US Engaged in Formal 'Armed Conflict' With 'Terrorist' Drug Cartels, Trump Says

The Trump administration has formally notified the United States Congress that it considers the nation to be in a "non-international armed conflict" with drug cartels, which it has designated as terrorist organizations. In a memo sent to several congressional committees on October 2, 2025, the administration asserted that this new classification provides the legal justification for recent and future military actions against these groups. The notification follows a series of deadly U.S. military strikes last month against alleged drug-smuggling vessels in the Caribbean, at least two of which reportedly originated from Venezuela. According to the memo, President Donald Trump determined that the cartels are "non-state armed groups" whose actions, particularly the trafficking of illicit drugs that kill Americans, "constitute an armed attack against the United States." This declaration reframes the fight against powerful drug syndicates from a law enforcement issue to a matter of national defense under the laws of armed conflict.

chinadailyasia.com reported, The memo obtained by news agencies states the President directed these actions under his constitutional authority as Commander in Chief to protect Americans and U.S. national security interests. It argues that although friendly nations have attempted to combat these transnational organizations, the groups continue to conduct attacks throughout the Western Hemisphere. By defining the situation as an armed conflict, the administration appears to be claiming extraordinary wartime powers to authorize lethal force without specific congressional approval, treating cartel members as "unlawful combatants." This move comes after the State Department officially designated eight organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) in February 2025, including six from Mexico, Venezuela's Tren de Aragua, and El Salvador's MS-13. The declaration has drawn sharp criticism from some lawmakers and rights observers, who question the legality of the strikes and warn of an overreach of executive authority.

The administration's shift in strategy has been building for months, underscored by a pledge from President Trump to unleash the U.S. military on cartels and a significant buildup of naval forces in the Caribbean. The FTO designations from earlier in the year were intended to provide law enforcement with more tools to curtail financial and material support for these groups. However, the new "armed conflict" notification escalates this policy dramatically, creating a legal framework for direct military engagement. The memo did not specify all the groups covered by the armed conflict designation, but the administration has previously focused on organizations like the Sinaloa Cartel, Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), and Tren de Aragua. The decision has already created significant political and diplomatic tension, particularly with Mexico, whose government has consistently opposed unilateral U.S. military action on its territory. The long-term implications for U.S.-Mexico relations, regional stability, and the legal boundaries of presidential war powers remain a subject of intense debate.

• Background and Historical Context: The idea of using the military against drug cartels is not new, but this formal declaration marks a significant escalation of the "war on drugs" initiated by President Richard Nixon in 1971. Past efforts, such as the Mérida Initiative, focused on security cooperation and strengthening law enforcement in partner countries like Mexico. However, recent years have seen growing calls among some U.S. politicians to designate cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs), a move President Trump executed via executive order in early 2025, laying the groundwork for this declaration of armed conflict.
• Key Stakeholders and Positions: The Trump administration is the primary driver, framing the policy as a necessary defense of U.S. national security. The Mexican government, now led by President Claudia Sheinbaum, has firmly rejected the notion of U.S. military intervention, emphasizing cooperation but opposing any violation of its sovereignty. Within the U.S. Congress, there is a divide; some Republicans support a more aggressive military posture, while many Democrats, including Senator Jack Reed, have criticized the move as an attempt to wage "secret wars" without legal justification or congressional oversight.
• Legal and Political Implications: Designating cartels as FTOs and engaging in "armed conflict" unlocks a range of authorities. It allows the U.S. to prosecute individuals and companies for providing "material support" to these groups, freeze their assets, and, most controversially, use military force against them as "unlawful combatants." This blurs the line between law enforcement and military action and raises constitutional questions about the President's authority to declare war, a power explicitly granted to Congress.
• Economic and Social Consequences: The designation and subsequent military posturing could severely impact businesses operating in Mexico and Latin America. Companies could face legal risks if they are forced to make protection payments to cartels that control certain territories, as this could be prosecuted as "material support" for a terrorist group. Furthermore, the aggressive stance threatens the deep economic relationship between the U.S. and Mexico, potentially impacting trade and investment, and could destabilize border communities.
• Expert Analysis and Criticism: Many experts argue that treating cartels as terrorist groups is a category error, as their primary motivation is profit, not political ideology. Critics warn that a military-first approach ignores the root cause of the drug trade: demand within the United States. There are also significant concerns that unilateral military action would be ineffective, violate Mexican sovereignty, and trigger a violent backlash from cartels, potentially increasing violence on both sides of the border.
• Timeline of Recent Events: The policy shift follows a sequence of escalating actions in 2025. In January, President Trump signed an executive order to begin the FTO designation process. In February, the State Department officially designated eight cartel and gang groups as FTOs. In August and September, the U.S. military conducted several lethal strikes against alleged drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean, leading to the October 2nd notification to Congress that an "armed conflict" is underway.
• Potential Future Developments: This declaration could pave the way for more direct U.S. military operations, including drone strikes, special forces deployments, and enhanced intelligence gathering inside Mexico, potentially without the consent of the Mexican government. The diplomatic fallout is a major concern, with the potential for a severe rupture in U.S.-Mexico relations. The situation also sets up a potential constitutional clash between the White House and Congress over war powers.