U.S. secretary of state asked if drug boats from allied countries could ever face ‘unilateral execution’

The recent U.S. airstrike on an alleged Venezuelan drug smuggling boat in international waters has raised questions about the legal authority behind the action. While U.S. officials have not yet cited the specific legal justification for the strike, criticism from legal experts continues to mount.

In addition to the airstrike, the U.S. has deployed 10 F-35 fighter jets to a Puerto Rico airfield for operations against drug cartels in the southern Caribbean. This move comes as part of an increased military presence in the region in recent weeks.

The strike, which resulted in the deaths of 11 individuals, was carried out against members of the Tren de Aragua gang, which the U.S. administration alleges is closely linked to the Venezuelan government. However, details about the individuals on the boat and the justification for the strike have not been provided, despite the legal requirement for the administration to inform Congress about military actions within 48 hours.

Critics, including the Washington Office of Latin America (WOLA), have raised concerns about the use of disproportionate lethal force in this incident. International law experts have questioned the legality of the strike, particularly since there were no hostilities occurring in the Caribbean at the time.

In response to inquiries about the legal review process, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio emphasized the importance of working with regional allies to combat drug smuggling. However, the lack of transparency surrounding the strike has led to calls for more information from lawmakers and human rights organizations.

While some have characterized Tren de Aragua as a terrorist organization, others have questioned the extent of its international presence and its ties to the Maduro government. The controversy surrounding the airstrike has prompted debate about the application of international law and the rights of individuals, even in cases involving criminal organizations.

As the U.S. faces criticism from both allies and adversaries over its actions in Venezuela, the legal and ethical implications of the airstrike remain a topic of discussion. It is essential for the administration to provide clarity on the legal basis for such operations to ensure accountability and adherence to international standards.