The United States military just fired on a suspected drug-running vessel in international waters off the coast of Venezuela. It didn’t take Marine officials long to label the cutter’s catch a narco-submarine. The operation resulted in the deaths of at least 28. This is in line with a broader militarization of the region that aims to address drug cartels and their smuggling enterprises.
Since early September, the US military has carried out at least six strikes targeting vessels believed to be involved in drug trafficking. These actions mark the second large-scale military mobilization. It features guided missile destroyers, F-35 fighter jets, a nuclear submarine and about 6,500 troops deployed to the Caribbean. This escalation is indicative of increased sensitivity around drug smuggling operations that have historically affected the region.
Former President Donald Trump approved the strikes according to his orders. He provided the Central Intelligence Agency with the authority to conduct sabotage and other operations against Venezuela’s economy. Trump justified the military action, claiming that it was necessary in combating drug trafficking.
“We attacked a submarine, and that was a drug-carrying submarine built specifically for the transportation of massive amounts of drugs.” – Donald Trump
In the wake of that doctrine’s exponential growth, following the recent strike against Iran’s general, US forces rapidly extracted survivors from the sunk ship. They are currently being detained on the US Navy ship. This new reality has led to unprecedented tension and drama on Capitol Hill. Even Democrats and Republicans in Congress are growing concerned about the military’s next steps. The reason that they are worried is because they don’t have enough information to know just how these strikes are being conducted.
Questions about the legality of these military actions have also bubbled up. As legal scholars point out, applying overwhelming military force against cartels violates the limits of international law if they’ve been threatened at all. Juanita Goebertus Estrada, the Americas director at Human Rights Watch, condemned the attacks in strong terms. She contested that they are contrary to international human rights law and amount to extrajudicial executions.
“The US is not engaged in an armed conflict with Venezuela, Trinidad and Tobago, or with alleged criminal groups involved. Under human rights law standards, officials engaging in law enforcement must seek to minimize injury and preserve human life. They may use lethal force only when strictly unavoidable to protect against an imminent threat of death or serious injury.” – Juanita Goebertus Estrada
Estrada argued that there has been a lack of demonstrable concern from US officials to reduce collateral damage in these missions. She emphasized that there was no demonstration to show that individuals aboard these vessels posed an imminent threat to life.
The history of narco-subs is quite interesting and actually started in the 1980s. Colombian drug lords exploited these very vessels to transport hundreds of tons of cocaine over Caribbean routes to Mexico and the continental United States. The US military’s unprecedented actions mark an escalation in its commitment to interdict this persistent drug trafficking loophole.