The US military killed two people on a boat in the eastern Pacific on Sunday, and once again offered the American public no evidence that the vessel was carrying drugs — or any explanation of what vital US interest justified lethal force thousands of miles from American shores.
US Southern Command announced the strike Monday, calling it a strike on a "low-profile vessel operating along established narcotrafficking routes." General Francis Donovan declared the command "committed to imposing total systemic friction on narco-terrorists" and vowed to prevent their "deadly poison" from reaching American communities. But as with most of the military's statements in this nearly year-long campaign, SOUTHCOM provided no proof the boat was ferrying narcotics. The Guardian noted that Southern Command did not provide evidence that the vessel was ferrying drugs. Al Jazeera reported the same gap, noting the Trump administration "has not provided definitive evidence" for any of its targeting claims across the entire operation.
This is strike number 67. The death toll now stands at 223 people killed since the campaign began last September, according to The Guardian's tally; Al Jazeera, citing AFP, put the figure at "more than 200." The Pentagon has also left survivors to drown. According to data compiled from SOUTHCOM's own social media posts, the strikes have produced 28 known survivors. Only three have ever been rescued. The rest were abandoned at sea. The very first strike in September 2025 left two survivors in the water. The military then struck the boat a second time, killing them both. When that became public, legal scholars said a second strike on survivors would be illegal under any circumstance. The White House insisted it was done "in self-defense."
President Trump has declared the US is in "armed conflict" with Latin American cartels and framed the bombings as necessary to stop fatal overdoses. But critics point out the obvious: fentanyl killing Americans is typically trafficked over land from Mexico, produced with chemicals imported from China and India. Blowing up boats in the open ocean does nothing to stop that supply chain.
The Pentagon's inspector general said in May it would review whether the military followed standard targeting procedures. But Al Jazeera noted the evaluation will not examine the legal authority behind the strikes — which is the only question that actually matters.
Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said during a visit to Panama this month that Colombia, Guatemala, and Honduras agreed to allow US joint military operations against criminal groups on their soil. Guatemala immediately denied reaching any such deal. Ecuador began similar operations in March. What American taxpayers will fund, what American troops will risk, and where the exit ramp sits — none of that has been explained.
The US military is waging a lethal campaign on the open ocean, killing people it calls narcoterrorists without showing the evidence, abandoning survivors to die, and now preparing to expand onto land across multiple sovereign nations. The inspector general won't even examine whether the government has the legal authority to do any of it. The only question left is who in Washington plans to ask it.
