A "war" with Venezuela?

Last Friday (October 3), the US Navy attacked and blew up an alleged drug smuggling boat in international waters in the Caribbean.  Four people were killed.  Colombian President Gustavo Pedro has stated the boat was Colombian and that those killed were Colombians.  Several major newspapers stated that members of the Trump administration have confirmed that the four people killed were Colombian. Three other similar incidents occurred in the month of September killing 17 people, all of whom were Venezuelan.  The Trump administration has yet to provide any evidence to support its claim that the boats belonged to the Tren de Agua Venezuelan drug cartel and that those who were killed were members of the cartel.  Of course, all the evidence and people who could counter the Trump administration claims are at the bottom of the Caribbean.

For decades, the United States has relied on the Coast Guard’s legal authorities, backed by Navy support, to interdict drug shipments in national and international waters.  Those actions follow a pattern: warning shots, disabling fire, boarding, seizure of evidence, and arrest.  Suspects face extradition and trial in US courts.  These precision naval strikes which destroy the boat and kill all people on board are a complete departure from that process.  Instead of a law enforcement interdiction, the US military conducted an operation that I believe should be understood as executing suspected criminals without trial or due process.  Of course, the Trump administration is very good at not providing due process to brown and black people who speak Spanish. I also note that most cocaine comes into the United States from the Pacific not the Caribbean.

It is important to note that the Trump administration has moved ten F-35 jets to Puerto Rico and now has eight warships (about 5,000 sailors and marines) off the coast of Venezuela.  On Monday (October 6) of this week, Trump told his envoy Richard Grenell to stop all diplomatic outreach efforts with Venezuela.  Grenel had secured the release of American prisoners in Venezuela in January and has a working relationship with President Maduro of Venezuela.  This has possibly paved the way for US military action against Venezuela as Trump has publicly threatened on several occasions to take direct action to remove Maduro from office.  US officials have acknowledged multiple plans for US intervention or war in Venezuela.  What is next?  Vamos a ver.

Since 9/11, US presidents have relied on the 2001 Authorization of Use of Military Force Act (AUMF) when carrying out military strikes against groups responsible for attacks against the United States.  The AUMF was directed clearly at al Qaeda and its splinter groups, such as ISIS, not at drug cartels from Latin America such as Tren de Agua.  Perhaps this is the primary reason the State Department has designated it as a foreign terrorist organization so it can somehow be “covered” by actions under the AUMF.  Trump’s politicized Department of Justice argued that his actions are legal under his authority to counter the threat of drug cartels who are “invading” the United States.  Legal scholars across the country reject the argument that the US is being “invaded” by drug cartels.  A memo provided to members of Congress from Trump's Department of Defense argued that this gives Trump “open-ended war powers.”  I would also point out that only Congress can declare war and that this is supported by the 1973 War Powers Act.  In the end, Trump acted and apparently traditional actions by the Coast Guard and the constitutional checks and balances are no longer in effect.