Blog Katerina Canyon December 31, 2025 0 Comments

A Little-Noticed Strike With Big Implications for U.S. Power

What we know so far about the reported CIA drone strike in Venezuela, and why it matters for oversight, accountability, and the expanding use of covert force.

Recent reporting indicates that the United States carried out a drone strike earlier this month on a port facility along Venezuela’s coast, allegedly used by drug trafficking networks. According to multiple sources cited by CNN, the operation was conducted by the CIA and marked the first publicly known U.S. strike on Venezuelan territory in this context. No casualties were reported.

While details remain limited and the U.S. government has declined to formally confirm the operation, the reporting raises important questions about the expanding scope of covert action, counter-narcotics policy, and military authority in the Western Hemisphere.

What was reportedly targeted in this strike

According to the reporting, the strike hit a remote dock believed to be used for staging drug shipments. U.S. officials described the action as part of a broader campaign aimed at disrupting drug trafficking routes originating from Venezuela. The facility was reportedly unoccupied at the time.

The operation follows a series of U.S. actions in recent years targeting vessels at sea under counter-narcotics authorities, but this appears to be the first publicly reported strike on land inside Venezuela tied to that campaign.

Why this strike matters

Even without casualties, the reported strike represents a significant escalation in how the United States is using covert force in the region. Several issues merit public attention and oversight:

1. Expansion of covert authority
Reports indicate that U.S. intelligence authorities were recently expanded to allow broader operations in Latin America. Historically, CIA-directed lethal operations have been associated with post-9/11 counterterrorism campaigns. Their extension into counter-narcotics enforcement raises questions about how far these authorities now reach.

2. Blurring of counterterrorism and counter-narcotics frameworks
U.S. officials have increasingly described drug trafficking organizations using the language once reserved for terrorist groups. This rhetorical shift has policy consequences: it can justify military-style responses to criminal activity and normalize the use of force outside declared armed conflict.

3. Oversight and transparency concerns
Operations conducted under covert authorities typically receive limited public disclosure and restricted congressional oversight. When actions involve strikes inside another country’s territory, questions arise about:

legal authorization
congressional notification
executive accountability
and long-term precedent

4. Regional and historical context
U.S. military and intelligence interventions in Latin America have a long and complicated history. Even limited or symbolic strikes can contribute to instability, diplomatic tension, and mistrust—particularly when they occur without clear public explanation or international process.

Why Peace Economy Project is paying attention

Peace Economy Project monitors the expanding use of military, intelligence, and law-enforcement powers—especially when they blur legal boundaries or bypass democratic oversight. While the stated goal of countering drug trafficking is widely shared, the methods used to pursue it matter.

Policies that rely on covert force rather than transparency, public debate, and international cooperation risk reinforcing cycles of militarization rather than addressing root causes of harm.