The Trump administration confirmed this week that U.S. forces struck several boats it claimed were linked to drug smuggling. One of the attacks killed three people and raised a storm of questions about the legality and oversight of such operations.

Officials presented the strikes as part of a broader effort to dismantle drug trafficking routes before narcotics reach American soil. Trump praised the actions as decisive and necessary, declaring that his administration would “hit traffickers where it hurts.”

But critics, including legal experts and human rights groups, say the government has yet to provide clear evidence connecting the targeted vessels to drug cartels. They also note the lack of transparency about whether international partners were informed, or whether there was legal authority for using lethal force in these waters.

For Trump’s supporters, the strikes symbolize toughness and resolve against a global drug trade that fuels crime and addiction in the U.S. For skeptics, the secrecy raises fears of overreach and potential violations of international law.

As with so many of Trump’s policies, the debate is not just about one action but about broader principles: how far should the U.S. go in projecting power, and at what cost to accountability and international trust?