U.K. quits sharing Caribbean boat intel with U.S.: Report

Britain says it has stopped sharing intelligence about alleged drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean with the U.S. over concerns that the Pentagon’s strikes on the vessels may be illegal, according to a Tuesday report.

The key U.S. ally paused the intelligence-sharing program over a month ago, shortly after the U.S. began bombing the Caribbean vessels, CNN reported. 

The Pentagon declined to comment. The White House and the British Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. 

The move signals a major shift for Britain which has for years shared intelligence with U.S. forces to combat terrorism and drug trafficking in the region. Britain has a significant military presence in the Caribbean, including in the Cayman and the Turks and Caicos islands

Typically, Britain would share intelligence with the Joint Interagency Task Force South, based in Florida, which would then pass along relevant information to the U.S. Coast Guard so it could apprehend suspected drug trafficking vessels. 

The strikes, which have killed at least 76 people across 19 vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific Ocean, have inspired positive and negative reactions.

The U.N.’s human rights chief, Volker Turk, has questioned the legality of the strikes and has called on the U.S. to investigate them formally. 

“I have called for investigations by the U.S. administration first and foremost, because they need to … ask themselves the question: Are these violations of international human rights law? Are they extrajudicial killings?” Mr. Turk told news outlet AFP.

The strikes coincide with a massive U.S. naval buildup in the Caribbean, aimed at combating drug trafficking in the region, according to President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. On Tuesday, America’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, entered Latin American waters to join a slew of warships and submarines. 

Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth have insisted that the strikes are legal because the alleged drug vessels pose an immediate threat to the U.S.

“The rationale is quite simple: It’s self-defense of the American people,” Mr. Hegseth told The Washington Times in a recent exclusive interview. “We have been poisoned. Our kids have been poisoned. Our communities have been poisoned, and we’ve allowed it to happen because, for some reason, we weren’t willing to look holistically or seriously at the problem.”

Mr. Trump has also called those on the boats “enemy combatants,” and the State Department has categorized several drug cartels connected to the vessels as foreign terrorist organizations. Some legal experts have pointed out similarities in the way the Trump administration is justifying strikes on the alleged drug boats and other terror organizations like al Qaeda.  

Successive U.S. presidents since the start of the War on Terror have argued that, while the military is not under attack and the U.S. is not at war, dangerous nonstate actors must be struck preemptively to prevent attacks. 

Those justifications have not convinced some U.S. lawmakers who have questioned the legality of the strikes. Last week, GOP lawmakers voted down a war powers resolution that would have curbed the president’s ability to carry out strikes against Venezuela.

Republicans are largely on Mr. Trump’s side. Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin told The Washington Times’ Alex Swoyer on her podcast last month, “Why would we care? They’re terrorists. … And for President Trump to go out there and say we’re going to stop it? Good on him.”  

Some, though, are bucking the White House’s legal justification. Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, echoed the accusations of Mr. Turk, calling the strikes “extrajudicial killings.”

Democrats are largely united in opposition. Sen. Tim Kaine, Virginia Democrat, said he is unconvinced by the Pentagon and the Justice Department’s legal argument. 

“It advances a theory of unilateral executive war power that I think is directly contrary to the Constitution. And even cites some constitutional-era precedence incorrectly,” Mr. Kaine said last week. “I think they’re illegal. I think they’re military action of a kind that is not imminent defense of the United States.”

Critics have also doubted that all those aboard the targeted vessels are narco terrorists. The U.S. Navy briefly detained two survivors of an Oct. 16 strike in the Caribbean before being released to their home countries for prosecution, according to Mr. Trump. However, officials in Colombia and Ecuador have not yet charged the men with a crime.

“There’s at least some evidence that some of the strikes might have been mistaken, or that some of the people who were struck may not have been narco traffickers,” Mr. Kaine said. “Well, wait, you’re not arresting them? I thought they’re in narco traffickers. You’re what you’re returning to the country? What they’re being released in the country? Wait, I thought they were narco traffickers.”