The United Nations human rights chief has issued a stark condemnation of recent U.S. military strikes targeting boats in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific Ocean. These operations are aimed at intercepting vessels believed to be engaged in drug trafficking from South America, yet the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, deems these actions “unacceptable” and calls for an immediate cessation of such strikes.
At a regular briefing, spokeswoman Ravina Shamdasani conveyed Türk’s concerns, highlighting the growing human cost associated with these attacks. She emphasized that U.S. airstrikes infringe upon international human rights law and called for an investigation into the operations, marking a significant stance from the U.N. regarding these military actions.
The Trump administration has defended these military strikes, framing them as a necessary measure to combat narcotics trafficking, which has been a contentious issue within the region. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently announced the latest operation, which resulted in the deaths of four individuals aboard a targeted vessel in the eastern Pacific. This latest strike is part of an escalating campaign that has seen 14 military actions and has claimed at least 61 lives since its inception in early September.
U.S. officials have linked some of these strikes to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, designated as a terrorist organization by the Trump administration. This characterization emerged after the administration declared that the U.S. is engaged in a “non-international armed conflict” with designated drug cartels, paralleling the language used in designating groups like al-Qaeda post 9/11.
Despite the U.S. rationalization of military force as a counter-terrorism strategy, critics, including Colombian President Gustavo Petro, have raised legal and ethical objections. Petro recently questioned the legitimacy and effectiveness of the strikes during a CBS News interview and has faced sanctions from the Trump administration for his remarks.
Shamdasani’s commentary underscores the longstanding international consensus that combating drug trafficking should be treated as a law enforcement issue rather than a military one. She noted that the intentional use of lethal force is permissible only when there is an imminent threat to life, asserting that current strikes are occurring outside of any recognized armed conflict or active hostilities.
As the international community grapples with the implications of these military operations, the need for a more measured and lawful approach to drug trafficking remains paramount. The ongoing debate surrounding these strikes could pave the way for more balanced strategies prioritizing human rights in addressing narcotics trafficking.