The U.S. strikes an alleged drug vessel off the coast of Colombia

MEXICO CITY — The United States expanded its military campaign against suspected drug traffickers in Latin America, announcing Wednesday that its forces had struck a boat allegedly trafficking narcotics off Colombia’s Pacific coast.

It is the eighth suspected anti-drug ship bombed by the United States in recent weeks and the first attacked in the Pacific Ocean.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the airstrike killed two people, bringing the death toll from the attacks to 34. He said the ship was “known through our intelligence” to be carrying narcotics, but did not provide proof of those claims.

In a short video clip posted to

The attack was quickly rebuked by US lawmakers who criticized the Trump administration’s campaign of covert strikes.

“Another illegal military strike against a ship, this time in the Pacific, expanding the administration’s murderous campaign to another ocean,” said Senator Adam Schiff, Democrat of California. “Again, there are no details on who was killed or why. »

The latest attack comes amid growing tensions between President Trump and Colombian President Gustavo Petro, and some observers have speculated that it was intended in part to punish Petro for defying Trump.

Petro, who has criticized Trump on issues ranging from migration to the war in Gaza, has in recent days accused the United States of killing innocent civilians and using the strikes as a pretext to try to oust Venezuela’s left-wing authoritarian leader, Nicolás Maduro. He criticized Trump for not doing more to reduce demand for narcotics in the United States, which is the world’s largest consumer of drugs.

After Petro accused the United States of murder, saying an earlier strike had killed a Colombian fisherman in the Caribbean, Trump retorted without evidence that Petro was a “drug trafficker” and warned that the United States would take unilateral action to combat drug trafficking in that region. He also pledged to cut aid to Colombia, which has long been one of the United States’ closest allies in the region, and to impose draconian tariffs on Colombian imports.

Since Trump took office in January, he has gone to great lengths to portray Latin American drug traffickers as a national security threat, officially declaring several cartels terrorist groups and then ordering the Pentagon to use military force against them. Trump, who insists that the United States is engaged in “armed conflict” with the cartels and has the right to defend itself against them, has deployed thousands of American troops and a small armada of ships and warplanes to the Caribbean.

In his social media post, Hegseth compared the suspected drug dealers to Al Qaeda, the terrorist group that orchestrated the September 11, 2001, attacks.

“Just as al-Qaeda waged war against our country, these cartels are waging war against our border and against our people,” Hegseth said. “There will be no refuge or forgiveness, only justice.”

US lawmakers, including members of Trump’s Republican Party, have questioned the legality – as well as the effectiveness – of the strikes.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said this week that he believes the strikes are illegal because only Congress has the power to declare war. The boats traveling some 2,000 miles south of the US border do not pose an imminent threat to Americans, he told journalist Piers Morgan.

“These are outboard boats that would have to refuel 20 times to reach Miami,” he said.

Paul questioned why U.S. officials didn’t first try to stop the boats and arrest the suspected smugglers before carrying out deadly strikes. “We don’t just summarily execute people,” he said. “We present evidence and convict them.”

Paul is part of a bipartisan group of senators considering forcing a vote on legislation that would prevent the United States from engaging in hostilities within or against Venezuela without explicit congressional approval. Passage of the measure is far from possible in a Republican-dominated Senate, but a vote would force senators to take a public stand on Trump’s escalating military campaign.

Schiff, who co-introduced the resolution, said the Senate must assert its authority and “prevent the United States from being drawn — intentionally or accidentally — into a full-blown war in South America.”

Michael Shifter, former president of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington research group, said expanding the military theater to the Pacific could be an effort to address criticism that only a small amount of drugs arriving in the United States transit through the Caribbean.

The Pacific is a major corridor for illicit drugs bound for the United States, particularly cocaine produced in Colombia. Chemical precursors to fentanyl and other synthetic drugs also cross the Pacific, from Asia to Mexico.

“This could be aimed at strengthening their arguments, because they are often asked about this,” Shifter said, referring to the Trump administration. “Most of the drugs come from the Pacific. »

He said expanding strikes could increase fears in Mexico – the main conduit for drugs into the United States. U.S. officials have warned that drone strikes against drug producers or traffickers in Mexico could take place, even as Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said her country would consider any unilateral military action on its territory “an invasion.”

“I’m sure they’re wondering in Mexico, ‘Are we next?’ “Shifter said.

The White House has focused more on Latin America than previous administrations, in part because its foreign policy is led by Marco Rubio, Trump’s secretary of state and national security adviser. Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has a deep interest in the region and has long sought to counter leftists there, particularly the authoritarian leaders of Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba.

Many analysts say the strikes, military buildup and Trump’s authorization for the CIA to carry out covert actions in Venezuela are signs the White House hopes to topple Maduro, who rules one of the world’s most oil-rich countries.

But that contrasts with Trump’s repeated vow not to interfere in the politics of other nations. “Interventionists were intervening in complex societies that they didn’t even understand,” he told an audience in the Middle East earlier this year.

Linthicum and McDonnell reported from Mexico and Ceballos from Washington.