Map: PCL

CLIP additionally examined the impact of the strikes on the overall flow of drugs, and concluded that conventional and internationally coordinated anti-narcotics operations that cause no deaths are more effective than the boat strikes.

From The New Humanitarian, May 15. Internal links added.

US Coast Guard via Wikimedia Commons

The organizations report that the administration in April re-arrested and forcibly transferred to third countries people who had previously been granted withholding of removal by US immigration judges and had prevailed on habeas petitions challenging the legality of their detention. The report documents an attempted transfer of individuals to Libya last year in violation of a court order then in effect.

Approximately 16,000 of the documented transfers have been to Mexico. That figure includes thousands of individuals the administration failed to acknowledge in a March 5 disclosure to a federal court. Roughly 1,400 additional people have been sent to 20 other countries, including Eswatini, South Sudan and Uganda. A March 2026 agreement with Costa Rica provides for regular weekly transfers.

The tracker reports that the administration has paid at least $44 million to receiving governments in connection with the agreements and has used the threat of third-country transfer to pressure detained immigrants into abandoning their legal claims.

Separately, the tracker reports that government attorneys have filed motions to “pretermit,” or dismiss without merits review, thousands of pending asylum cases in immigration court on the basis of Asylum Cooperative Agreements with Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras and Uganda. Citing data compiled by immigration advocacy group Mobile Pathways from Executive Office for Immigration Review records, the tracker counts nearly 9,500 such pretermissions as of February 2026. The following month, the Department of Homeland Security directed Immigration & Customs Enforcement attorneys to stop filing new pretermission motions but did not withdraw those already pending.

The administration has invoked a range of statutory and constitutional authorities to justify the transfers, including the Alien Enemies Act, and the suspension-of-entry provision at 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f). Federal judges have held several uses of those authorities unlawful, including in challenges to expulsions of Venezuelans to El Salvador and to forced transfers of people with final removal orders carried out without notice or an opportunity to raise fear-based claims.

From JURIST, May 5. Used with permission.

See our last report on the third-country deportations.

See our podcast “MAGA-fascism and the struggle in Libya”

Photo: Venezuelan deportees in Honduras. Credit: ICE via Wikimedia Commons

The payment came days after a $2 billion contract for 12 F-16s was signed by an official in Peru’s Air Force—over the head of Balcázar, who was informed of finalization of the deal only after the fact.

In fact, hours before a ceremonial signing April 17, Balcázar announced in a radio interview that the next president should decide on the deal, saying his interim government lacked the authority to make such a large outlay. In early March, Balcázar had signed a decree designating the project a “military secret,” limiting public information about government negotiations for the deal.

In a lengthy post after the signing, the US Embassy said that on April 14 “Lockheed Martin was informed in writing of its selection, with a technical signing scheduled for 7:00am and a ceremonial signing for 5:00pm on April 17.” The US ambassador, Bernie Navarro, accused Balcázar of “bad faith” in announcing the postponement, and warned that Washington would use “every available tool” to promote its interests. The “technical signing” finally took place on April 20.

Peru has ​spent years negotiating with different companies to modernize its aging fleet of Mirage 2000 and MiG‑29 fighters acquired in the 1980s and 1990s. The Air Force says it is looking to eventually acquire a total of 24 jets from Lockheed.

The imbroglio has yet further divided Peru’s already rancorous political class, and especially raised suspicions of US intentions. “It’s extortion,” Jorge Nieto, a centrist presidential candidate and former defense minister, said in a TV interview. “If we don’t play our cards right, we run the risk of turning from a country into a territory.” (NYT, BreakingDefense, Reuters)

Results still have not been finalized for the hotly contested presidential election, which took place on April 12. Police in Lima on April 24 raided the home of Piero Corvetto, former head of the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE), as part of a judicial warrant in an investigation of electoral irregularities. (Al Jazeera)

Photo: Wikipedia

President Claudia Sheinbaum said after the revelation of apparent CIA involvement that she is considering sanctions against the government of Chihuahua, asserting that any security collaboration with the US must be approved by Mexico’s federal government. She is meanwhile demanding a meeting to discuss the matter with the governor of Chihuahua, María Eugenia Campos Galván of the right-wing opposition National Action Party (PAN).

Mexico’s Senate Commission on Constitutional Issues is attempting to broker a dialogue between Chihuahua and federal authorities on the question. But lawmakers from Sheinbaum’s leftist MORENA party accused Campos and the PAN of “betraying the homeland and the Mexican people” by concealing the CIA presence in Chihuahua. (CBS News, Animal Político, El Arensal, NACLA Update, Diario Red, La Verdad, La Verdad, Juárez)

The Washington Post reports that under CIA director John Ratcliffe, “the agency has taken a larger, more aggressive role in counternarcotics, one of Trump’s top priorities upon assuming office. The agency has shared more intelligence with Mexican antidrug units and increased training for local counternarcotics units… It has flown unarmed drones over Mexico to help track cartel leaders and locate illicit drug labs.”

CIA intelligence was apparently critical in the operation by Mexican federal forces in which Jalisco New Generation Cartel kingpin Nemesio Rubén Oseguera Cervantes AKA “El Mencho” was killed earlier this year.

Photo: AEI via CBS News

The takeover of the port came last month just days before a US Air Force C-40 business jet landed at Ushuaia, bringing in a delegation of US lawmakers from the House of Representatives’ Energy & Commerce Committee.

Milei, in power since December 2023, has already received two heads of the US Southern Command in Ushuaia: Laura Richardson in 2024 and Alvin Holsey last year. Both visited the Ushuaia Integrated Naval Base project, which Argentina has been building since 2022. While Milei insists the base will be under full Argentine control, in October he signed an executive order allowing US Naval troops to carry out joint exercises with Argentine forces at Ushuaia and two bases in in Buenos Aires province.

The country’s opposition press notes that the takeover of Ushuaia came just as Milei was attending the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland—the scene of much contestation over Trump’s annexationist designs on Greenland. The Argentine press is full of speculation that on the sidelines of the Davos summit, Milei offered the Integrated Naval Base and all of Ushuaia to the US in exchange for an invitation to join the “Board of Peace” being touted by Trump as an alternative to the United Nations. (BAT, BAH, BAH, MercoPress, MercoPress, La Jornada)

Photo: Wikipedia

On Jan. 3, the Trump administration announced that it had conducted a raid on Venezuela, resulting in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores. President Trump said he would “run Venezuela,” directing the country’s oil industry with the compliance of Maduro’s successors. Two days later, Maduro and Flores pleaded not guilty in US federal court to charges of narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, and weapons offenses.

Amnesty condemned the capture, stating that it was an unlawful use of force and violated the UN Charter, articles 2(3) and 2(4). Article 2(3) states that members shall “settle their international disputes by peaceful means.” Article 2(4) prohibits use of force, stating: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

Amnesty also stated that the US violated UN General Assembly Resolution 3314, which holds that “a state’s first use of armed force in violation of the Charter is prima facie evidence of an act of aggression, including bombardment or attacks on another state’s armed forces.”

Said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s secretary general:

Crimes against humanity do not end with Maduro’s removal. Venezuelan victims, survivors, and their families continue to carry physical and psychological scars. The fate and whereabouts of many people subjected to enforced disappearance remain unresolved. The state machinery responsible for those crimes is still firmly in place, now supported by the US authorities’ involvement…

Venezuelan victims have a right to truth, justice, and reparation for crimes against humanity they have suffered. We call on the International Criminal Court to expedite its work, including issuing arrest warrants when the evidentiary threshold is met. Justice delayed is justice denied, especially for Venezuelans who have waited years to be heard. However, the US administration’s actions currently make the prospect of any potential justice proceedings concerning Nicolás Maduro much more challenging and complex.

Amnesty called for adherence to the UN Charter, and for the US to cease lethal force against suspected drug boats, as well as the use of force or threat of use of force against Venezuela.

From JURIST, Feb. 4. Used with permission.

Note: Resolution 3314 has also been invoked to condemn Russian aggression in Ukraine.

Photo: USS Gerald R. Ford. Credit: US Navy via Wikimedia Commons

The order states that any judicial proceedings against funds from “the sale of natural resources” from the Venezuelan government would inhibit efforts to “ensure economic and political stability” in the country. It adds that they would interfere with numerous US foreign policy objectives, such as ending irregular migration, cracking down on the influx of narcotics, and protecting against foreign actors such as Iran and Hezbollah. It describes potential judicial processes as an “unusual and extraordinary threat,” and declares a national emergency.

There are three legal bases for the order, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which gives the president a broad range of economic powers in national emergencies; the National Emergencies Act, which allows the president to declare national emergencies; and Section 301 of Title 3 of the US Code, which allows the president to delegate powers.

This order follows statements from Trump that US oil companies will invest billions in Venezuela, with his Energy Secretary Chris Wright saying that the US will control and market Venezuela’s oil “indefinitely.” The president called a meeting on Friday with oil executives to discuss rebuilding the country’s oil infrastructure, and announced that 30 million barrels of oil, worth $4 billion, are currently on their way to the US.

The CEO of ExxonMobil, Darren Woods, expressed concern about conditions in Venezuela, and said that the country is currently “un-investable.” Trump responded angrily that he was “inclined” to keep ExxonMobil out of Venezuela.

Companies including ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips say that Venezuela owes them billions of dollars over lost investments. Trump’s executive order could hinder these companies from recovering their claims.

From JURIST, Jan. 12. Used with permission. Internal links added.

Map: Perry-Castañeda Library

Did Delcy capitulate?
Meanwhile in Washington, White House officials were briefing members of Congress, who were not notified beforehand of the Jan. 3 military operation in which Maduro was captured.

And in Venezuela, Maduro’s groomed successor, newly inaugurated acting president Delcy Rodríguez, showed signs of capitulating to the pressure from Washington. After the Pentagon raid in which Maduro was taken (which also claimed the lives of at least 60 people, including civilians and several members of a Cuban security detail), Rodriguez defiantly stated in a televised address: “There is only one president in Venezuela, and his name is Nicolás Maduro Moros.”

But the next day, she struck a conciliatory tone, writing on social media: “We invite the US government to collaborate with us on an agenda of cooperation oriented towards shared development within the framework of international law to strengthen lasting community coexistence.”

Bellicose mid-flight press conference
Rodríguez is under explicit threat from Trump, who told reporters on a Dec. 4 flight from Florida to DC that if she doesn’t cooperate “she will face a situation probably worse than Maduro.” When asked about his boast that he will “run” Venezuela, Trump responded: “We’re dealing with the people. We’re dealing with the people that just got sworn in. And don’t ask me who’s in charge, because I will give you an answer and it’ll be very controversial.” When the reporter took this bait and asked him what that meant, he replied: “It means we’re in charge.”

Trump was similarly lacking subtlety in his claim to Venezuela’s oil: “The oil companies are ready to go. They’re going to go in. They’re going to rebuild the infrastructure. You know, we built it to start off with many years ago. They took it away. You can’t do that.”

Apparently refering to Venezuelan efforts to extend state control over the country’s oil resources following US investment in the sector over a century ago, he added: “It was the greatest theft in the history of America. Nobody has ever stolen our property like they have. They took our oil away from us. They took the infrastructure away and all that infrastructure is rotted and decayed, and the oil companies are going to go in and rebuild it.”

And indeed, shares of Chevron, the last US oil company that was authorized to operate in Venezuela, soared as much as 10% in pre-market trading after Trump’s comment. Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips shares also rose around 4%.

Queried about his supposed isolationism and antipathy to “nation-building,” Trump explicitly invoked the notion of Latin America as a US influence sphere, which was articulated in his recent National Security Strategy. He said of Venezuela: “This isn’t a country that’s on the other side of the world. This isn’t a country like we have to travel 24 hours in an airplane. This is Venezuela. It’s in our area, the Donroe Doctrine.”

Colombia, Mexico, Cuba, Greenland
He went on to directly threaten Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro: “He has cocaine mills, cocaine factories. He’s not going to be doing it very long.” So there will be another military operation?, the reporter asked. Trump: “It sounds good to me.”

Mexico was next. Invoking the flow of migrants across the US southern border, Trump reiterated his recent threat of military intervention: “Mexico has to get their act together, because they’re pouring through Mexico, and we’re going to have to do something.”

And even Greenland: “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security. And Denmark is not going to be able to do it, I can tell you. You know what Denmark did recently to boost up security in Greenland? They added one more dogsled. It’s true.”

Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen prompty responded: “This is enough. No more pressure. No more innuendo. No more fantasies about annexation.”

And Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said in a statement: “It is necessary to reaffirm that in Mexico the people are in charge and that we are a free, independent and sovereign country. Cooperation, yes. Subordination and intervention, no.”

But Secretary of State Marco Rubio meanwhile warned that Cuba could be next, responding to a reporter’s question at a DC press conference: “Yeah, look, if I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned.” (PBS NewsHour, FreedomNews.tv, CNN, The Hill, Politico, NDTV, NBC News)

Photo: US Navy via Latin America Reports

Trump made the remarks during a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. He stated that the US would “run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper, and judicious transition,” without specifying a timeline. He emphasized the recent decline of Venezuela’s oil industry, saying that US oil companies would spend billions to repair the country’s infrastructure and bring in foreign exchange. He claimed to be acting in the interest of bringing “peace, liberty and justice for the great people of Venezuela,” including Venezuelans in the US who want to return to their home country. He added that the US would be prepared to “stage a second and larger attack” if necessary.

Trump described Maduro as an illegitimate dictator and accused him of overseeing drug trafficking to the US, threatening the stability of the region and causing suffering to American communities.

Maduro and his wife were indicted in the Southern District of New York in 2020. They are due to appear in federal court on Jan. 5, where they will be charged with “narco-terrorism conspiracy,” cocaine importation conspiracy, and possession of machine guns and destructive devices, as well as conspiracy to possess such devices. They are currently being held in the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, has been sworn in as interim president.

The US raid on the military base where Maduro was housed near Caracas took place at around 4:30 AM on Jan. 3 and lasted less than 30 minutes. He was first transported aboard the USS Iwo Jima to the US base at Guantánamo Bay before being flown to New York City.

The capture of Maduro has provoked strong reactions both in the region and internationally. Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Spain and Uruguay released a joint statement condemning the attack, describing it as an “extremely dangerous precedent.”

In contrast, Maria Corina Machado, who won the Nobel Peace Prize earlier this year and was prevented from running in the 2024 Venezuelan presidential election, said that “the United States government has fulfilled its promise to enforce the law” and “we are ready to assert our mandate and take power.”

Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, states are obligated to refrain from “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” The exceptions to this rule are self-defense and authorization by the UN Security Council. The UN Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela stated after the raid that the “Maduro government’s longstanding record of grave human rights violations does not justify a US military intervention that breaches international law.”

Maduro came to power in 2013 after the death of his predecessor Hugo Chávez, under whom he had served as vice president. He was elected as president later that year, and again in 2018. He was most recently re-elected in 2024, despite accusations of interference with the election results and suppression of political opposition. He has been criticized for committing extensive human rights violations, including arbitrary detentions, inhuman treatment, and extrajudicial killings.

The raid on Caracas is the culmination of numerous measures that the US has taken against Venezuela over the past year. These include sanctions on oil companies operating in Venezuela, blockades on oil tankers, and strikes on vessels suspected of drug trafficking.

From JURIST, Jan. 4. Used with permission. Internal links added.

Map: Perry-Castañeda Library