Military attacks on boats in the Caribbean Sea might just be murder, or the start of a war

Some analysts have speculated that the military campaign is more about forcing a regime change in Venezuela and asserting U.S. influence over the world’s largest oil reserves than combating drugs.

Since September 2, the Trump Administration has conducted military strikes on 16 boats in the Caribbean Sea near Venezuela and the east Pacific Ocean near Columbia, killing at least 66 people that the Trump Administration claimed were smuggling drugs.

Little is known about the targets of these attacks, and public announcements by Venezuelans were addressed and deleted quickly by the Venezuelan government, cutting electricity to one town where sympathetic posts were circulating after the first strike. Interviews with Venezuelans in coastal villages have produced reports that some of the people killed were fishermen, laborers, and bus drivers in addition to low-level criminals and one local crime boss.Two people survived one of the attacks in the Pacific and were detained and deported back to their home countries, Ecuador and Columbia. Mexico is conducting a search and rescue operation for a third survivor in the Pacific.

On October 23, President Trump spoke of a potential expansion of the attacks onto land in Venezuela. He said “The land is going to be next… we may go to Congress and tell them about it, but I can’t imagine they’d have any problem with it.” At the same press conference, a reporter asked why he wouldn’t ask Congress for a declaration of war, and he said “I don’t think we’re going, necessarily, to ask for a declaration of war. I think we’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. OK. We’re going to kill them. They’re going to be, like, dead.” Venezuela called for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council on October 10, where they expressed concern for an armed attack against their country and requested the U.N. Security Council investigate the strikes to determine their legality. However, the Security Council isn’t able to take action due to the U.S.’s veto power.

Military strikes on foreign civilians would be a war crime if the U.S. were at war.

On October 2 Trump sent a notice to Congress informing it of an “armed conflict” with unspecified drug cartels. It suggested that the U.S. would be participating in a sustained conflict with cartels which the administration has labeled terrorist organizations. However, no evidence has been shared that the military targets were in fact connected to an organized terrorist organization.

U.S. Military presence in the Caribbean

The U.S. has built up a wide array of military assets in the Caribbean including ships, planes, and drones. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the movement of a major aircraft carrier and its strike group from the Mediterranean Sea to the U.S. Southern Command to bolster the growing number of combat vessels in the area, where thousands of troops were already deployed. F-35 fighter jets have also been deployed, and U.S. heavy bomber planes have flown up to the coast of Venezuela as part of training exercises.

International Response

On October 31 the United Nations Human Rights chief called for an investigation and stated that she believes the attacks “violate international human rights law” and “must halt.” Experts appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council previously said that “the use of lethal force in international waters without proper legal basis violates international law of the sea and amounts to extrajudicial executions.” Even if the boats are transporting drugs, “These moves are an extremely dangerous escalation with grave implications for peace and security in the Caribbean region.”

Venezuela’s defense minister said in September that the attacks amounted to a “non-declared war,” prompting Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro to call militias into active duty. The Venezuelan military is working to train local militias made up of volunteers, largely older citizens from poor communities, which some political analysts in Venezuela view as a human shield. In response to the aircraft carrier being called to the Caribbean, Maduro accused the U.S. again of “fabricating a new war.” Trump, among other world leaders, doesn’t recognize Maduro as a legitimate leader after questionable results from the 2024 election. But the Trump administration goes further to claim Maduro heads a drug-trafficking ring, despite Venezuela’s minor role in the drug trade.

Some analysts have speculated that the military campaign is more about forcing a regime change in Venezuela and asserting U.S. influence over the world’s largest oil reserves than combating drug trafficking. This tracks with a pattern of actions the U.S. has taken over the years to unseat President Maduro including efforts to infiltrate his inner circle beginning in 2024.

Columbian President Gustavo Petro accused the U.S. of murdering at least one fisherman, posting on social media that “U.S. government officials have committed a murder and violated our sovereignty in territorial waters.” Trump responded by further cutting aid to Columbia’s counternarcotics programs and announcing new tariffs on Colombian goods.

Domestic Response and Messaging

The day after Trump confirmed that the CIA had been authorized to conduct covert operations in Venezuela, Admiral Alvin Holsey announced his retirement from his position overseeing operations in U.S. Southern Command in December. The retirement comes a year into his post, which would typically last three to four years. The exact reason for his retirement is unclear, though social media posts by Holsey and Hegseth afterwards appeared to demonstrate an apparent mutual respect.

The administration has repeatedly insisted that it is within its legal authority to perform these attacks. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said “If people want to stop seeing drug boats blow up, stop sending drugs to the United States.” Hegseth has compared the initiative to the war on terror, posting on social media “Just as Al Qaeda waged war on our homeland, these cartels are waging war on our border and our people.”

On October 8, the Senate voted down a war powers resolution which would have required Trump to consult Congress before continuing military strikes in the area. It was a largely symbolic move, since the White House indicated that Trump would veto the legislation. The vote took place mostly along party lines, with two Republicans voting in favor of the resolution and one Democrat voting against it. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth briefed lawmakers on November 5 on their legal justification for the aggression, which quelled some Republican complaints about a lack of transparency, while still leaving Democrats unhappy about being left in the dark. A bipartisan group of legislators is planning another vote to require congressional approval to engage in further hostilities, but administration officials have been lobbying Republicans to vote no again.