US Allies Halt Intelligence Sharing Over Trump’s Caribbean Military Strikes
London-UK, November 13, 2025
Legal Firestorm: US Allies Begin to Push Back on Trump’s Caribbean Military Strikes
A significant diplomatic and legal firestorm has erupted, as key U.S. allies begin to push back publicly against Trump’s Caribbean military strikes on alleged drug-trafficking vessels, citing concerns that the lethal actions violate international law.
The United Kingdom and Colombia have taken the dramatic step of halting intelligence sharing with the United States in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, a move that signals a serious rupture in counter-narcotics cooperation.
The Trump administration has carried out nearly two dozen military strikes since September, resulting in the deaths of at least 76 individuals, a policy which major allies, including France, are now openly condemning as “extrajudicial killings” and a violation of international legal statutes.
Headline Points: The Ally Pushback and Legal Challenge
Intelligence Halt:
The United Kingdom has privately suspended sharing intelligence on suspected drug-trafficking vessels with the US military, fearing that UK-supplied information could be used in lethal kinetic strikes that the UK believes are illegal under international law.
Colombia’s Condemnation:
Colombian President Gustavo Petro publicly ordered his military to stop sharing information with the US, stating that the strikes amount to murder, and that his country will not be complicit in human rights abuses, especially after at least one Colombian citizen was killed.
France’s Intervention:
The Foreign Minister of France, a fellow G7 ally with overseas territories in the Caribbean, publicly condemned the strikes, stating they “violate international law” and risk regional instability.
Strike Justification:
The Trump administration, led by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, defends the strikes by labeling the occupants of the vessels as “narco-terrorists” and “enemy combatants,” arguing that the US is engaged in a non-international armed conflict with the drug cartels.
Death Toll:
The strikes, involving missile attacks and other lethal force, have targeted 19 vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, resulting in a confirmed death toll of at least 76 people, according to US officials.
Military Build-Up:
The diplomatic rift occurs as the US continues its military build-up in the region, including the deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier strike group, a move that has escalated tensions with Venezuela.
The UK-US Intelligence Rupture
The decision by the United Kingdom to halt intelligence sharing marks a rare and serious breakdown in the historically robust military-to-military and intelligence relationship between the two nations.
The UK has a permanent naval presence in the Caribbean through its Overseas Territories and has long been a vital partner in the US-led Joint Interagency Task Force South (JIATF South), which coordinates counter-drug operations.
According to British naval sources, the suspension was a legal necessity. The UK determined that any intelligence provided that was subsequently used to facilitate a lethal strike—an action where suspects are killed rather than interdicted and arrested—could implicate the UK in an act that its own legal counsel deems a violation of international law.
The official UK government response maintained the longstanding policy of not commenting on intelligence matters, but the suspension is widely understood to be a direct pushback against the US administration’s use of lethal force in what are fundamentally law enforcement actions.
This transatlantic rift puts political pressure on the British government to clearly define its position on Trump’s controversial, kill-or-capture policy.
The situation is complicated by the presence of a senior Royal Navy officer permanently deployed on a US destroyer within the Caribbean strike group, forcing a legal review of his continued involvement in any kinetic operations.
Latin American Condemnation and Escalation
The pushback from U.S. allies is not confined to Europe. Colombian President Gustavo Petro, an important, if sometimes uneasy, partner in regional counter-narcotics efforts, publicly ordered his armed forces to stop sharing intelligence with the United States.
Petro, whose country has seen citizens killed in the strikes, was unequivocal, stating: “He may have been carrying fish, or he may have been carrying cocaine, but he had not been sentenced to death.
There was no need to murder him.” This position led the Trump administration to retaliate by imposing financial sanctions on Petro and his family and threatening to cut all US aid to Colombia, creating a volatile situation with a long-standing partner.
Separately, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot condemned the strikes at a G7 meeting, noting France’s presence in the Caribbean region through its overseas departments and expressing alarm that the US actions could lead to wider instability.
The Trump administration’s legal justification for the strikes rests on the assertion that drug cartels like the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua—which the administration links to the Maduro regime—are “narco-terrorist organizations” operating within a non-international armed conflict zone.
This interpretation is firmly rejected by international legal experts, who argue that the targeting of civilian vessels carrying alleged smugglers constitutes extrajudicial killings and is a gross violation of both human rights law and the law of the sea.
As U.S. allies begin to push back and withdraw cooperation, the legality and diplomatic fallout of Trump’s Caribbean military strikes represent a serious challenge to the global network of counter-terrorism and counter-narcotics alliances.
