In recent weeks, the U.S. military has carried out a series of airstrikes on suspected narcotics smuggling vessels in the Caribbean Sea, near Venezuela and Colombia. The operations mark a significant escalation in U.S. counter-narcotics efforts at sea.
According to the administration, the targets were “narcoterrorist” boats affiliated with designated foreign terrorist organizations and involved in drug trafficking. These missions have sparked interest, support, and scrutiny — particularly due to their scale, speed, and lethal nature.
The campaign began in early September 2025. In the first publicly confirmed operation on September 2, a U.S. aircraft destroyed a small vessel in international waters off Venezuela’s coast, reportedly killing 11 people. Since then, at least seven strikes have taken place, according to U.S. officials, targeting similar boats in open waters. The attacks have been carried out by drones or fixed-wing aircraft, with high-resolution video released by the White House showing direct hits on the targets.
President Trump said that these operations are part of a broader maritime effort to dismantle drug smuggling routes. “Under my standing authorities as Commander-in-Chief, I authorized these strikes to prevent deadly narcotics from reaching our shores,” he said in a statement posted alongside footage of one attack.
The targets are believed to be operated by criminal groups including Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan organization the which U.S. designated a terrorist group earlier this year. By assigning this label, the administration says it has legal grounds to use military force against the vessels of this terrorist group in international waters.
The U.S. has significantly increased its military presence in the Caribbean since the declaration of this new counter-narcotics stance. Naval destroyers, surveillance planes, amphibious ships, and thousands of personnel have all been deployed to intercept suspected trafficking operations.
Officials say that these are precision strikes, based on real-time surveillance and intelligence. Each mission has targeted boats believed to be actively engaged in drug smuggling operations. The administration says that typical interdiction — boarding the boats and seizing drugs and people — is no longer enough against sophisticated cartels operating with military-grade tactics and equipment.
President Trump has also linked the campaign to efforts to dismantle cross-border criminal networks that may be funneling drugs into the U.S. via land and sea. “Every boat we stop is a threat neutralized,” Trump said. In one post, he claimed that each vessel could carry enough fentanyl or cocaine to endanger an estimated tens of thousands of American lives.
The focus on waters near Venezuela is part of a broader effort to put pressure on the Maduro government, which U.S. officials have long accused of tolerating or supporting narco-trafficking operations. The Trump administration has described Venezuela’s role in global drug networks as a key national security concern and argues that these actions are defensive and preemptive.
Some of the vessels reportedly came from coastal areas with known drug cartel activity. In at least one case, survivors were recovered and taken into custody, though most of the attacks have resulted in total destruction of the boats with no survivors.
The strikes have prompted strong responses abroad. Venezuela’s government has condemned the operations, calling them violations of sovereignty, though the U.S. insists all strikes occurred in international waters. Tensions with Colombia flared after President Gustavo Petro claimed that one vessel hit in mid-October contained Colombian nationals, including one allegedly uninvolved in drug trafficking. The U.S. rejected that claim, maintaining the strike was justified by actionable intelligence.
Several other governments have called for clarification of the U.S.’s targeting protocols, and their keeping to international maritime law.
In the U.S., reactions have predictably followed political lines. Supporters of the operations say they represent a firm stance on international drug trafficking and show a clear willingness to act decisively. Critics have raised a cry about the transparency and legal justification of such an approach, particularly in the designation of drug networks as terrorist groups, and the lack of due process (fair trial in a court of law) being given to the targeted people.
A congressional resolution to limit further strikes failed to pass the Senate, and the White House repeated that it believes the president’s constitutional authority as commander-in-chief is enough to authorize continued action.