The United States military has recently come under fire for justifying the killing of alleged drug traffickers by claiming links to “designated terrorist organizations.” This new tactic, conjured up by the Trump administration, has raised concerns about the justification of violence against civilians and the potential consequences of labeling individuals as terrorists without proper evidence.
The Intercept recently reported on a disturbing trend in the U.S. military’s approach to combating drug trafficking. In an effort to justify their actions, the military has begun to label suspected drug traffickers as “designated terrorists,” a term typically reserved for individuals and groups involved in politically motivated violence. This new designation allows the military to use lethal force against these individuals, even if they are not directly involved in any terrorist activities.
This tactic has been used in several recent incidents, including a 2017 airstrike in Afghanistan that killed 33 civilians, including children, and a 2018 attack in Somalia that resulted in the deaths of 10 civilians. In both cases, the U.S. military claimed that the targets were involved in drug trafficking and had links to designated terrorist organizations.
By labeling these individuals as terrorists, the U.S. military is able to bypass the usual rules of engagement and use lethal force without facing the same level of scrutiny and criticism. This dangerous precedent not only undermines the principles of international law and human rights, but it also puts innocent civilians at risk.
Furthermore, the designation of these individuals as terrorists is often based on flimsy evidence and unreliable intelligence. In many cases, the military relies on information from local informants, who may have their own agendas and biases. This lack of concrete evidence raises serious questions about the validity of these claims and the potential for innocent civilians to be caught in the crossfire.
The consequences of this new tactic are far-reaching and potentially devastating. By labeling individuals as terrorists, the U.S. military is essentially giving itself a free pass to use lethal force against anyone they deem a threat, without proper oversight or accountability. This could lead to an increase in civilian casualties and further destabilization of already volatile regions.
Moreover, this tactic sets a dangerous precedent for other countries to follow. If the U.S. military can justify killing civilians by labeling them as terrorists, what is to stop other nations from doing the same? This could lead to a dangerous escalation of violence and further erode the principles of international law.
It is also worth noting that the U.S. military’s focus on drug trafficking as a national security threat is misguided. While the illegal drug trade is a serious issue, it is not a justification for using lethal force against civilians. This approach ignores the root causes of drug trafficking, such as poverty, corruption, and lack of economic opportunities, and instead uses violence as a solution.
In light of these concerns, it is imperative that the U.S. military re-evaluate its approach to combating drug trafficking and refrain from using the “designated terrorist” label as a justification for killing civilians. The Trump administration must be held accountable for its actions and ensure that the military follows international law and respects human rights.
In conclusion, the U.S. military’s use of the “designated terrorist” label to justify killing alleged drug traffickers is a dangerous and unethical tactic. It not only undermines the principles of international law and human rights, but it also puts innocent civilians at risk and sets a dangerous precedent for other countries to follow. It is time for the U.S. government to re-evaluate its approach and prioritize the protection of human lives over the pursuit of its political agenda.
