Secretary Rubio Defends Military Strike on Narco-Terrorists, Signals More Attacks to Come

Washington, D.C. – September 4, 2025 – U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has issued a sharp rebuke to Democratic critics who have questioned the legality and morality of a recent U.S. military strike against alleged members of Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua cartel. The operation, a “kinetic strike” conducted in international waters in the southern Caribbean, resulted in the deaths of 11 individuals described by President Donald Trump as “narcoterrorists.” Rubio, speaking to reporters in Mexico City on September 3, 2025, defended the strike as a necessary escalation in the fight against drug cartels, accusing Democrats of undermining national security by sympathizing with criminal networks. He warned that more targeted attacks are forthcoming, signaling a bold new phase in the Trump administration’s war on narco-terrorism.

The Strike and Its Context

On September 2, 2025, the U.S. military conducted a precision strike against a vessel departing from Venezuela, which officials claim was carrying illegal narcotics bound for the United States. President Trump announced the operation in a press conference, later sharing a video on Truth Social that appeared to show a speedboat exploding in flames. The strike, which killed 11 alleged members of the Tren de Aragua cartel, marked the first known operation since the Trump administration’s recent deployment of warships to the southern Caribbean, including three guided-missile destroyers and around 4,000 military personnel. The Pentagon confirmed the strike but provided limited details, citing operational security.

The operation stems from a directive signed by President Trump in July 2025, authorizing the Pentagon to use military force against Latin American drug cartels designated as foreign terrorist organizations. In February 2025, the State Department, under Rubio’s leadership, labeled several groups, including Tren de Aragua, Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel, and El Salvador’s MS-13, as terrorist entities. This designation allows the U.S. to leverage intelligence agencies and the Department of Defense (DoD) to target these groups, treating them as national security threats rather than traditional criminal organizations.

Rubio’s Defense and Criticism of Democrats

Rubio, who has long advocated for a hardline stance against Latin American cartels, dismissed Democratic criticisms of the strike as misguided and detrimental to U.S. interests. Speaking in Mexico City, where he was negotiating counter-narcotics agreements, Rubio argued that traditional law enforcement methods, such as interdiction and seizure, are ineffective against cartels. “These drug cartels know they’re going to lose 2% of their cargo—they bake it into their economics,” Rubio said. “What will stop them is when you blow them up or get rid of them.”

He accused Democrats of “defending narco-terrorists” and undermining national security by questioning the strike’s legality under international law. Critics, including legal experts cited by the BBC, argue that the strike may violate Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force except in self-defense or with UN authorization. Professor Michael Becker of Trinity College Dublin told BBC Verify that labeling the targets as “narco-terrorists” does not make them lawful military targets, as the U.S. is not engaged in an armed conflict with Venezuela or Tren de Aragua.

Rubio countered that the cartels are not merely criminal enterprises but “armed terrorist organizations” that control territory, destabilize regions, and flood American communities with deadly drugs like fentanyl. “The United States has long-established intelligence that allows us to interdict and stop drug boats. And we did it!” he said, emphasizing the precision of the operation. He added, “The President of the United States is going to wage war on narco-terrorist organizations,” signaling that the strike was not a one-off event.

Political and International Reactions

The strike has heightened tensions between the U.S. and Venezuela, with President Nicolás Maduro accusing the Trump administration of seeking regime change. Maduro, who has been indicted in the U.S. for narco-terrorism and faces a $50 million bounty for his arrest, called the U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean “an extravagant, unjustifiable, immoral, and absolutely criminal threat.” In response, Venezuela has mobilized over four million militia troops and deployed forces along its coast and border with Colombia.

Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, have criticized the strike as a dangerous escalation. Schumer argued that the use of military force against cartels risks broader regional instability and called for greater transparency regarding the legal authority for the operation. The Pentagon has declined to release its legal rationale, and Rubio deflected questions about the White House counsel’s role, stating, “Suffice it to say that all of those steps were taken in advance.”

Public sentiment on platforms like X reflects polarized views. Some users praise the strike as a necessary deterrent, with one post stating, “Finally, a president taking action against the cartels poisoning our streets!” Others express skepticism, questioning the lack of evidence that the vessel was carrying drugs and suggesting the operation may be a pretext for broader geopolitical goals.

The Broader Strategy

The Trump administration’s aggressive stance on cartels is part of a multifaceted approach to combat drug trafficking. In addition to military strikes, the administration has imposed tariffs on countries like Canada, China, and Mexico for failing to curb fentanyl smuggling and increased the bounty for Maduro’s arrest. The deployment of naval assets, including P-8 spy planes and an attack submarine, underscores the scale of the operation.

Rubio emphasized that the cartels’ use of advanced weaponry, including drones and rocket-propelled grenades, justifies treating them as terrorist organizations. “These groups are not just drug traffickers; they’re a threat to international security,” he said. He also highlighted the destabilizing impact of cartels on the Caribbean and Latin America, noting that drugs from Venezuela often pass through Puerto Rico en route to the U.S. mainland.

Looking Ahead

Rubio’s warning that “strikes like these will happen again” suggests that the U.S. is embarking on a sustained military campaign against narco-terrorists. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth echoed this sentiment, stating on Fox News, “Anyone else trafficking in those waters who we know is a designated narco-terrorist will face the same fate.” The administration’s approach has drawn cautious support from some Republican allies, with Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.) suggesting the vessel may also be linked to the Cartel of the Suns, allegedly led by Maduro.

As the U.S. ramps up its military presence in the Caribbean, questions remain about the long-term implications of this strategy. Critics warn of potential violations of international law and the risk of escalating tensions with Venezuela and its allies, including Russia and China. For now, Rubio’s unapologetic defense of the strike and promise of further action signal a new, aggressive chapter in the fight against drug cartels, with far-reaching consequences for U.S. foreign policy and regional stability.