Former Philippine President Duterte was forced to face trial in the ICC for using the pretext of a drug war for his murder campaign. 

Trump’s Illegal Boat Strikes Echo
Duterte’s “Drug War” Mass Killings
Marjorie Cohn / LAProgressive

(December 6, 2025) — Public outrage is mounting over the Trump administration’s September 2 “double tap” strike, in which the U.S. military bombed a small boat for a second time to kill the survivors of a first strike. This particular strike has garnered significant attention due to its clear violation of U.S. and international law because shipwrecked sailors should never be targeted. But it is crucial to note that Donald Trump’s entire bombing operation against vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific is illegal as well.

Trump’s campaign of extrajudicial violence under the pretext of fighting a “drug war” is reminiscent of the policies of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who is currently in custody in the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Netherlands, awaiting trial for murdering alleged drug dealers and users. Like Duterte, Trump’s bombing campaign should be considered a crime against humanity.

Trump Issued Orders to Bomb Alleged Drug Smugglers on Small Boats

On September 2, Trump proudly posted a video on Truth Social depicting the first of his murderous bombings of alleged drug traffickers on small boats in international waters. Trump stated he had personally ordered the operation:

Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. TDA is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, operating under the control of Nicolas Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terror across the United States and Western Hemisphere.

The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States. The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE! Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!!!!!!!!!

Although Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has waffled about whether it was he or Admiral Frank M. Bradley who issued the order for the second strike, Trump left no doubt that the orders resulting in the killing of 11 people came directly from him, the Commander in Chief.

Since that double tap bombing, 21 publicly known U.S. airstrikes on 22 vessels have killed at least 83 people. The legal rationale for these bombings has shifted over time, but it is apparently based on a classified memorandum from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel.

The memo reportedly claims that the United States is in a state of armed conflict with drug cartels that use drug proceeds to buy weapons and fund violence, so the U.S. is acting in collective self-defense.

But on December 1, international law scholars Michael Schmitt, Ryan Goodman, and Tess Bridgeman argued in Just Security:

There is no international armed conflict because, inter alia, there are neither hostilities between States nor the requisite degree of State control over alleged drug cartels operating the boats. And there is no non-international armed conflict, both because the cartels concerned do not qualify as organized armed groups in the [law of armed conflict] sense, and because there were no hostilities between the United States and the cartels on [September 2], let alone hostilities that would reach the requisite level of intensity to cross the armed conflict threshold.

“There is no evidence that this group is committing an armed attack against the U.S. that would allow the U.S. to use military force against it in national self-defence,” three UN experts have also said. “International law does not allow governments to simply murder alleged drug traffickers,” the experts noted, calling Trump’s strikes extrajudicial executions. “Criminal activities should be disrupted, investigated and prosecuted in accordance with the rule of law, including through international cooperation.”

An assessment from U.S. intelligence agencies dated February 26 found that Tren de Aragua was neither controlled by the Venezuelan government, nor committing crimes in the United States on its orders.

Even if there was a state of armed conflict, these would be war crimes. The Geneva Conventions forbid the targeting of civilians and shipwrecked sailors. Without a state of armed conflict, this is just plain murder.

Moreover, the administration has provided no evidence that the people on these boats were involved in a drug operation. In fact, officials have admitted that they don’t even know the identities of the people killed in the strikes.

But regardless of whether or not there is proof that the victims were trafficking drugs, there is no legal justification for killing them. If there was probable cause they were committing crimes, there are procedures for arrest and trial with due process protections.

On October 28, in a post decrying the murder of 57 civilians in attacks on 14 civilian boats up to that point, Ben Saul, UN Special Rapporteur for the protection of human rights while countering terrorism, and Challis Chair of International Law at the University of Sydney, wrote “A systematic attack on civilians is a crime against humanity under international law.”

Duterte Ordered Killings in “War on Drugs”

Rodrigo Duterte was charged by the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber I on March 7, with the crime against humanity of murder committed pursuant to his “war on drugs” while he served as mayor of Davao City and president of the Philippines.

While both Duterte and Trump have utilized state violence in their drug wars, they have used different mechanisms — both of them illegal. Whereas Trump launched a military operation to kill alleged drug traffickers,

Duterte established police “death squads” to kill the targets of his so-called war on drugs. Unlike Trump, Duterte was supposedly able to identify the targets of his drug war, but that still did not shield him from legal accountability.

 

In a campaign that Catholic leaders called a reign of terror, Duterte ordered that alleged criminals be “neutralized,” which, the ICC chamber said, meant “kill.” Trump has similarly ordered the killing of “narcoterrorists,” with no evidence to support such a designation.

The chamber found reasonable grounds to believe Duterte was individually responsible for the crime against humanity as an indirect co-perpetrator, even though he didn’t personally commit the murders. Trump is likewise liable for the (so far) 83 boat strike deaths because he gave the initial order.

Under the doctrine of command responsibility, commanders — all the way up the chain of command to the commander in chief — are legally responsible for acts they knew or should have known would be committed by their subordinates. Orders by Hegseth and/or Bradley can be imputed to Trump to hold him liable for a crime against humanity.

Furthermore, Hegseth, Bradley, and all service members who participated in the bombings had a duty to disobey the illegal orders to launch those strikes.

Both the ICC’s Rome Statute and customary international law punish crimes against humanity, so any state can prosecute them under the well-established doctrine of universal jurisdiction.’

Both Duterte and Trump Used Their Drug Wars as a Pretext to Kill With Impunity

On October 23, Trump said, “I think we’re just gonna kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. … They’re going to be, like, dead.”

Trump’s hypocrisy became all the more transparent on December 1, when he issued a pardon to former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who was serving a 45-year sentence for expediting the importation of over 400 tons of cocaine into the United States over nearly two decades. Prosecutors called Hernández the architect of a “narco-state.”

During Trump’s first term, he praised then-President Duterte, telling him in a telephone call that he was doing “an unbelievable job on the drug problem.”

Whereas Duterte used his “war on drugs” as a pretext to neutralize his political opponents, Trump appears to be using his strikes on “drug boats” as a potential lead-up to an unlawful military attack on Venezuela in order to engage in illegal forcible regime change and secure control over the proven oil reserves in Venezuela, the largest in the world.

Since August, Trump has moved troops and warships — including the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier — to the Latin American region. On December 2, Trump declared that he could attack accused drug traffickers who cross Latin America by land “very soon.” Trump also warned it’s not just Venezuela he has in his sights but Colombia as well. A few days prior, he announced that the airspace over Venezuela should be considered closed.

As Congress remains mute in the face of Trump’s impending military attacks, we must mount a full court press.

People should lobby their senators and congressmembers to create a select committee to investigate the misuse of Trump’s war powers. It could issue subpoenas, gather facts, and garner media attention.

On December 3, Democratic Senators Tim Kaine (Virginia), Chuck Schumer (New York), and Adam Schiff (California), and Republican Senator Rand Paul (Kentucky) introduced a war powers resolution that “directs the President to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force.”

Attacking Venezuela would violate the UN Charter. This resolution should be supported and senators urged to co-sponsor it, although it is unlikely to pass in the House of Representatives.

Congress members should respond to pressure from their constituents. Pressure can take the form of phone calls, letters, emails, sit-ins, demonstrations, op-eds, and letters to the editors. It is incumbent upon all of us to stop this dangerous course of action.

Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, dean of the People’s Academy of International Law, and past president of the National Lawyers Guild. She sits on the national advisory boards of Assange Defense and Veterans For Peace, and serves as a member of the bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers and the U.S. representative to the continental advisory council of the Association of American Jurists. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral and Geopolitical Issues. 

The opinions expressed here are solely the author’s and do not reflect the opinions or beliefs of the LA Progressive