planned. This is how U.S. forces mapped out countless terrorist groups’ leadership ranks… Why the administration has opted to blow apart potential leads and sources instead of exploiting them is anyone’s guess.”
W.J. Hennigan, New York Times
“Far from weakening and isolating the regime, Trump may achieve the exact opposite. Maduro is already using the crisis to assume dictatorial ‘special powers’ and rally public opinion behind patriotic calls for national solidarity. Trump’s bullying of other left-leaning Latin American countries such as Colombia – and presumptuous cheerleading for rightwing populists in Argentina and El Salvador – is spurring a regional backlash.”
Simon Tisdall, Guardian
The right is divided.
The right is divided.
“The Trump administration is right that illicit drugs are inflicting more harm on the U.S. than most armed conflicts have. More than 800,000 Americans have died of opioid overdoses since 1999. Drug-caused deaths remain at historic highs, with an estimated 76,000 perishing from fentanyl in 2023 alone…
“But the U.S. cannot wage war against any source of harm to Americans… The White House has yet to provide compelling evidence in court or to Congress that drug cartels have become arms of the Venezuelan government.”
John Yoo, Washington Post
“The president isn’t a king. Trump can’t order somebody’s death simply by calling them a terrorist. Drug traffickers may be the scum of the earth, but they aren’t terrorists using violence to achieve a political objective. To mix the two together, as the Trump administration is doing, has dangerous practical implications…
“Let’s remember: Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua is not the only Latin American criminal group labeled by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization. The list now includes Viv Ansanm and Gran Grif in Haiti, Los Choneros and Los Lobos in Ecuador, and a litany of cartels in Mexico. By Trump’s logic, the U.S. is now free to bomb any and all of these groups at whim, regardless of whether their governments support it. It doesn’t take a genius to recognize the diplomatic fallout that could ensue.”
Daniel DePetris, Washington Examiner
Others argue, “Trump dislikes regime-change wars in the classic sense. The ‘America First’ portfolio is transactional by design: fewer open-ended nation-building campaigns, more calibrated use of force or diplomatic pressure where the legal and political cover exists… Trump’s approach always aims to maximize leverage while minimizing open-ended commitments…
“Seen from this angle, the narco-terror narrative is a tool – a great one. Declaring networks as terror or terrorist-adjacent reconfigures the legal playbook. It widens authorities, attracts military assets and legitimizes potential strikes that would be harder to justify under other rubrics. It also performs a diplomatic service: it makes pressure acceptable to partners who would recoil at a naked campaign aimed at regime decapitation…
“A full-scale invasion or a prolonged occupation would be catastrophic for the United States politically and logistically… So if you cannot replace Maduro through direct warfare, how do you change his cost-benefit calculus? You make continued rule more expensive, more dangerous, and less useful: target revenue streams, hinder patronage, sap his ability to reward subordinates and increase the political price of belligerence.”
Juan P. Villasmil, Spectator World
Does Your Backyard Need a Stegosaurus?
New York Times
