By Valentina Toro
Contributor
As federal officials continue carrying out military strikes in international waters, students and faculty say the government’s limited explanation has raised concerns about transparency and the justification behind the operations.
The U.S. has carried out multiple military strikes on suspected smuggling boats near Venezuela, prompting national debate over whether these actions are necessary, lawful or clearly explainable.
“Now more than ever, young people are paying attention to this simply because the information is so easily accessible,” psychology major Benjamin Berube, a sophomore, said.
While the operations have been described by federal officials as efforts to curb drug trafficking, students and faculty said the government has not provided enough information to reassure the public about the purpose or impact of these strikes.
Joey Merly, a graduate, said many students who were not previously engaged in foreign policy are becoming more curious about U.S. actions abroad.
“Social media and just news are everywhere and so easily accessible. People are seeing through the cracks and seeing through all the flaws,” Merly said.
Professor Kevin Buterbaugh, who works within the political science department, said the strikes raise legal questions that have historically surfaced during presidential uses of force without a formal war declaration.
“There needs to be more congressional and public debate before lethal force in international waters is used, but Congress has a hard time asserting its authority when presidents act outside a formal declaration of war,” Buterbaugh said.
He added that the U.S. government has framed the operations as anti-drug missions, but the decision to target Venezuela raises concerns.
“I’d say just out of hand, the government is acting. The public position is about stopping drugs, but Venezuela is not a drug country. Lying to us is going to harm trust,” Buterbaugh said.
Students and faculty expressed concern about how the U.S. is perceived internationally. Berube said the strikes could reinforce a negative global reputation for the country.
“In recent history, we’ve been a bit of an embarrassment on the global stage, which is definitely disappointing,” Berube said. “I’m hoping that when we’re on the other side of all this, it will be easier to rebuild that trust with the rest of the world.”
Buterbaugh also stressed the importance of public oversight, even when decisions must be made quickly. Buterbaugh noted that transparency helps maintain trust and ensures that urgent actions remain accountable.
While Congress faces challenges in intervening in fast-moving operations, the public deserves to understand the rationale behind military actions, ensuring citizens remain informed.
“A much larger national conversation is needed about when and how lethal force is employed, particularly in international waters,” Buterbaugh said.
Students said that real-time access to news through social media makes it harder for officials to justify secretive operations and increases the demand for government accountability.
“If the government is lying to us, that’s going to damage trust in a major way,” Merly said.
