Photo: Alamy
Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday defended the Trump administration’s recent military strikes on suspected drug-trafficking vessels in South America and the Pacific, dismissing criticism from European allies and arguing that the operations are necessary to defend U.S. national security.
“I don’t think the European Union gets to determine what international law is. They certainly don’t get to determine how the United States defends its national security,” Rubio told reporters outside the G7 Summit in Canada.
“The United States is under attack from organized criminal narco-terrorists in our hemisphere, and the president is responding in defense of our country,” he said.
The U.S. has conducted at least 16 strikes over the past two months, destroying 19 vessels and killing more than 70 people, according to defense officials. The operations have focused on suspected narcotics-smuggling routes in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, part of what the Trump administration describes as a broader campaign to dismantle cartels linked to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
The actions have led to strong criticism from some U.S. allies. On Tuesday, reports surfaced that the United Kingdom had suspended certain intelligence-sharing activities with the United States, citing concerns that the maritime strikes may violate international law. British officials have reportedly sought clarification to ensure they are not complicit in operations they consider unlawful.
Rubio accused European leaders of hypocrisy, saying they rely on U.S. military support to protect their own borders while objecting to America’s use of force in the Western Hemisphere.
“I find it interesting that these countries want us to send and supply, for example, nuclear-capable Tomahawk missiles to defend Europe,” Rubio said. “But when the United States positions aircraft carriers in our own hemisphere, somehow that’s a problem.”
The Trump administration maintains that the operations are lawful, arguing that the United States is engaged in an “armed conflict” with transnational drug cartels that pose a direct threat to national security.
Earlier this month, officials from the Department of War briefed the House Armed Services Committee amid bipartisan calls for more transparency and legal justification for the strikes. Some lawmakers have questioned whether the operations fall under the War Powers Resolution, which limits the president’s ability to use military force without congressional approval.
The White House contends that the strikes do not constitute “hostilities” as defined by the law, and therefore do not require authorization from Congress.