Legal Dilemmas of US Strikes on Latin American 'Drug Boats'

Tue Oct 21 2025 06:24:24 GMT+0300 (Eastern European Summer Time)

The legality of recent US military actions targeting alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean raises significant questions about international law and US constitutional authority.

The US has conducted strikes on boats in the Caribbean allegedly linked to the Tren de Aragua cartel, claiming to act in self-defense against drug trafficking. While US officials defend these actions, experts argue they may contravene international law and the US Constitution. Debates continue over the legality of targeting non-state actors and the need for congressional approval.

Legal Dilemmas of US Strikes on Latin American 'Drug Boats'

US officials have reported a series of strikes in the Caribbean aimed at vessels linked to drug trafficking, specifically targeting the Tren de Aragua cartel. This assertion began in September when President Donald Trump declared the destruction of a boat departing from Venezuela allegedly carrying drugs destined for the US.

In recent weeks, reports have surfaced detailing multiple strikes, accompanied by video footage but lacking substantial evidence or information regarding the individuals on board.

While the Trump administration defends its actions as necessary for self-defense against drug trafficking, the strikes have garnered backlash, particularly from Latin American leaders such as Colombia's president, who clarified that one of the targeted boats was not Venezuelan but Colombian.

What does international law say?

The US, while not a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, is expected by its military legal advisors to conduct operations in accordance with its provisions. International law generally prohibits interference with vessels in international waters unless specific exceptions apply, such as the principle of hot pursuit for unlawful activity.

Experts have raised concerns that the lethal force used in some of these strikes may not meet the necessary standards of legality under international maritime law.

Are US strikes on alleged cartel members legal?

Legal analysts question the justification for labeling the cartel members as legitimate military targets under international law, particularly given the unclear scope of armed conflict definitions that apply to drug cartels. Some argue that the United States is not in a declared conflict with Venezuela or the Tren de Aragua, complicating the legality of these operations.

Can Trump launch attacks without congressional approval?

Additionally, debates are ongoing regarding whether Trump had the necessary authority for these strikes under US law. The Constitution assigns war-declaring powers solely to Congress but provides the president with command of the military. This raises questions about the establishment of legal precedent for military engagement against non-state actors.

What do we know about US operations in the region?

The strikes come amid heightened US military presence in the Caribbean, with satellite imagery confirming the deployment of warships for anti-narcotics operations. President Trump has also authorized the CIA to engage in covert operations against the Venezuelan government, intensifying US efforts to undermine President Nicolás Maduro's regime.

As these legal and political complexities unfold, the ramifications of US military actions in international waters may reshape the understanding of state powers and law enforcement in drug trafficking operations.