President Donald Trump’s administration has escalated its campaign against alleged Latin American drug cartels, launching a series of controversial military strikes that have killed dozens and drawn fierce debate in Washington and abroad. Since early September 2025, the United States military has targeted at least nine vessels in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, resulting in the deaths of at least 37 people, according to government estimates cited by multiple sources including Reuters and CNN. What began as a maritime operation is now poised to expand to land, with Trump vowing to pursue traffickers wherever they operate.
“Well, I don’t think we’re going to necessarily ask for a declaration of war,” Trump told reporters at the White House on October 23, 2025. “I think we’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. OK? We’re going to kill them.” He added, “Now they [drugs] are coming in by land… you know, the land is going to be next.” Trump’s remarks, reported by Reuters and other outlets, signal a willingness to bypass traditional checks on presidential war powers, insisting that Congress will be notified but not necessarily asked for approval before further action.
The military campaign has seen the deployment of U.S. naval ships, F-35 fighter jets, a nuclear submarine, and thousands of troops to the Caribbean region. According to AFP, the show of force has included at least one B-1B bomber flying over the Caribbean Sea near Venezuela’s coast, sparking alarm in Caracas and among regional leaders. While Trump publicly denied the U.S. sent the bomber—“it’s false,” he said—he did not hide his administration’s displeasure with Venezuela. “We’re not happy with Venezuela for a lot of reasons,” Trump said, listing drugs and the alleged export of prisoners to the U.S. as chief complaints.
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, bracing for possible escalation, claimed on October 22 that his armed forces have 5,000 Russian-made Igla-S surface-to-air missiles in key air defense positions. “We are ready to defend our sovereignty,” Maduro declared, as reported by CNN and AFP. The Venezuelan government has accused Washington of using the anti-cartel campaign as a pretext for regime change, a charge the U.S. denies.
Colombia, too, has found itself in the crosshairs. Two U.S. attacks off the Colombian coast on October 22 extended the strikes into the Pacific for the first time, killing five people. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced the expansion, writing on social media: “Narco-terrorists intending to bring poison to our shores will find no safe harbor anywhere in our hemisphere. There will be no refuge or forgiveness—only justice.” The Trump administration claims those targeted are “unlawful combatants” in a war, not simply criminals.
But the strikes have triggered a wave of criticism from Latin American leaders and human rights groups. Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum and Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro have both condemned the U.S. operation as a violation of international law. “Obviously, we do not agree. There are international laws governing how operations must be carried out when facing alleged illegal drug or weapons transportation in international waters,” Sheinbaum said. Petro was even more direct, stating, “The U.S. is carrying out extrajudicial executions that violate international law.” Amnesty International echoed these concerns, opposing the missile strikes and warning that “all international law is broken in the Caribbean.”
The Trump administration, for its part, maintains that each targeted vessel was confirmed to be trafficking drugs. Defense Secretary Hegseth defended the practice of returning survivors of the strikes to their home countries, calling it “standard” in war. “Compared to Iraq and Afghanistan, the vast majority of people that we captured on the battlefield we handed over to the home country,” Hegseth said.
Not everyone in Washington is convinced. Lawmakers from both parties have raised alarms about the legality and transparency of the strikes. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., criticized the administration on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” saying, “If our policy now is to blow up every ship we suspect or accuse of drug running, that would be a bizarre world in which 25% of the people might be innocent.” Paul and Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, joined Democrats in supporting a resolution to block unauthorized military action against Venezuela, but the measure failed narrowly in the Senate.
Legal scholars have also weighed in, arguing that the strikes represent a troubling expansion of executive power. Harold Hongju Koh, a Yale Law School professor and former State Department official, called the attacks “unprecedented and illegal.” He explained, “The individuals on the targeted ships were summarily executed for non-capital offenses with no rights to due process or even to claim mistaken identity or to prove innocence. They were declared guilty and executable without anyone ever being told their names.”
John Yoo, a former Justice Department official known for his work on the so-called “torture memos,” has emerged as a surprising critic. In a recent essay, Yoo warned, “To confuse [drug cartels] with wartime enemies is to misuse the tools of war, erode constitutional limits, and endanger liberty at home.” He argued that the administration had not provided compelling evidence that drug cartels are arms of hostile governments like Venezuela’s.
The administration’s stance is that these operations are acts of self-defense against traffickers whose products kill Americans. In September, Trump informed Congress that the U.S. was now in a formal armed conflict with drug cartels, which he had earlier designated as terrorist organizations by executive order. Still, the lack of transparency around targeting decisions and the absence of a congressional declaration of war have left many uneasy.
For Colombia, the stakes are especially high. President Petro has faced domestic pressure after a previous U.S. strike killed a Colombian national described as a fisherman. Trump’s response was to impose tariffs, cut aid, and label Petro an “illegal drug leader.” A former U.S. intelligence official, speaking anonymously to Reuters, warned, “The U.S. risks alienating countries like Colombia. There is always an inherent risk of alienating partners with actions perceived as overly aggressive.”
With U.S. bombers conducting strike rehearsals off Venezuela’s coast and Trump threatening to expand operations to land, the region is on edge. Congressional leaders, including Rep. Adam Smith and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, have called for more transparency and oversight. “The Trump administration is abjectly failing to provide essential facts the American people deserve about its lethal military strikes in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific,” Blumenthal said.
As the debate intensifies, the world watches to see whether the U.S. will continue down this path—raising profound questions about the limits of presidential power, the role of Congress, and the future of international cooperation against the scourge of narcotics.
