The United States military has conducted another strike against a boat suspected of smuggling drugs in the eastern Pacific Ocean. This latest action resulted in the immediate deaths of two people and left six survivors. This strike forms part of an ongoing campaign against alleged traffickers in Latin America. To date, more than 60 such attacks have been reported, resulting in over 210 deaths since the operation began under the Trump administration in early September.
Details surrounding the fate of the survivors remain unclear. In previous incidents, such as a strike on June 16, the U.S. Central Command notified the U.S. Coast Guard about survivors. However, the Coast Guard suspended their search a day later, finding no signs of survivors or debris. They have not commented on the current incident.
The U.S. Southern Command stated that the strikes targeted alleged drug traffickers operating along recognized smuggling routes. Despite these claims, the military has not provided evidence that the vessels involved were carrying drugs.
A video released on social media showed a boat moving swiftly through the water, being hit by a visible projectile, and subsequently erupting into flames. Former President Donald Trump had expressed that the U.S. is engaged in an “armed conflict” with Latin American cartels. He justified these attacks as crucial to reducing the flow of drugs into the United States and preventing drug overdose deaths. However, the administration has not substantiated its claims of eliminating “narcoterrorists.”
There have been legal and effectiveness concerns regarding these military actions. Critics point out that many fatal overdoses in the U.S. involve fentanyl, typically trafficked overland from Mexico, where it is manufactured using chemicals from China and India.
Recently, U.S. lawmakers called for the Pentagon to release “unedited video” of a prior strike. Reports indicated that the U.S. conducted a follow-up strike on survivors of the initial attack. Two men initially survived an attack that killed nine others and were later struck again while clinging to the wreckage. The White House supported this follow-up strike, citing “self-defense” under the laws of armed conflict.
Legal experts argue that targeting survivors in a second strike would be illegal in any situation, conflict-related or not. The Pentagon’s inspector general announced plans in May to investigate whether the military adhered to the established targeting framework during the strikes. The review will specifically examine the six-phase Joint Targeting Cycle, excluding the legal validity of these actions.
Leave a Reply