United Nations experts on Sept. 1 issued a statement [6] demanding an end to the unlawful attacks and killings carried out [7] by the United States military on suspected drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean and Pacific. The experts indicated that these attacks—which began a year ago and resumed [8] in August after a months-long hiatus—were not justifiable under international humanitarian law.
The experts stated: "These systematic killings gravely violate the fundamental obligation to respect the right to life. International law does not permit governments to simply murder alleged criminals at sea… Just as the police cannot summarily execute people on the street in United States territory."
The campaign [10], dubbed Operation Southern Spear [11] by the US, began on Sept. 2, 2025 when US military struck a small boat in the Caribbean, killing all of those on board to "eliminate the threat" they posed. The US Department of Defense conveyed in a report [12] to Congress at the end of March that the purpose of the operation was to disrupt the flow of narcotics from drug cartels that have been marked as designated terrorist organizations (DTOs) through lethal airstrikes. In the year since the first attack, roughly 227 individuals have been killed in the strikes, none of whom were formally charged with a crime or had been previously detained.
In its report, the Department of Defense conceded that Congress had not authorized the use of military force [13] against the alleged traffickers, but indicated that US law allows the president to take military action without congressional approval in light of a national emergency [14] "created by attack upon the United States." This criteria was allegedly satisfied upon US President Trump's issuance of a Jan. 20, 2025 executive order [15] (EO) proclaiming that activity of "transnational criminal organizations" constitutes "insurgency and asymmetric warfare" against the US.
The UN experts completely rejected the US government's justifications of the attacks, finding that drug cartels and gangs are not carrying out armed attacks against the United States, and therefore there is no right of self-defense under Article 51 [16] of the Charter of the United Nations.
Since cartels fall outside the scope of Non-International Armed Conflict [17], the laws of war do not apply and cannot be used to justify deadly military intervention, the experts stated. They also asserted that these unilateral attacks were unlawful under provisions of international law. International human rights law [18] provides that lethal force may only be used for self-defense, if strictly necessary to prevent an imminent threat to life, while the international law of the sea [19] requires intervention by law enforcement rather than military force to combat trafficking.
Human rights group Amnesty International has also condemned [20] the US attacks, calling the strikes illegal and criticizing US lawmakers for their lack of accountability.
UN special rapporteurs have indicated [21] that they were in contact with the US government over the legal issues presented by the attacks.
From JURIST [22], Sept. 1. Used with permission. Internal links added.
