Key Takeaways
- The US military carried out a follow-up strike on a suspected drug vessel in the Caribbean, killing the remaining crew and sinking the ship.
- The strike was part of a series of attacks on alleged drug boats, with the US military assessing that there were survivors after the initial attack.
- The administration has faced criticism and concerns over the legality of the strikes, with some arguing that they amount to extrajudicial killings.
- The US military has hit boats multiple times in several instances to sink them, but the September 2 strike is the only known instance where the military deliberately killed survivors.
- The White House has tried to justify the strikes by claiming they are carrying individuals linked to roughly two dozen drug cartels engaged in an armed conflict with the US.
Introduction to the US Military Strikes
The US military carried out a follow-up strike on a suspected drug vessel operating in the Caribbean on September 2, after an initial attack did not kill everyone on board. This strike was the first in a series of attacks on alleged drug boats, and it has raised concerns over the legality of the US military’s actions. According to sources familiar with the matter, the initial strike appeared to disable the boat and cause deaths, but the military assessed that there were survivors. The second attack killed the remaining crew on board, bringing the total death toll to 11, and sank the ship.
Concerns Over Legality
The strike and deaths were announced by President Donald Trump on the day of the attacks, but the administration has never publicly acknowledged killing survivors. This has led to criticism and concerns over the legality of the strikes, with some arguing that they amount to extrajudicial killings. People briefed on the "double-tap" strike said they were concerned that it could violate the law of armed conflict, which prohibits the execution of an enemy combatant who is "hors de combat," or taken out of the fight due to injury or surrender. Sarah Harrison, a former associate general counsel at the Pentagon, stated that "they’re breaking the law either way," and that the strikes are "unlawful under the law of armed conflict."
Details of the Strikes
The US military was aware that there were survivors in the water following the first strike on September 2 and carried out another to both sink the vessel and kill the remaining crew. Pentagon officials told lawmakers in briefings afterward that the second strike was done to sink the boat so it would not pose a threat to navigation. The US military has hit boats multiple times in several instances to sink them, but the September 2 strike is the only known instance where the military deliberately killed survivors. It is not clear why the survivors were not picked up, as they were following another strike in the Caribbean in October, where the Trump administration rescued two survivors and repatriated them to their home countries.
Justification for the Strikes
The administration has tried to legally justify its strikes on the boats by claiming they are carrying individuals linked to roughly two dozen drug cartels engaged in an armed conflict with the US. The White House has said repeatedly that the administration’s actions "comply fully with the Law of Armed Conflict," the area of international law that is designed to prevent attacks on civilians. However, many legal experts argue that the suspected drug traffickers are civilians, not combatants, and that the strikes therefore amount to extrajudicial killings. Before the US military began blowing up boats in September, countering illicit drug trafficking was handled by law enforcement and the US Coast Guard, and cartel members and drug smugglers were treated as criminals with due process rights.
International Response
The US military’s actions have also been met with skepticism from senior US defense officials and US allies. The commander of US Southern Command, Adm. Alvin Holsey, offered to leave his post during a tense meeting last month with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff after he raised questions about the legality of the strikes. Holsey will leave his post in December, just one year into his tenure as the SOUTHCOM chief. Lawyers specializing in international law within DoD’s Office of General Counsel have also raised concerns about the legality of the strikes. The United Kingdom is also no longer sharing intelligence with the US about suspected drug trafficking vessels in the Caribbean because it does not want to be complicit in US military strikes and believes the attacks are illegal.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the US military’s strikes on suspected drug vessels in the Caribbean have raised concerns over the legality of the actions. The administration has tried to justify the strikes by claiming they are carrying individuals linked to roughly two dozen drug cartels engaged in an armed conflict with the US. However, many legal experts argue that the suspected drug traffickers are civilians, not combatants, and that the strikes therefore amount to extrajudicial killings. The international community has also expressed skepticism over the US military’s actions, with the United Kingdom no longer sharing intelligence with the US about suspected drug trafficking vessels in the Caribbean. As the US continues to carry out these strikes, it is essential to examine the legality and implications of these actions.
/file/dailymaverick/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Siya-Seta-MPs-copy.jpg?w=300&resize=300,300&ssl=1 "Minister Slammed Over Controversial Seta CEO Reappointments")
