MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
Was a U.S. strike on a boat in the Caribbean, which President Trump said killed 11 Venezuelan narco-terrorists, legal? In other words, was it consistent with international and maritime law? On Tuesday, the president announced that U.S. forces had destroyed the vessel and shared footage of the strike on Truth Social.
The administration says the boat was in international waters. But beyond this, the administration has not provided evidence to support his claims about what the boat and the people on it were up to. We've called Brian Finucane to talk more about this. He's a national security lawyer with the International Crisis Group, which is an organization focused on conflict resolution. Good morning, Mr. Finucane. Thanks for joining us.
BRIAN FINUCANE: Good morning.
MARTIN: First, I'd just like to ask broadly, when a president has legal authority to use this kind of military force? As briefly as you can.
FINUCANE: Well, in this situation, Congress, which has the bulk of the war powers in the Constitution, did not authorize the operation. The White House would have to therefore rely solely on Article 2 of the Constitution, but it has not explained how the Constitution authorizes this attack earlier this week.
MARTIN: What legal issues does this raise for you as a person with expertise in this area?
FINUCANE: Well, when you see the premeditated killing of another person outside of an armed conflict, there's a term for that, and that term is murder. The administration has not established that the United States is in an armed conflict with Tren de Aragua or any other criminal entity in Latin America, has not established that this operation is governed by the law of war and has not established that the targets of this operation, whether the passengers on the boat or the cargo on the boat, were lawful targets under the law of war.
MARTIN: So you mentioned Tren de Aragua. You said that because the president has labeled the Tren de Aragua gang as a foreign terrorist organization, he says that they were behind this boat and whatever it was doing. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that that's true. Does that give him latitude to use force on a boat like this?
FINUCANE: No. Designating an entity as a foreign terrorist organization neither confirms - confers authority under U.S. law to use military force, nor does it magically transfer or transform that entity into a lawful military target.
MARTIN: So, let's say that, for the sake of argument, that this group, this boat, was transporting substances that would be illegal in the United States, let's say, an illegal drug, illegal for consumer use or whatever it was. So, is the trafficking of an illegal consumer product a capital offense? Would that justify military force?
FINUCANE: No. That's why we have law enforcement, and that's why we have well established procedures for the Coast Guard and the Navy to conduct maritime interdiction operations, take people into custody and prosecute them through the criminal justice system as appropriate. This is not an appropriate use of lethal military force in the first instance.
The administration is trying to frame its confrontation with criminal entities in Latin America as a new war on terror, but that's completely inappropriate use of that both rhetorical framework and more importantly, the legal frameworks used for lethal force.
MARTIN: So the administration argues that the people on this boat were endangering American lives by bringing this substance here or possibly engaging in some other activities. Does that, in your view, justify this action?
FINUCANE: Just to reiterate, they have made allegations, but they have not provided any information to substantiate these claims. But even if they did, it would not provide a sufficient basis for the use of lethal force in the first instance.
MARTIN: That is Brian Finucane. He's a senior advisor at the International Crisis Group, and he's a national security lawyer. Mr. Finucane, thanks so much for sharing these insights with us.
FINUCANE: Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
