International Law

UN Human Rights Chief: US Strikes on Drug Boats Violate Law

The UN’s human rights chief has criticized recent US military strikes on vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific, alleging these lethal attacks violate international law and constitute extrajudicial killings. According to reports, these strikes have resulted in over 60 fatalities since early September. The UN is calling on the US to cease these actions immediately. Despite the criticism, the US has defended the strikes, with President Trump arguing their necessity to combat drug trafficking and that he has the legal authority to continue them.

Read More

Pentagon Admits to Bombing Boats Without Identifying Occupants

The White House’s legal rationale for airstrikes on boats in Latin American waters has only been shared with select Republicans. Representative Sara Jacobs has stated the strikes are “completely illegal” due to extrajudicial killings and a lack of evidence. The U.S. has conducted over a dozen airstrikes, killing at least 61 people under the pretense of targeting drug smuggling operations and “designated terrorist organizations”, primarily focused on cocaine, which officials claim facilitates fentanyl.

Read More

US Military Kills 14 in Pacific: Outrage Over Alleged Drug Boat Strikes

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced Tuesday that the U.S. military conducted strikes in the eastern Pacific Ocean, targeting four boats suspected of carrying drugs, resulting in 14 fatalities and one survivor. The strikes, which took place off the coast of Colombia, mark the deadliest single day since the Trump administration initiated its campaign against drug trafficking in South American waters. The attacks have escalated tensions in the region, drawing criticism from allies like Mexico, which is conducting a search and rescue operation for the survivor. Furthermore, the actions have fueled speculation that the U.S. aims to remove Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, as the administration accuses him of involvement in narcoterrorism.

Read More

US Kills Three in Second Pacific Strike, Sparks Questions of Legality and Intent

U.S. forces conducted a second strike on alleged drug-carrying vessels in the Pacific Ocean, resulting in three fatalities, as part of an expanding campaign against seaborne drug smuggling. The strikes, which follow a previous incident where two were killed, have been met with condemnation from Colombia, who described the actions as disproportionate and outside international law. The U.S. has defended the strikes, with officials stating that they target “narco-terrorists,” while also suggesting a potential expansion of operations to include land-based targets. These strikes are taking place in the Pacific Ocean, which has a higher rate of drug trafficking, and may be another part of an ongoing military pressure on the Venezuelan government.

Read More

Putin’s G20 Absence: Arrest Fears Keep Him Away from South Africa

Putin to skip the G20 summit in South Africa over arrest fears, it seems. The news is out, and it’s got people talking, no surprise there. Honestly, it’s pretty wild to imagine someone like Putin, who commands so much power and resources, now potentially constrained by the threat of arrest. It’s a stark contrast to the image of a world leader, isn’t it?

The elephant in the room is the International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for Putin’s arrest. This isn’t just a political snag; it’s a legal one. South Africa, as a signatory to the ICC, is theoretically obligated to act on that warrant.… Continue reading

US Strikes in Pacific: Alleged Drug Cartel Vessels or Extrajudicial Murders?

US strikes another alleged drug cartel vessel, expanding attacks to Pacific

It’s hard to ignore the news: another alleged drug cartel vessel has been targeted by the US, this time with attacks extending into the Pacific Ocean. The immediate reaction is a mix of concern and confusion, particularly given the lack of arrests and the potential for civilian casualties. The use of phrases like “multiple homicide” in relation to the incidents is certainly jarring and prompts a fundamental question: are these truly drug traffickers, or is there more to the story? The echoes of the “war on terror” are hard to miss, with the same slippery slope of justifying actions based on vague accusations and the normalization of targeted killings.… Continue reading

US Boat Strikes in Caribbean: 32 Deaths, Critics Decry Extrajudicial Killings

The user’s email notification has been successfully saved, allowing for daily updates on the specified subject. These daily notifications will only be delivered if new matching items are available. Should any issues arise during the saving process, an error message will be displayed. Users should note that these notifications are designed to provide a single, daily update, ensuring timely information delivery.

Read More

Polish Court Frees Ukrainian Suspect in Nord Stream Blasts, Citing “Just War” Defense

A Ukrainian man, identified as Volodymyr Z, is suspected by German prosecutors of involvement in the 2022 Nord Stream gas pipeline attack. The man was seen leaving a courtroom in Warsaw, Poland. The photo suggests a legal proceeding related to the ongoing investigation. Further details about the charges or the specifics of Volodymyr Z’s alleged role have yet to be released publicly.

Read More

US Strike on Trinidadian Man: Family Demands Proof Amidst Concerns of Due Process and Illegality

Family of Trinidadian man believed killed in US strike demands proof of drug trafficking, and frankly, it’s a pretty reasonable request. When a life is taken, especially in what appears to be a military operation, the burden of proof shouldn’t be on the bereaved family to *disprove* accusations. It should be on those who authorized the strike to demonstrate the necessity and legality of their actions. Simply put, if the claim is that the man was involved in drug trafficking and that justified his death, then let’s see the evidence.

The argument that even if he *was* involved in illicit activities, blowing up a boat full of people is wrong, is pretty hard to argue with, even without the legal context.… Continue reading