The Myth of Armed Conflict
By Mark M. Bello
Each news alert reads like a Netflix script: a U.S. drone or fighter jet tracks a “narco-boat” somewhere off the coast of Venezuela or Colombia. A brief pursuit ensues, a missile strike, and, sometimes, a second missile — aimed not at combatants but at survivors clinging to the wreckage.
The Pentagon calls these counter-narcotics operations. Human-rights Experts call them something else entirely: Extrajudicial killings. Potential war crimes. A repudiation of international law.
The truth?
These deadly boat strikes may represent the most legally dubious military practices the United States has carried out in decades. Not surprisingly, the world is starting to notice.
For the U.S. government to treat these boat strikes as lawful under the law of armed conflict (LOAC), there must be… well… an actual armed conflict.
Drug traffickers — even heavily armed ones — do not meet the legal criteria for an “organized armed group” engaged in sustained hostilities. They’re criminals, not combatants. That distinction matters because:
- Without an armed conflict, the LOAC does not apply.
- The government cannot lawfully kill on sight.
- The legal framework defaults to international human-rights law, not war law.
Under human-rights law, lethal force is justified only to prevent an imminent threat to life — not to destroy vessels, punish trafficking, or demonstrate toughness.
If the targeted individuals had no immediate lethal intent toward the United States, the legality collapses before we even reach the question of proportionality.
Killing Survivors Is Absolutely Illegal
Even if we charitably assume an armed conflict (we shouldn’t), another problem emerges:
You cannot kill people who are rendered helpless!
Under international humanitarian law:
- A person who is wounded, detained, or shipwrecked is considered hors de combat.
- It is unlawful to attack anyone in that condition.
- A follow-up strike on survivors constitutes a war crime.
If reports are accurate, launching a second missile at individuals floating in the water is an unambiguous legal violation. It is explicit and severe. These rules exist for a reason. Humanity does not disappear at sea.
Even Under a U.S. Domestic “Self-Defense” Theory, the Strikes Struggle Legally
The Trump administration has hinted at a theory of anticipatory self-defense against cartels. But here’s the problem with that argument:
Self-defense cannot justify killing unless:
- The threat is imminent,
- The target has the capacity to carry out the threat, and
- Nonlethal alternatives are unavailable.
Drug traffickers moving contraband in remote waters do not present an imminent threat to the United States homeland. Nor does their attempted escape justify lethal force. If the U.S. claims self-defense, it faces a dilemma:
- Either these are criminals — in which case they must be arrested, not executed,
- or they are enemy combatants — in which case survivors cannot be targeted.
The U.S. cannot choose the legal framework moment by moment to justify a missile.
The Problem of Classification: Crime Control vs. War
Every legal analysis converges on the same truth:
These strikes look less like ‘war’ and more like ‘death penalty by drone’ for suspected criminals. But the law is clear:
- Criminal law does not permit lethal force as a first resort.
- Human-rights law does not permit execution without due process.
- Maritime law demands that shipwrecked persons be rescued, not obliterated.
If these individuals had been apprehended, they would have been charged in court, not shot in the water. The legal system exists for a reason — to prevent governments from doing exactly what is happening now.
Why It Matters: Precedent, Power, and the Erosion of Norms
Deadly strikes in international waters do more than kill suspected traffickers. They set a precedent. If the U.S. can kill on the high seas without due process,other nations may claim the same right.
Imagine:
- China, announcing it blew up “pirate vessels” in the South China Sea.
- Russia, targeting “smuggling boats” near the Baltic.
- Iran, striking “terrorist vessels” in the Persian Gulf.
International law survives only if major powers obey it even when it’s inconvenient. When the world’s leading democracy starts operating like a vigilante at sea, the rule of law erodes everywhere.
A Sobering Reality: This Looks Unlawful
When you strip away politics, posturing, and press releases, the legal reasoning is straightforward:
No armed conflict
No imminent threat
No due process
No justification for lethal force
Survivors were allegedly targeted
Taken together, these facts make a compelling case that deadly boat strikes in South American waters violate:
- International human-rights law
- Maritime conventions
- Potentially customary international law on the treatment of persons in distress
This isn’t complicated, and it isn’t partisan. It’s a basic question of legality and morality. When a government fires a missile at people floating in the ocean, something fundamental has broken.
If We Allow This, What Won’t We Allow?
Lethal force without due process is the hallmark of authoritarianism. The United States government should know better. Once you normalize extrajudicial killing in foreign waters,
- accountability fades,
- transparency disappears,
- empathy vanishes,
- and the rule of law becomes optional.
We can debate drug policy, military strategy, or foreign affairs. But the idea that this president — or any president — can order summary executions at sea should terrify every one of us. If this isn’t a violation of international law, the phrase no longer means anything.
That’s my look at the law. What do you think?
For many years, Bob Gatty worked as a writer, editor, and communications consultant, based on the Washington, DC area with a focus on government and politics. He began at The Pittsburgh Courier, an African American weekly, covering crime and the courts. His salary was $55 per week before moving on to two local Pennsylvania dailies. At age 24, he began reporting for United Press International covering state politics in Pennsylvania and then New Jersey, where he was UPI’s state capitol bureau in Trenton.
Tempted by the allure of Washington, DC and big-time politics, at age 29 Bob became press secretary and chief of staff for two Congressmen – first Republican Edwin B. Forsythe, and then Democrat James J. Florio, who later became governor of New Jersey and until his recent death was a frequent podcast guest and co-host of Bob’s NFN Radio News podcast (now called Lean to the Left).
After seven years on Capitol Hill, Bob opened a communications business in Washington, first providing political media consulting to candidates and then freelance Washington coverage for business and trade magazines, plus creative communications services for trade and professional associations, including social media. This work involved articles and analyses of key governmental developments affecting businesses, such as the food and Health industries, retailing, and the environment.
His work as a communications consultant to trade and professional associations included launching and editing association publications, providing website content and social media assistance, and covering conferences and conventions.
Bob retired from G-Net Strategic Communications in 2016 and moved to Myrtle Beach, SC, where he launched his blog site, first called Not Fake News, now known as Lean to the Left.
Hijacked Nation
In August, 2020, Bob and co-author Chris Waldron, one of Lean to the Left's most loyal and prolific contributor, published "Hijacked Nation-Donald Trump's Attack on America's Greatness," a two-volume compilation of blogs regarding Trump's presidency and the consequences for our nation. A followup volume was published by Luna Global Media in September 2024. It is available at https://amzn.to/4ePrTF7 .
In all three volumes, blogs from Not Fake News and Lean to the Left create a virtual play-by-play of key actions of the Trump administration and Congress. For more information, please visit https://leantotheleft.net/books/, and visit Bob's Author's Page on Amazon, https://www.amazon.com/stores/Bob-Gatty/author/B08C7HWXZ5?ref=ap_rdr&isDramIntegrated=true&shoppingPortalEnabled=true&ccs_id=4e603563-7251-4074-b54d-40800c4ce40a.
The Lean to the Left Podcast
The Lean to the Left podcast provides commentary and interviews with newsmakers and others with interesting stories to tell. Video and audio podcasts stream twice weekly on major channels. More info at https://podcast.leantotheleft.net.
The Lean to the Left YouTube Channel
You'll find all of the audio tracks for the Lean to the Left Podcast here plus original videos, including complete video versions of each podcast.
https://www.youtube.com/@LeantotheLeft.
