Implications of US Military Operations in the southern Caribbean

Implications of US Military Operations in the southern Caribbean

 Ambassador Curtis A. Ward

(17 October 2025) — As of this writing, U.S. military strikes blowing up six small boats in the southern Caribbean Sea between Venezuela and Trinidad killed nearly 30 people. No evidence has been offered by the Trump administration to the American public or international community to justify these killings. The victims of these summary executions are alleged by the U.S. president to be trafficking in drugs from Venezuela to the U.S. But so far, these are mere allegations. And, even if there is supporting evidence, it raises questions on whether extrajudicial killings are justified or legal in domestic or international law?

So far, the U.S. government has provided no proof that those killed are drug traffickers or that they are tied to Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro as alleged. But, even if they were, only large scale drug trafficking is deemed to be a capital offense in U.S. criminal law, and so far no proof has been offered to suggest that the victims of U.S. bombings in the southern Caribbean Sea fall into this category.

Extending war on terrorism to narco-trafficking

Extrajudicial killings of suspected drug traffickers or other criminal violators are not sanctioned by law in a democracy, including US law. Neither are such killings sanctioned under international criminal law. These killings are seen by many legal observers as just that – a extrajudicial killings.

The Trump administration skirts the law by designating drug traffickers as terrorists and adding a new wartime legal dimension by describing them as ‘unlawful combatants.’ Eight drug trafficking groups were designated by the U.S. State Department in February 2025, as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), including the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, which the Trump administration claims to be tied to president Maduro.

This is the first time in U.S. history that drug traffickers have been designated as FTOs. Hence justifying the use of military force to kill them as has been the practice of killing terrorists since 9/11. Given the perpetual war on terrorism, first declared by former president George W. Bush, the Trump administration does not see the need to capture drug traffickers and bring them to justice. In the U.S. war on terrorism, extrajudicial killings of terrorists have become the norm. The U.S. government has used drone attacks to kill terrorists in many parts of the world

Failure of checks on presidential power

Yet, use of deadly military forces to kill alleged drug traffickers has evoked widespread concerns, not merely for the killings but questions arise concerning the legitimate use of the War Powers Act (WPA) to justify the use of the military and declaring war against them—a la the war on terrorism. The drumbeat of opposition is emanating primarily from human rights groups, Democratic Party members of Congress, and from legal experts who challenge this use of the WPA as an abuse of presidential powers. The legislators complain that the president has not briefed the Congress and provided justification as required by law whenever invoking use of the WPA.

Other than the international Criminal Court (ICC) which does not have jurisdiction over the United States which is not a party to the ICC’s Statute, there is no international body except the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) with the authority to act on this issue.  But it can’t. The veto power held by the United States blocks actions against the U.S. by the UNSC on all matters. The same applies to the other four veto-holding permanent members of the UNSC — China, France, Russian Federation (Russia), and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK).

This is an issue to be resolved internally between the president, the Congress and the judiciary. Civil society groups are weighing-in to pressure the three branches of the U.S. government, particularly the US Congress. However, the Republican-controlled Senate has already rejected a Democrat-sponsored resolution to block the president’s use of the WPA without congressional approval. The resolution failed mostly on party-line votes with only two Republican Senators — Rand Paul and Lisa Murkowski—voting with the Democrats, and John Fetterman, a Democrat, voting with the Republicans.

Civil society — the last bastion for accountability

On October 8, 2025, the Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC), a global organization, joined over 60 other organizations “expressing alarm at the repeated extrajudicial killings of unidentified civilians in the Caribbean through US strikes and calling on Congress to block further such military action in the region.”

CIVIC’s US Director, Annie Shiel, noted that the U.S. government had “summarily executed over 20 civilians in the Caribbean with no accountability or end in sight.” She said, “These unauthorized strikes violate fundamental principles of human rights and US law and risk escalation toward a conflict that would devastate communities across the region.” This sentiment is growing, but amid the dynamics of a news-busy environment, the issue is not receiving as much media attention as it should.

Implications for the Caribbean will be grave, should this potential conflict situation escalate beyond the killing of alleged drug traffickers—designated terrorists. The concerns raised for the safety of fishermen and occupants of small leisure crafts in the Caribbean are justified. Actions by U.S. military forces place Caribbean citizens in the line of fire. This is an issue on which governments in the region cannot remain silent in their diplomatic exchanges with the Trump administration, and they should not hesitate to raise their concerns publicly. CARICOM governments must speak in unison on this issue and not allow themselves to be divided and used as pawns.

Large amounts of drugs, mostly cocaine, from South America to the U.S. and Europe transit the waters of the northern Caribbean, including in the vicinity of Jamaica. Strikes targeting alleged drug boats in the Southern Caribbean Sea only and not elsewhere in the Caribbean region will confirm the real intentions—it is not to stop drug trafficking but a precursor to regime change in Venezuela.

Ominous signs of war — Regime change in Venezuela

Removing Maduro in Venezuela was at the center of the first Trump administration’s regional policy. The failed experiment to replace Maduro with Juan Guaidó divided CARICOM states in 2019-2020.  They should have learned from those policy mistakes and not repeat them. This time, the implications could be much wider and long-lasting.

The safety of Caribbean fishermen and tourist leisure craft, which are plentiful in the Caribbean Sea, are valid concerns. CARICOM governments cannot straddle the fence in silence. They can express their concerns without aligning with either side. But speaking up is imperative.

The U.S. buildup of military assets in the region are not necessary for drone attacks on small boats but is precursor to much broader military objectives. It signals a large military operation to effect regime change in Venezuela. Ending drug trafficking in the region might be a noble cause but the process of regime change will destabilize Venezuela and the region. It will threaten the safety of the international supply chain. It will also strain geopolitical relationships and Caribbean regional security.

Just before publication of this article, there were widespread reports of a buildup of some 10,000 U.S. troops in the Caribbean.

©The Ward Post / Curtis A. Ward