Continuing U.S. military attacks on boats and individuals accused of trafficking narcotics through the Caribbean and potentially in association with Venezuela has drawn differing reactions from the Trump administration and members of Congress.
Questions by legislators in Washington abound on whether they should have the official say in terms of escalated military aggression off the South American coast, where both Venezuela and Columbia have been embroiled with the U.S. as tensions have risen in recent weeks—in addition to claims that briefings have been held but have shut out some of the highest-elected lawmakers due to partisanship or otherwise.
More than 60 individuals have been killed by U.S. boat strikes hailed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has warned that the 15 or so attacks since September are preventing “narco-terrorists” from drug smuggling to areas like the U.S.
Recently, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called the strikes part of a broader “new game” being executed by the U.S. government and military. He praised President Donald Trump, a longtime ally, for “doing the right thing” and suggested that congressional approval may not be necessary in such instances.
White House 'Maintaining Transparency'
“On the campaign trail, President Trump promised to take on the cartels and he has taken unprecedented action to stop the scourge of narcoterrorism that has resulted in the needless deaths of innocent Americans,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told Military.com. “All of these decisive strikes have been against designated narco-terrorists, as affirmed by U.S. intelligence, bringing deadly poison to our shores, and the president will continue to use every element of American power to stop drugs from flooding into our country and to bring those responsible to justice while maintaining transparency with the Hill.”
A senior Trump administration official told Military.com last week that the administration has provided Congress seven separate classified briefings since early September, covering members or staff from House leadership, Senate leadership, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, and the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees.
The Department of War is working through additional requests for information from Capitol Hill and continues to make senior officials available to answer questions, the official added, calling the Trump administration “more forthcoming with the legal rationale behind these strikes than prior administrations”—contrasting their ongoing actions in the Caribbean with the 500 or so drone strikes authorized and conducted by the Obama administration “without offering any legal justification to Congress."
Trump Administration Claims Disputed
A source familiar with the situation and associated with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), who sits on the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, told Military.com: “The White House is counting the same briefing multiple times based on individual or small group touches with certain members and staff.”
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), ranking member and former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told the press last week that the system is designed for Congress to approve such military action.
"When you politicize decision-making about putting our servicemembers in harm's way, you make them less safe," Warner said.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, (D-IL), also a member of the Armed Services Committee, said last week that she was “disgusted” about so-called secret briefings exempting Democrats from the conversation on national security.
“This is ridiculous,” Duckworth said, per reports. “This is not how we will operate in the Senate.”
Sen. Adam Schiff, (D-CA), who has sponsored legislation mandating that Congress provide approval for continued military strikes, said the legislative body’s role involves moments just like these.
“It makes no sense to give a briefing to Republicans only,” Schiff told reporters last week. “This is exactly why Congress needs to be brought in to any decision about use of force, and I hope we’ll have more support for the war powers resolution when we take it up.”
Sen. Chris Coons, (D-DE), a senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations panel, questioned whether the “long-standing tradition” of conversation between the Pentagon, presidential administration and the highest levels of Congress is waning as this situation unfolds.
He’s only received the “most superficial” information on future plans pertaining to Venezuela and South America.
Bipartisan Calls For More Transparency
On Friday, during an appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH) expressed some of the same disillusionment as his colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
“People were very frustrated in the information that was being provided," said Turner, a House Armed Services Committee member, of a Thursday meeting. "It was a bipartisan briefing, but people were not happy with the level information that was provided, and certainly the level of legal justification that was provided."
Republican Sens. James Lankford (OK) and Rand Paul (KY) are among conservatives veering from Sen. Graham’s position, warning of ongoing attacks without congressional approval.
Lankford has stated he would be “apoplectic” if the Biden administration had taken the same steps as those being carried out by Trump and his administration.
Paul said the U.S. is engaging in “extrajudicial killings…akin to what China does, to what Iran does with drug dealers.”
Military.com reached out to the offices of Lankford and Paul for comment.
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) reportedly attended a briefing last week only to find that just Republicans were present.
Rounds said he received a phone call from the White House on Thursday asking if he had concerns.
“I said, ‘Yup.’ Because Intel and Armed Services, we do things on a bipartisan basis when it comes to this, we want to keep it that way,” Rounds said, according to the Associated Press.
