Sponsor Advertisement
U.S. Declares "Armed Conflict" with South American Cartels

U.S. Declares "Armed Conflict" with South American Cartels

President Trump has declared that the U.S. is in an "armed conflict" with South American drug cartels, designating them as unlawful combatants. This follows military strikes on trafficking boats and marks a significant shift in foreign policy.

In a groundbreaking move, President Donald Trump has formally declared the United States to be in an "armed conflict" with South American drug cartels. A memo, which was recently obtained by the Associated Press, revealed that the administration has now classified these cartels as unlawful combatants, signifying a pivotal change in U.S. foreign policy.

The declaration follows a series of U.S. military strikes against narco-trafficking boats in the Caribbean, which resulted in the destruction of vessels and narcotics, as well as the death of cartel members involved in smuggling drugs into the United States. "The President determined that the United States is in a non-international armed conflict with these designated terrorist organizations," the memo stated, underscoring the severity of the situation.

President Trump directed the War Department to "conduct operations against them pursuant to the law of armed conflict," as reported by the Conservative Brief. The administration's stance is that drug trafficking into the U.S. represents an attack on American citizens, thereby justifying the use of military force. "The United States has now reached a critical point where we must use force in self-defense and defense of others against the ongoing attacks by these designated terrorist organizations," the memo elaborated.

According to the AP, this move offers new legal grounds for both retrospective and prospective strikes. It frames cartel activities as acts of war, thereby broadening the scope of presidential war powers. However, this shift has not been without its critics. Matthew Waxman, a former official from the Bush administration, voiced his concerns to the AP, stating, "It means the United States can target members of those cartels with lethal force. It means the United States can capture and detain them without trial." Waxman described the change as "a very, very far stretch of international law and a dangerous one."

Defending Trump's decision, the White House issued a statement asserting that the President acted within the law of armed conflict to "protect our country from those trying to bring deadly poison to our shores," and that he is fulfilling his promise to confront the cartels and eliminate these threats.

The military operations conducted last month against Caribbean boats, some reportedly originating from Venezuela, align with a significant increase in American naval forces in the region. The Navy has dispatched eight warships and over 5,000 sailors and Marines in what is described as the largest buildup in years.

Pentagon officials briefed senators on the operations during a classified session, with some lawmakers interpreting the discussions as establishing a new legal framework for U.S. military action. This has raised concerns regarding Congress's role in authorizing the use of force. Additionally, House staffers received separate classified briefings on the strikes. The White House has refrained from providing further public details, directing inquiries back to the administration.

The memo, first reported by The New York Times, now acts as both a rationale for the strikes already executed and a basis for future actions. With this declaration, President Trump has set a precedent for the United States' stance on combating international drug trafficking, marking a significant moment in the nation's foreign policy narrative.

Advertisement

The Flipside: Different Perspectives

Progressive View

While the threat posed by drug cartels is real and concerning, the declaration of an "armed conflict" by President Trump raises significant legal and ethical questions. The expansion of presidential war powers without clear authorization from Congress is a departure from the checks and balances that are fundamental to our democracy. This action risks setting a dangerous precedent for future unilateral military engagements without proper oversight.

The framing of drug trafficking as an act of war is an oversimplification of a complex issue. It fails to address the root causes of drug abuse and addiction within the United States, such as socioeconomic factors and the need for better healthcare and rehabilitation services. A militarized approach to what is fundamentally a public health issue is not only short-sighted but also counterproductive.

Moreover, the potential for collateral damage and the loss of innocent lives cannot be ignored. The use of lethal force against cartel members, who are often entangled in a web of poverty and lack of opportunity, perpetuates a cycle of violence without addressing the underlying conditions that give rise to such organizations.

There is also the matter of international law and human rights. The potential capture and indefinite detention of individuals without trial is a breach of international human rights standards. It is imperative that the United States uphold its commitment to human rights and due process, even in the face of security threats.

In essence, while national security is paramount, it must not come at the expense of civil liberties and human rights. A progressive approach to the issue of drug cartels would involve a combination of targeted law enforcement, international cooperation, and investment in domestic policies that address the demand for drugs and provide support for those affected by addiction.

Conservative View

The decision by President Trump to declare an "armed conflict" with South American drug cartels is a bold and necessary step in protecting American lives and sovereignty. The cartels, which have long been a source of illicit narcotics flowing into our country, have effectively waged war against the United States through their actions. It is the prerogative of the President to ensure the safety of our citizens and to use military force when our nation is under attack.

The use of military force against these cartels is a reflection of a strong foreign policy that prioritizes American security. By designating these groups as unlawful combatants, the administration is sending a clear message that the United States will not tolerate any form of aggression against its people. This is not only about drug trafficking; it's about defending our borders and maintaining our national integrity.

Critics who argue that this move stretches international law fail to recognize the gravity of the threat posed by these cartels. They are not mere criminals; they are organized, armed groups that operate with impunity, often with connections to corrupt government officials. The use of military force is justified under the law of armed conflict, given the scale and impact of their operations.

Furthermore, this decision underscores the importance of a robust military presence and capability. The deployment of naval forces to the Caribbean is a strategic move that enhances our ability to intercept and neutralize threats before they reach our shores. It is a proactive approach to national defense, one that ensures our enemies know we are prepared to take decisive action.

In conclusion, President Trump's declaration is a testament to a conservative approach to foreign policy—one that is unapologetically America-first, strong on defense, and unwavering in its commitment to the safety and prosperity of the American people.

Common Ground

Both conservative and progressive viewpoints recognize the gravity of the threat posed by South American drug cartels and the need to protect American citizens from the harm caused by drug trafficking. There is agreement that the safety and security of the nation are of utmost importance. Furthermore, there is a shared understanding that the issue of drug trafficking has international implications and