Say Something Real
By Michelle Bryant
Michelle Bryant
I have a simple question: If you can board a tanker, why do you need to sink/AKA “blow up/AKA “kill everybody” on fishing boats? While we grapple with this query, or not, one thing is clear: The Trump administration’s approach to maritime enforcement reached a peak of irony when it celebrated the high-profile seizure of an Iranian oil tanker, while feigning the only way to deal with suspected drug trafficking was to sink fishing boats. These contrasting actions reveal not only a disjointed policy but also raise questions about international law, diplomatic consistency, and the United States’ image on the global stage.
The seizure of the privately owned oil tanker appears rooted in the Trump administration’s pressure campaign on Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Forced regime change appears more reality than rumor, and an oil grab from the country is no surprise. The tanker was transporting 1.1 million barrels of oil from Venezuela. With a conservative estimate of $50-$60/barrel, this crude oil is worth an estimated 50-60 million dollars. When asked what the U.S. planned to do with the seized oil, Trump’s insightful and carefully crafted response was “We keep it, I guess.” I don’t think anyone doubts, that Trump knows exactly what’s the plan for the oil and as he stated in interviews after taking possession of the tanker, there’s more to come.
If you are like many Americans, you have not kept up with U.S. imposed sanctions and the countries involved. Typically, these measures are employed to address the expansion of nuclear and missile expansion program, stopping money to fund these developments and support for terrorist groups, counter destabilization efforts, force negotiations, abandon adversarial policies, and pressure regime change, usually over suspected human rights abuses.
However, before I can get to any of the sanction justifications for taking this oil tanker, I’m still stuck with an operational question. How do we board, detain and seize the crew and oil on the massive tanker, but sink fishing boat? One crew we bring to justice and the others crew we kill.
This juxtaposition is deeply problematic. First, it exposes a double standard: powerful state actors are subject to legal processes and diplomatic wrangling, while less powerful individuals, often at the margins of survival, are met with force. This erodes moral authority and paints the U.S. as selective in its application of international law. Second, the optics are poor: championing high-profile legal enforcement in one case, while resorting to destruction in another, undermines the credibility of U.S. maritime policy.
Reports indicate that there have been 22 strikes of suspected drug trafficking vessels. There have been 87 reported murders of those on board. No proof. No arrest. No jury. Just a death sentence.
This administration seems to create more problems than they solve. Trump’s actions risk alienating partners, emboldening adversaries, and setting dangerous precedents. If the world’s leading naval power is seen as flouting due process for expediency, others may feel justified in doing the same. A more balanced, just, and consistent policy is essential for the U.S. to maintain its standing and promote real security solutions.