MEXICO CITY — Hundreds of people have been killed in the year since the U.S. military began bombing boats it accused of ferrying drugs off Latin America’s Caribbean and Pacific coasts. Now, the Trump administration says it is seeking to extend that lethal campaign to land, pursuing deals that would put U.S. forces on the ground in allied nations across the region. U.S. President Donald Trump’s defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, announced last week during a visit to Panama that Colombia, Guatemala and Honduras had agreed to allow the U.S. to carry out joint military operations against criminal groups on their soil, following Ecuador, which launched similar missions with the U.S. in March. Guatemala, however, has denied reaching such an agreement. It will be “like you saw with the strikes on the drug boats,” Hegseth said during a military drill in the jungle in Panama. “Same effect on land. And so we’re working with Ecuador. We’re working with Colombia. We’re working with partners to bring the fight to the (designated terrorist organizations) on land.” The expansion marks a new phase in the Trump administration’s campaign to pressure governments across Latin America to align with its security priorities and assert what it calls “American dominance over the Western Hemisphere.” Voters across the region are increasingly embracing Trump-aligned leaders, giving Washington more willing partners. But critics warn that the widening U.S. military campaign risks civilian casualties and a backlash against the U.S. that could outlast the Republican administration. “What’s going on is an attempt to legitimize the increased use of the U.S. military in the region,” said Michael Shifter, a Latin America expert at the Inter-American Dialogue think tank. “It projects power, demonstrates military superiority and enables Washington to impose its agenda. This is not cooperation, it’s obviously a very asymmetrical relationship.” Escalating unilateral boat strikes to joint land operations The U.S. military has operated in Latin America for generations, supplying allies with weapons, intelligence and training to fight drug trafficking, while leaving a fraught legacy of support for military coups and dictatorships. But since Trump returned to office in January 2025, Washington has pursued its most interventionist approach to the region in decades. His administration has designated 20 Latin American criminal groups as “foreign terrorist organizations,” sent U.S. forces into Venezuela to capture its president and involved CIA agents in drug lab busts in Mexico. It has killed more than 200 people in over 60 boat strikes in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, offering little evidence that those targeted were “narco-terrorists” and drawing questions about the strikes’ legality. But sustained U.S. combat operations alongside local forces would be “new and different,” said William LeoGrande, a Latin America specialist at American University, testing deep-rooted sensitivities over national sovereignty and the presence of U.S. troops. Hegseth provided few details about what joint operations with Colombia, Guatemala and Honduras would look like. But in Colombia, where Trump-backed Abelardo de la Espriella took office this month, he raised the prospect of U.S. forces joining strikes against armed groups including the National Liberation Army, or ELN, Colombia’s last major guerrilla group. Hegseth said de la Espriella had requested greater U.S. military involvement. “Anywhere you traffic drugs or you threaten the American people or our partners, you are a target just like ISIS or al-Qaida,” Hegseth said, equating drug traffickers with Islamic extremist groups that dominated U.S. national security priorities for decades. On Saturday, following a drone attack by the ELN on troops, de la Espriella vowed the rebels would “pay a high price.” Concerns over U.S. military presence in Latin America Ecuador has emerged as the clearest case of direct U.S. military involvement, launching joint raids with Washington despite voters overwhelmingly rejecting foreign military bases in a November 2025 referendum. A New York Times investigation found that one strike on an alleged drug lab in March instead destroyed a cattle farm. The push to extend such agreements has gained the most traction among Trump’s ideological allies in the region — conservative leaders elected on promises of aggressive crackdowns on crime in recent months. Guatemala stands out as an exception. Its progressive government has worked closely with Washington on security despite political differences. But President Bernardo Arévalo has denied agreeing to joint anti-drug operations, saying they would be illegal without congressional approval. Honduras, Colombia and Ecuador did not respond to requests for comment on Hegseth’s remarks. A notable outlier from the new U.S. anti-trafficking alliance is Mexico, a major source and transit point for fentanyl and other drugs entering the U.S. Progressive President Claudia Sheinbaum has cooperated closely with Washington on security but resisted mounting pressure for a U.S. military role in fighting cartels on Mexican soil. “Ultimately, the United States will have to define what ‘joint operations’ means in each of these countries. It may discover pretty quickly that this is something most governments — even governments on the right — are quite uncomfortable with,” said Adam Isacson, a defence analyst with the Washington Office on Latin America. ‘There is only so much sovereignty they can cede’ Observers question whether a more militarized approach would produce lasting security gains. Shifter said the campaign may serve partly as a show of force, building on the capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro as the Trump administration seeks to offset foreign policy setbacks elsewhere, including in the Middle East. Others warn the strategy risks civilian casualties, particularly in Colombia, where armed groups operate among civilian populations and often function as de facto authorities in areas beyond the state’s reach. Rather than beating back those groups, military strikes are more likely to force them to adapt, said Jeremy McDermott, co-director of the Colombia-based investigative organization InSight Crime. “The U.S. bombs an ELN camp in Colombia or in Venezuela, what is the first thing the ELN are going to do? They’re going to dismantle all their camps and move into the villages and towns,” he said. In the long term, experts say, deeper U.S. military involvement could test how far voters are willing to go in putting security over sovereignty, potentially constraining even Trump’s closest allies. “All of these presidents, no matter how far right they are, face pressure to do something about security and to make a show of pursuing the ‘bad guys’ who are making people feel unsafe. There is broad agreement on that,” Isacson said. “But they also know there is only so much sovereignty they can cede before public opinion begins turning against them.” ___ Megan Janetsky and Isabel Debre, The Associated Press DeBre reported from Buenos Aires, Argentina. Associated Press journalists Sonia Pérez D. in Guatemala City, Guatemala, Marlon González in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, and Astrid Suárez in Bogotá, Colombia, contributed to this report.
