The United States has significantly expanded its controversial counternarcotics campaign, launching military strikes against two alleged drug-smuggling vessels in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. These recent operations, which resulted in the deaths of five individuals, mark the first time the U.S. military has targeted such vessels in the Pacific, signaling a new front in an escalating strategy that has drawn international criticism and ignited debates over legality and due process.
Pacific Operations Add New Dimension to Drug War
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced Wednesday that U.S. forces conducted two lethal kinetic strikes on vessels in international waters off South America on Tuesday and Wednesday. He stated that the individuals aboard were “narco-terrorists” and that their boats were “known by our intelligence to be involved in illicit narcotics smuggling” and transiting “a known narco-trafficking route”. While the exact location was not specified beyond the Eastern Pacific, reports suggest one strike occurred near Colombia’s Pacific coast. The first strike on Tuesday killed two people, and a second strike on Wednesday claimed the lives of three more. Videos accompanying Hegseth’s social media posts show small boats exploding after being hit, with one appearing to have brown packages floating in the water afterward. No U.S. personnel were reported harmed in these operations.
Escalating Campaign Against Designated ‘Terrorist Organizations’
These Pacific strikes represent an extension of a campaign that began in September, primarily targeting vessels in the Caribbean Sea. To date, a total of at least nine such strikes have been conducted, resulting in the deaths of at least 37 people. The Trump administration has characterized these actions as part of a broader strategy against Latin American drug cartels, many of which have been designated as “foreign terrorist organizations” (FTOs) by the U.S. government. These designations, which include groups like the Tren de Aragua and the Sinaloa Cartel, are unusual as they typically apply to groups with political aims rather than purely profit-driven criminal enterprises. Defense Secretary Hegseth has drawn parallels between these cartels and terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, stating they “are waging war on our border and our people” and promising “no refuge or forgiveness – only justice”.
Legal and Ethical Quagmires Emerge
The administration’s reliance on military strikes, particularly against individuals in international waters, has drawn significant scrutiny from legal experts and international observers. Unlike traditional maritime interdictions conducted by the U.S. Coast Guard, which typically involve boarding, seizure, and prosecution under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA), these military actions result in immediate lethality and appear to bypass due process. Critics argue that these are effectively extrajudicial killings, raising concerns about violations of both U.S. and international law, including the Geneva Conventions.
The U.S. government has asserted it is in “armed conflict” with these cartels, justifying the use of lethal force as a national security imperative to protect Americans from illicit drugs. However, evidence substantiating the claims that these specific vessels were involved in drug smuggling, or that the individuals were “narco-terrorists,” has not been publicly released. The lack of transparency has led to accusations of “murder” from the Colombian president, Gustavo Petro, who stated that the U.S. strategy “breaks the norms of international law”. Furthermore, U.S. intelligence plays a central role, meaning much of the evidence used to select targets may remain classified.
Pacific Routes: A New Focus for Smuggling
The expansion into the Eastern Pacific is strategically significant, as this region, along with Colombia and Peru, is a primary corridor for cocaine smuggling. While the Eastern Pacific is a major route for cocaine destined for markets worldwide, including the United States, the U.S. Coast Guard has historically conducted interdictions there, seizing substantial amounts of drugs. The shift to military strikes in this area, instead of relying on law enforcement operations, remains unclear, especially as the Coast Guard has seen success in interdicting significant drug hauls.
Future Actions and Unresolved Questions
President Trump has alluded to further aggressive actions, hinting at potential future operations targeting drug traffickers on land. The ongoing series of strikes and the administration’s rhetoric underscore a policy shift towards a more forceful, militarized approach to combating drug crime. As these operations continue, the debate over their legality, ethical implications, and overall effectiveness in achieving justice and curbing the flow of illicit substances into the American homeland is likely to intensify. This news cycle continues to unfold with profound questions about the boundaries of American foreign policy and the pursuit of national security in the face of global crime.
