US military deploying forces to southern Caribbean against drug groups
The sources had few details of the operation, but President Donald Trump has wanted to use the military to go after Latin American drug gangs that have been designated as global terrorist organizations. The Pentagon had been directed to prepare options.
Trump has made cracking down on drug cartels a central goal of his administration, part of a wider effort to limit migration and secure the U.S. southern border.
The Trump administration in recent months has already deployed at least two warships to help in border security efforts and drug trafficking.
The sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Defense Department has begun ordering the deployment of U.S. air and naval forces to the Southern Caribbean Sea.
'This deployment is aimed at addressing threats to U.S. national security from specially designated narco-terrorist organizations in the region,' one of the sources said.
The Trump administration designated Mexico's Sinaloa Cartel and other drug gangs as well as Venezuelan criminal group Tren de Aragua as global terrorist organizations in February, as Trump stepped up immigration enforcement against alleged gang members.
The U.S. military has already been increasing its airborne surveillance of Mexican drug cartels to collect intelligence to determine how to best counter their activities. Trump has previously offered to send U.S. troops to Mexico to help combat drug trafficking, an offer Mexico says it has refused.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
5 hours ago
- The South African
Warren Hammond's Personal View: March 2016 Forecast 'The USA - The next 18 years' at the halfway mark
' Radical change, transformation, and upheaval ' – in a note released on March 14, 2016, I forecasted that these characteristics would define the USA's next 18 years. Nearly a decade later, the picture is clear. The forecast was designed to inform investment choices, providing a framework for regional, asset class, sector, and security selection, to ensure decisions were both well-informed and highly effective in investment selection and duration. I identified three key areas where change would be most visible and landscape-shaping: Technology Boom: Exponential, accelerating growth across all things technical. Debt Reckoning: An inevitable restructuring of finance, breaking the cycle of cheap money and debt-led consumption. Environmental Revolution: Sweeping policy changes, with water at the centre. I noted that the USA had entered a long-term pattern of radical change, transformation, innovation, and upheaval. It wasn't just policy shifts; a structural overhaul was essential to heal its dependence on cheap money, debt-led consumption, and risky investment. The political backdrop was already unconventional, and the Clinton vs. Trump race signalled that the USA had entered a non-traditional era of leadership choices, reflecting broader systemic shifts. Based solely on the characteristics of this forecast, with no personal preference or bias, The Personal View, in a separate note reiterated throughout 2016, forecast Donald Trump's first presidential win. The original note warned that while long-term results could be positive, the cycle would be marked by volatility and upheaval, especially as debt and risky investment remained 'the nectar of the Gods'. I wrote that the USA might face significant brand damage and public discredit before structural reform and overhaul could take hold. On the environmental side, I foresaw not just policy shifts but a revolution in attitudes toward managing natural resources, with water playing a pivotal role. Almost 10 years on, how close was this to today's reality? Looking ahead to 2033, will these trends continue? Remember, for The Personal View, 'expected' in the context of this forecast, was stated as being 'disorderly, disruptive, fiery, unexpected, and transformative change that upends the status quo, sweeps away what has served historically, and installs deep structural change'. In 2016, I closed the note with a challenge: 'In 18 years, we will see to what extent this view is verifiable.' At the halfway point, that question remains open and is worth asking again today. Do these trends reflect what you see unfolding in the USA? Share your perspective and join the conversation on the next 18 years of transformation. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
eNCA
5 hours ago
- eNCA
Last chance saloon for global plastic pollution treaty
Negotiators trying to secure a global agreement on tackling the scourge of plastic pollution had just hours left to salvage a deal on Thursday after the talks plunged into disarray. Countries wanting bold action to turn the tide on plastic garbage are so far apart from a group of oil-producing nations that the prospects of finding meaningful common ground before Friday -- after three years of talks -- seem low. With just over a day to go, talks chair Luis Vayas Valdivieso produced a draft text on Wednesday based on the few areas of convergence, in an attempt to find common ground. But the draft succeeded only in infuriating virtually all corners, and the text was immediately shredded as one country after another ripped it to bits. AFP | Noel CELIS For the self-styled "ambition coalition" countries, it was an empty document shorn of bold action like curbing production and phasing out toxic ingredients and reduced down to a waste management accord. And for the so-called Like-Minded Group, with Gulf states leading the charge, it crossed too many of their red lines and did not do enough to narrow down the scope of what they might be signing up for. - The bad, the very bad, the ugly - Vayas held talks with regional delegations late Wednesday that ran past midnight. Raking over the fall-out, European Union member states held a coordination meeting early Thursday, as did a group of small island developing states struggling to cope with ocean plastic they did little to produce and have scant capacity to deal with. Latin American and Caribbean nations and the African group of countries were also due to have their own meetings behind closed doors. After that, the two key cross-regional blocs -- the High Ambition Coalition and the Like-Minded Group -- were to have their own meetings before marching back into the plenary session, which brings all the negotiating countries together in the UN Palais des Nations' main assembly hall. Aleksandar Rankovic from The Common Initiative think-tank, said Vayas had effectively removed all the ambitious countries' bargaining chips, meaning they are unlikely to get anything better than what is on the table. AFP | Sylvie HUSSON, Christophe THALABOT "It's very simple: there are only two scenarios: there's bad and very bad -- and a lot of ugliness in between," he told AFP. "The bad scenario is that countries adopt a very bad treaty: something that looks like the text from Wednesday, but potentially worse. "The very bad is that they don't agree on anything, and they either try to reconvene," or the treaty is "kept in limbo for a long time -- so practically abandoned". - 'Repulsive surrender' - After three years and five previous rounds of talks, negotiators from 180-odd countries have been working at the United Nations in Geneva since August 5 to try to conclude a first international accord on dealing with plastic pollution. AFP | JOHAN ORDONEZ The problem is so ubiquitous that microplastics have been found on the highest mountain peaks, in the deepest ocean trench and scattered throughout almost every part of the human body. In Wednesday's bombshell plenary, Panama said the draft text was "simply repulsive. It is not ambition: it is surrender", while Kenya said it had been "significantly diluted and lost its very objective". The World Wide Fund for Nature said ambitious countries "must have by now recognised that there is no possible text that will be acceptable to all UN member states". AFP | Elodie LE MAOU "They must then be prepared to vote their text through. There is no other way a meaningful treaty can be agreed," she said.
The South African
7 hours ago
- The South African
Warren Hammond's Personal View: The ceasefire that isn't - August's rising risk
Trump deploys two nuclear submarines after provocative Russian comments. Published before events accelerate, why August may become the most geopolitically frustrating month in years. August will be a geopolitically frustrating month, and history shows that such frustration often leads to missteps. Here's why the so-called 'ceasefire' masks rising systemic risk, and what investors must prepare for now. History warns us: frustration breeds miscalculation. Just ask 1962. Or 1951. This article explains: Why the Israel–Iran 'ceasefire' is a mirage How August echoes Cold War brinkmanship What investors must do to prepare for volatility and escalation In my July article, 'Fragile Highs – July Is Vulnerable', I explicitly warned that what was being publicly described as a ceasefire between Israel and Iran was, in reality, a fragile pause, not a sustainable peace. Lifting the illusory curtain of calm revealed, as warned, that while direct conflict has been avoided, indirect hostilities have intensified. Military operations resumed across Gaza and Syria, reflecting a regional strategy of containment and escalation. Both flashpoints highlight ongoing efforts to counter regional influence through indirect conflict dynamics, without triggering confrontation. Since April, The Personal View has issued multiple warnings, forecasting geopolitical instability through June and July: Tension between Iran and Israel The ongoing Russia–Ukraine war Renewed US–China friction Cyber and energy vulnerabilities That outlook is now materialising. Such periods don't just bring volatility; they cause gridlock. Delays, diplomatic bottlenecks, and miscommunication dominate. For governments and institutions, this is dangerous: decision fatigue and rising escalation risk. Frustration will define August. For geopolitical actors, from Washington and Tehran to Moscow, Brussels, and Beijing, this is a month of diminishing patience and rising constraints. Tactical frustration risks strategic overreach. While history never repeats perfectly, past moments of institutional strain offer sobering lessons: The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, brinkmanship and communication breakdown The 1951 Korean War escalation, a regional conflict, turned Cold War flashpoint WWII's turning points, miscalculations that irreversibly shifted the global order Not inevitable, each triggered by distrust, delay, and frustration. Today carries similar hallmarks. What we are witnessing is not resolution, it is redirection. The Iran–Israel conflict hasn't ended; it has simply shifted form. Beneath the surface, tensions remain elevated. August brings rising risk. Investors should position accordingly: Hedge exposures Reduce fragility Prepare for volatility spikes Frustration fuels miscalculation. And August is built for both. What do you think about President Trump's warning to Putin and the rising geopolitical tensions this August? Share your thoughts below. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
