Trump Confirms CIA Ops In Venezuela As US Strikes Kill 27 At Sea: Are These Attacks Legal?

Last Updated:October 16, 2025, 09:26 IST

As Trump confirms CIA covert action inside Venezuela and defends deadly maritime strikes, questions mount over what the law permits and what it doesn’t

US President Donald Trump addresses the Israeli parliament, the Knesset. (AFP)_

Over the past month, the United States has carried out a series of deadly military strikes in the Caribbean Sea, destroying boats the Trump administration says were operated by Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua cartel. Since early September, five vessels have been hit, killing 27 people.

The attacks came as part of what US President Donald Trump has described as a new front in the war on drugs. On Wednesday, he confirmed for the first time that he had authorised CIA covert operations inside Venezuela. “I authorised for two reasons, really," he said at the White House. “No. 1, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America… and the other thing, the drugs, we have a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela, and a lot of the Venezuelan drugs come in through the sea."

Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has repeatedly defended the strikes, calling them necessary to protect US lives. “A drug cartel is no different than al Qaeda, and they will be treated as such," he said. Trump has also referred to the targets as “narcoterrorists," claiming one of the boats carried members of the foreign terrorist organisation he designated as the Tren de Aragua.

What Is Tren de Aragua, And Why Is Venezuela Involved?

Tren de Aragua is one of Venezuela’s most powerful and violent criminal syndicates, operating drug and arms trafficking routes across Latin America. Though based in Venezuela, its network extends into Colombia, the Caribbean, and as far north as the US–Mexico border. The Trump administration this year labelled the group a “foreign terrorist organisation."

Relations between the US and Venezuela have been hostile for years, particularly since Nicolás Maduro took power following Hugo Chávez’s death in 2013. The US government has accused Maduro of overseeing fraudulent elections and supporting narco-trafficking networks. In 2020, the US Justice Department indicted Maduro on drug charges and placed a $15 million bounty on his head.

The recent strikes mark the first time in over three decades that the US has acknowledged military operations in Latin American waters. They have also come without direct provocation or declared war, raising legal and diplomatic alarms.

Did The Boats Pose An Immediate Threat To The US?

The Trump administration insists they did. “Every boatload of any form of drug that poisons the American people is an imminent threat," Hegseth said last week.

But officials have not provided clear evidence that any of the destroyed boats were carrying drugs or were en route to the US. According to CNN, the Pentagon has not released satellite intelligence or cargo details, only grainy videos showing the boats exploding at sea.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted that one vessel was “probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean." In another case, the boat reportedly turned around before being hit. And in perhaps the most controversial incident, Colombian President Gustavo Petro claimed that a destroyed boat was actually Colombian and carrying Colombian citizens. The US has denied this.

Former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) official Mike Vigil warned that intelligence behind such operations is often limited: “You don’t just send a missile and destroy a boat. It is the equivalent of a police officer walking up to a drug trafficker on the street and shooting him," he told The WSJ.

What Are The Legal Grounds For These Strikes?

This is where the controversy deepens. The US Constitution requires congressional approval to declare war, but the Trump administration has neither requested nor received authorisation. Instead, it informed Congress that the US is engaged in a “non-international armed conflict" with drug cartels — a unilateral designation.

Critics say this argument stretches both domestic and international law beyond its limits. Brett Max Kaufman, senior counsel at the ACLU, called the attacks “extrajudicial killings that are flagrantly illegal under both domestic and international law." Writing for MSNBC, he said: “Even if the law of war were to apply (and it absolutely does not), it would prohibit direct attacks against civilians who are not directly participating in the conflict."

According to Geoffrey Corn, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and law of war adviser, “I don’t think there is any way to legitimately characterise a drug ship heading from Venezuela, arguably to Trinidad, as an actual or imminent armed attack against the United States."

Former State Department lawyer Brian Finucane also dismissed the legal basis offered by the administration. “Designation enables sanctions and criminal prosecutions," he told WSJ. “It does not authorise the president to launch missiles."

Do These Strikes Breach International Maritime Law?

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), countries cannot use lethal force against vessels in international waters unless there is an immediate and demonstrable threat. While the US is not a party to the convention, its military has historically operated in a manner consistent with its provisions.

Professor Luke Moffett of Queen’s University Belfast explained: “Force can be used to stop a boat but generally this should be non-lethal measures… [Lethal strikes] must be reasonable and necessary in self-defence where there is an immediate threat of serious injury or loss of life." He concluded that the US actions were “likely unlawful under the law of the sea."

Are These Strikes Part Of A Bigger Operation In The Region?

Yes. According to the BBC, at least four US Navy ships — the USS Lake Erie, USS Gravely, USS Jason Dunham, and USS Fort Lauderdale — have been detected in the Caribbean since late August. Though the US says they are there for anti-narcotics patrols, the expanded military presence has raised concerns in the region.

In a sign of rising tensions, two Venezuelan F-16 jets reportedly flew near a US warship shortly after the first boat strike. The Pentagon called the manoeuvre “highly provocative."

There is also regional memory of past US operations gone wrong — such as the 2001 downing of a civilian plane over Peru during a botched joint anti-drug mission, in which an American missionary and her baby were killed.

So, Is The US Violating The Law?

Legal scholars say yes. Both international and domestic law place strict limits on the use of lethal force, particularly in non-war zones and against non-state actors. “Whatever the government now says in an attempt to cover its tracks does not magically unlock legal authority to use force," Kaufman wrote.

He argued that drug trafficking, even when deadly in its impact, does not amount to “armed violence" under international law. “The president announcing an armed conflict does not make it so… The murder statutes in both US criminal and military law prohibit the use of lethal force against civilians, and no plausible exception applies here."

What Happens Next?

With Trump hinting at land operations and confirming CIA activity inside Venezuela, the legal, political, and diplomatic fallout is far from over. International law experts are urging the United Nations to intervene, while rights groups are calling for congressional oversight and full transparency.

Karishma Jain

Karishma Jain, Chief Sub Editor at News18.com, writes and edits opinion pieces on a variety of subjects, including Indian politics and policy, culture and the arts, technology and social change. Follow her @kar...Read More

Karishma Jain, Chief Sub Editor at News18.com, writes and edits opinion pieces on a variety of subjects, including Indian politics and policy, culture and the arts, technology and social change. Follow her @kar...

Read More

News explainers Trump Confirms CIA Ops In Venezuela As US Strikes Kill 27 At Sea: Are These Attacks Legal?

Read More