The US military announced Monday that it killed two people in a strike on a vessel in the eastern Pacific Ocean, describing them as operatives involved in drug smuggling. The Southern Command said the boat was traveling along known narco-trafficking routes and was operated by designated terrorist organizations, but provided no evidence to support either claim.
The two individuals were characterized as "male narco-terrorists" with no further identifying information released. A grainy overhead video of the vessel exploding accompanied the statement. The command said no American forces were harmed and that it was "applying total systemic friction on the cartels."
The strike represents the latest in a series of lethal maritime operations in the region. A day earlier, the military announced it had destroyed two boats allegedly involved in drug smuggling, resulting in five deaths and one survivor. The coast guard initiated a search and rescue operation for the survivor. Like the subsequent strike, the military released video footage but offered no substantiation of the smuggling allegations.
Since early September, when the Trump administration initiated a systematic targeting campaign against vessels in the region, at least 170 people have been killed in boat strikes, according to the Associated Press.
The operations have drawn fierce legal and political opposition. In December, Democratic senator Adam Schiff demanded the resignation of defense secretary Pete Hegseth, contending the strikes violate both US and international law. Schiff characterized them as unlawful and unauthorized.
That same month, civil rights attorneys filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of families of two men killed in an October 14 airstrike on a Caribbean boat. Both victims were from a Trinidad fishing village and were en route to Venezuela when struck. The suit describes the killing as "premeditated and intentional," asserting it "lacks any plausible legal justification" and constitutes "simply murder, ordered at the highest levels of government."
The administration has defended the strikes as lawful under rules of armed conflict, arguing the US is engaged in a war against traffickers. Legal experts have widely rejected this reasoning, finding no basis in law for treating alleged smugglers as combatants in an armed conflict.
The pattern of strikes without accompanying evidence of trafficking activity or terrorist connections reflects a broader consistency in the military's public statements on dozens of similar operations conducted across the eastern Pacific and Caribbean. None of the announcements have included proof supporting the narco-trafficking or terrorist organization claims.
Author James Rodriguez: "At this point, the military is asking the public to accept lethal force on faith alone, and the legal walls are closing in faster than anyone in the command chain anticipated."
Comments