Today, Explained Trump’s new war on drugs
88 snips
Sep 8, 2025 Samantha Schmidt, Bogotá Bureau Chief for The Washington Post, and Alex Avina, an Associate Professor of Latin American history, delve into the complexities of the Trump administration's war on drugs. They explore the controversial military strike on a Venezuelan drug vessel and the designation of gangs as terrorist organizations, raising questions about the legal and moral implications. The discussion also highlights shifting U.S. policies toward Venezuela, the opioid crisis, and the potential repercussions of militarized strategies on local communities in Latin America.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
U.S. Strike Lacked Public Evidence
- The Trump administration claimed it struck a Venezuelan boat in international waters, killing 11 people alleged to be drug traffickers.
- The government released video and strong statements but provided little public evidence tying the victims to drugs or Tren de Aragua.
Legal Justification Is Contested
- The White House framed the strike as defense of vital U.S. interests and cited the 2001 AUMF as legal cover.
- Legal experts and scholars call that claim tenuous because there is no armed conflict with Venezuela and international law limits such strikes.
Gang Claims Stretch Credibility
- Tren de Aragua is a real Venezuelan gang with regional reach, but U.S. claims it is directed by Maduro lack clear evidence.
- Reporting and secret intelligence suggest the administration overstated links between Maduro and gang-directed attacks on the U.S.
