Another slate of recent controversy surrounds the Trump administration, this time over its recent policy of bombing boats in international waters originating from Venezuela. The administration claims that these vessels are “drug boats” smuggling controlled substances into the country and that these attacks are a part of a larger border security policy of clamping down on the drug trade from Latin America. The controversy originates from the dubious legality of the attacks, as the executive has taken unilateral action, without congressional approval, to carry out what would otherwise be considered military actions in international waters, potentially also violating international law. Furthermore, the act of bombing these vessels as opposed to arresting them has been called vicous and a violation of due process, not to mention that, because the administration refuses to contact the vessels beforehand, there is no guarantee that these vessels actually contain drugs as opposed to refugees.
As of early November, the administration has conducted seven of these attacks, resulting in 32 casualties, with the first one beginning in early September and continuing unabated since then. For several of these strikes, Donald Trump has posted videos of the boats and the attacks on his social media platform Truth Social, each of them lacking definitive proof of the intentions or cargo of the boats. The claim that these boats contain fentanyl is also dubious, given that the overwhelming majority of the substance comes from Mexico, and is most frequently smuggled by US citizens. The administration has also claimed that the attacks eliminate terrorists. In January, Trump signed an executive order designating the Venezuelan drug cartel Tren de Aragua as a terrorist organization, a claim which Venezuelan officials dispute. According to the Venezuelan minister of the interior, none of the 11 victims in a September attack were members of the cartel. In fact, a Trinidian family claims one of their relatives was killed in an attack whilst working in the local fisheries, a common source of income in the region. These accounts have raised fears that the administration has actually prevented zero drug smuggling operations and has been culpable for the murder of dozens of innocents.
The administration has not provided a reason as to why, if they have confirmed visuals over these vessels in addition to recent naval reinforcements in the Caribbean, they have not arrested the accused smugglers. The rhetoric of the administration is that these boats are smuggling fentanyl and that for every boat destroyed, 25,000 American lives are saved. One can not understate the intended element of terror either, or, in the words of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, “There will be no refuge or forgiveness—only justice.” The words and actions of the Administration make it clear that the arbitrary, unexpected, and overwhelming force deployed is meant to deter these vessels. One must imagine, too, that even if some refugees are caught up in these attacks, the administration would not also consider that a success in their other, larger, mission of force directed against migrants.
Political resistance to the administration’s policies has been attempted within the halls of Congress, but has been stymied by Trump loyalists. Senatorial Democrats, joined by Republican Senator Rand Paul, argue that President Trump’s refusal to notify Congress of the attacks, and without their authorization, is a violation of the 1973 War Powers resolution, a resolution passed in the aftermath of Vietnam to prevent a Presidential administration from engaging in hostilities without authorization. The constitutional fig leaf the administration uses is that Donald Trump, in his capacity as commander in chief, is allowed to direct the military as he wishes. Since Donald Trump has declared the drug cartels a terrorist group, he claims he can wage military actions against them without the need for congressional authorization. However, this reasoning buckles under the weight of the administration’s own internal memos, which describe the nation in a state of war—something only Congress can declare.
There still is a chance that Congress can rein in the President’s actions, as a bipartisan group of lawmakers attempts to craft a compromise that can restrict an overreaching executive branch. Until that time, however, the administration has shown no signs of relenting.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.