(Washington, DC, September 18, 2025) – Human Rights Watch has condemned recent U.S. military strikes against two boats allegedly transporting drug traffickers, which the Trump administration claims resulted in the deaths of at least 14 individuals, labeling these actions as unlawful extrajudicial killings. This troubling development arises amid the administration’s push for expanded authority to target what they term “narco-terrorists,” raising serious concerns about potential human rights violations.
“U.S. officials cannot summarily kill individuals based solely on accusations of drug smuggling,” stated Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch. “The issue of narcotics entering the United States does not constitute an armed conflict, and U.S. officials cannot evade their human rights obligations by pretending it does.”
On September 2, 2025, President Donald Trump announced that U.S. military forces had struck a speedboat originating from Venezuela in international waters, claiming to have killed 11 individuals associated with Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan organized crime group recognized by the U.S. State Department as a foreign terrorist organization. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the vessel as being operated by a “narco-terrorist organization” involved in transporting drugs into the United States.
Following the attack, Trump shared aerial footage of the explosion on Truth Social, which Human Rights Watch analyzed and confirmed showed at least six people on board at the time of the strike. However, the exact location and timing of the attack remain unverified. Reports from the New York Times indicated that a special operations aircraft, either an attack helicopter or an MQ-9 Reaper drone, executed the operation.
In a subsequent announcement on September 15, Trump revealed that U.S. forces had conducted a second attack on another Venezuelan boat in international waters, resulting in the deaths of three men. Video footage displayed the boat idling with at least two figures on board before an explosion engulfed it. Human Rights Watch could not confirm the specifics of this second strike. Trump’s message accompanying this announcement warned, “BE WARNED — IF YOU ARE TRANSPORTING DRUGS THAT CAN KILL AMERICANS, WE ARE HUNTING YOU!”
Human Rights Watch has asserted that the U.S. military’s lethal actions against suspected drug traffickers in these incidents breach international human rights laws. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the United States, safeguards the right to life. According to human rights law, officials involved in law enforcement, including military personnel, are required to minimize harm and prioritize the preservation of human life. Lethal force may only be employed when absolutely necessary to counter an imminent threat of death or serious injury.
In these two strikes, U.S. authorities failed to take measures to minimize harm and have not demonstrated that the individuals aboard the vessels posed any immediate threat to life. Non-lethal alternatives, such as interdiction or arrest, were not pursued. Instead, administration officials have characterized the strikes in a manner that suggests they are unlawful targeted killings. The United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial summary or arbitrary executions, along with two other UN human rights experts, has publicly condemned both strikes as extrajudicial executions.
International humanitarian law, which governs the conduct of hostilities during armed conflicts, does not apply in this context, as the U.S. is not engaged in an armed conflict with Venezuela or the alleged criminal groups involved. Human Rights Watch has called on foreign governments to publicly and privately condemn these attacks.
These strikes occur in the larger context of the Trump administration’s dismantling of internal legal oversight mechanisms within the U.S. military. Human Rights Watch has reported that essential protections, which are meant to ensure compliance with international law, have been severely weakened.
Earlier this year, the administration removed senior judge advocate general officers—military lawyers responsible for reviewing the legality of military operations—from critical roles in decision-making. Additionally, in February, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth signed a directive that significantly eased oversight of airstrikes and special operations raids, granting commanders greater freedom to authorize lethal force without the rigorous legal vetting that was previously required. This decline in safeguards heightens the risk of unlawful attacks and undermines the military’s ability to meet its obligations under both international humanitarian and human rights law.
“The U.S. military must immediately cease any plans for future unlawful strikes and ensure that all military operations conform to international human rights and humanitarian law,” Yager asserted. “Congress should conduct a prompt and transparent investigation into the decision-making processes behind these attacks, including the legal rationale and chain of command involved.”
