Trump Signals Possible Expansion of Strikes Against Drug Cartels Into Mexico:

On Monday, Trump hinted that U.S. intelligence agencies have already developed a list of potential targets. “We know every route. We know the addresses of every drug lord,” he said. “We know their address. We know their front door. We know everything about every one of them.” He argued that the scale of drug-related deaths in the U.S. amounts to “a war,” citing cocaine, heroin, methamphetamines and fentanyl as primary causes of the crisis. However, Garmany said that even if the U.S. were to carry out strikes in Mexico, the impact would likely be limited. Mexico’s cartels, he explained, are among the most powerful and organized criminal networks in the world. The Mexican state has been engaged in its own “war on drugs” for nearly two decades, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths but little reduction in cartel influence or capacity. “Mexico’s cartels have extensive resources and occupy a unique geographic position between the U.S. and the rest of Latin America,” Garmany noted. “Targeted military strikes would be more of a PR stunt than a meaningful blow. It won’t stop one of the world’s most lucrative illegal supply chains.” Since returning to office in January, Trump has relied on executive orders and legal classifications to bypass congressional approval for military action. His administration designated six major drug cartels as “foreign terrorist organizations,” enabling the White House to justify strikes as national security operations. Since September, the U.S. has carried out at least 20 strikes on vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific that it claims were transporting drugs. The operations have killed at least 80 people, though the administration has not publicly provided evidence linking them to specific cartels. Calling the campaign a “non-international armed conflict” against “narcoterrorists,” the White House has revived legal arguments previously used during the George W. Bush administration’s “war on terror,” raising new debate about the limits of presidential military authority.

NEWS