By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Colombian President Gustavo Petro has accused the US of “murder” and violating Colombian sovereignty after a US strike on a boat in Colombian waters, resulting in the death of a fisherman. The incident, which occurred in September, allegedly involved a boat that was adrift with a distress signal up due to engine failure. Petro has demanded explanations from the US government, while former US President Donald Trump claims the strikes target drug-carrying vessels. This attack is at least the sixth US strike on ships in the Caribbean Sea in recent weeks, drawing criticism from UN human rights experts who have labeled the attacks “extrajudicial executions”.
Read the original article here
Colombia accusing the US of “murder” after a strike on a boat – now that’s a headline that grabs your attention. It’s the kind of situation that makes you stop and think, right? We’re talking about a serious accusation, one that involves a sovereign nation directly pointing the finger at another, essentially saying, “You committed murder.” And this isn’t some backroom deal; it’s playing out in the public eye, amplified by social media and international news outlets.
The crux of the matter revolves around a US strike on a boat in Colombian waters. According to Colombian President Gustavo Petro, the boat was adrift, signaling distress due to an engine failure, when it was hit. He’s calling for explanations from the US government, and rightly so. The US, on the other hand, is defending these actions, framing them as part of a crackdown on drug trafficking, and President Trump himself has been vocal, citing a recent strike on a “drug-carrying submarine” and claiming it was loaded with illegal narcotics. But here’s the kicker: there’s no evidence being provided.
This isn’t an isolated incident. Reports indicate this is at least the sixth US strike on ships in the Caribbean Sea in recent weeks. And before the current situation, previous strikes had resulted in multiple deaths. Think about that: multiple confirmed deaths. And we’re not talking about a battlefield; we’re talking about international waters, or, in this case, even Colombian territorial waters. It brings up questions of sovereignty and the rules of engagement. If you are going to take the law into your own hands on the high seas, then you need to provide evidence, and you need to arrest those committing alleged crimes and give them a trial.
The use of the word “murder” isn’t a casual choice here; it’s a direct accusation. The Columbian President is calling out the death of fisherman Alejandro Carranza, who, according to Petro, had no ties to the drug trade. But, the US is not providing the evidence, nor the process, to confirm the claims of the drug trades. The lack of due process, the quickness of the strikes, and the lack of transparency raise serious questions. This is where things get really complicated. Where is the evidence? Where is the investigation? Where is the right to a fair trial? When you have that level of power, as a military organization, and you’re making these sorts of decisions on who lives and dies without any apparent oversight, that’s not justice, that’s something else entirely.
It’s easy to see why people are drawing comparisons to other situations where governments have been accused of extrajudicial killings or acting outside international norms. The phrase “extrajudicial executions,” as used by UN-appointed human rights experts to describe the strikes, carries significant weight.
And the narrative doesn’t stop there. President Trump, defending the attacks, has ramped up the rhetoric against Venezuela, claiming it’s sending drugs to the US, and he’s even authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations in the country. This creates an even more unstable situation. This feels like the prelude to escalation. The rhetoric and the actions seem to be building up to something much bigger.
The use of “narco-subs” adds another layer of complexity. These homemade vessels, often used to transport drugs, are relatively easy to construct and often sunk after delivery. So they are very hard to track, as well as very easy to sink with no evidence. The fact that the US has been intercepting some of these submarines doesn’t change the underlying ethical and legal questions.
The accusations and counter-accusations are flying, but the core issue remains: a sovereign nation is accusing another of murder and violating its sovereignty. The lack of transparency, the absence of due process, and the increasing use of force are all cause for serious concern. It raises questions about international relations, the rule of law, and the lengths to which a country is willing to go in its fight against drug trafficking. It’s a situation that demands thorough investigation, and, most importantly, accountability.