The U.S. military reported killing four individuals in a boat strike in the eastern Pacific Ocean on April 14, marking the third such lethal incident involving vessels in the region within four days. The strikes are part of an ongoing campaign overseen by U.S. Southern Command, which is responsible for military operations across Latin America and the Caribbean.

In a social media statement, Southern Command identified the individuals as “narco-terrorists,” claiming the targeted boat was traveling along established drug trafficking routes. The military released a blurred aerial video purportedly showing the moment one of the boats exploded. Since September, boat strikes conducted by the U.S. military have resulted in at least 174 fatalities.

Officials assert that those killed were engaged in narcotics trafficking operations, but have not provided independent evidence or detailed intelligence to substantiate these claims. This lack of transparency has drawn criticism from legal experts and human rights groups, who argue the strikes constitute extrajudicial killings and violate both U.S. and international law. Critics contend that the military is executing individuals without legal process, based solely on accusations.

The recent strikes follow two previous incidents in the region this week: on April 13, when the military said two people were killed in a similar operation, and on April 12, when five individuals were reported killed in a boat explosion, with one survivor. These patterns underscore the intensifying use of lethal force against suspected narcotics traffickers at sea.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump has defended the actions as part of an “armed conflict” with Latin American drug cartels, a stance not endorsed by international legal authorities. The United Nations has stated that international humanitarian law does not permit the U.S. to target and kill individuals solely on accusations of drug trafficking, particularly in the absence of evidence indicating an imminent threat to human life.

Legal challenges have been mounted against the U.S. government over these strikes. A federal lawsuit filed in January represents families of two men from a Trinidad fishing village who were killed in an October boat strike in the Caribbean. The suit describes the killings as “premeditated and intentional” and lacking any plausible legal justification.

Advocacy organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have voiced strong opposition, arguing that some victims were innocent fishermen. The ACLU accuses the administration of using unsubstantiated claims to justify these lethal operations and of attempting to redefine civilians as combatants to shield federal officials from legal accountability.

In March, Democratic members of Congress Joaquin Castro and Sara Jacobs alerted the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, highlighting concerns over the strikes. Their letter emphasized that the killings occurred outside recognized armed conflict zones and without due process, aligning with a broad consensus among legal experts that these constitute a campaign of extrajudicial executions.

Many details about the victims, including their identities and nationalities, remain undisclosed, compounding calls for greater transparency and legal scrutiny of the U.S. military’s operations in the region.