That was Sen. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), last Wednesday, questioning Adm. Kevin E. Lunday during the latter’s confirmation hearing to be the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard last Wednesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Lunday answered, “Well, Senator, we're operating out there under our Coast Guard law enforcement authority as a law enforcement agency, a maritime law enforcement agency. And so that's not within our authority as a law enforcement agency during our Coast Guard operations under the Department of Homeland Security's authority.”

I begin with that exchange because to me, the heart of Lunday’s response – “that’s not within our authority as a law enforcement agency” – showed a senior military officer respecting the law under which he operates.

It also raises directly the question of under what law, or still-secret Justice Department interpretation of the law, is the Trump administration carrying out its destruction of alleged narco-trafficking boats and killing of crews – so far 21 boats and 83 dead crew members?

Before discussing, again, the legal issues surrounding the Trump administration’s military activity in the Caribbean, I want to lay out concerns about what the U.S. military is doing – beyond blowing up speed boats -- and how those actions, along with Venezuela’s reactions, could lead to a war no one wants.

On November 16, with the arrival of the USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group, more than 15 percent of all deployed U.S. Navy warships are now positioned in the Caribbean Sea, a force greater than existed during the 1960s Cuban missile crisis. Remember, the earlier buildup included the USS Iwo Jima and its amphibious ready group with the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) that has more than 2,200 Marines, MV-22 Ospreys, CH-53E helicopters, and landing craft.

Although U.S. Southern Command has said these forces are focused on counternarcotics efforts with regional partners, it has not commented or disclosed details on any other specific operations,

However, the New York Times reported Friday that “the U.S. Navy has routinely been positioning warships near Venezuela’s coast in locations far from the Caribbean’s main drug-smuggling routes, suggesting that the buildup is focused more on a pressure campaign against Venezuela than on the counternarcotics operation the Trump administration says it’s waging.”

At the same time, Air & Space Forces Magazine reported “multiple B-52H Stratofortress bombers [from Minot Air Force Base, N.D.] flew off the northern coast of South America on November 20,” on a “lengthy, nearly daylong flight, which a U.S. official said was a ‘presence patrol.’” At the same time that the B-52s were operating in the region, the U.S. also dispatched Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets from the Gerald R. Ford who then joined with a U.S. Air Force RC-135 Rivet Joint signals intelligence aircraft, the magazine reported.

“All the aircraft, including the fighters, switched on their transponders for parts of the mission, making them visible [to Venezuelan radar] on flight tracking data,” according to the magazine.

What national security news are you missing today? Get full access to your own national security daily brief by upgrading to Subscriber+Member status.

From November 16 through November 21, elements of the Marine Corps 22nd MEU along with Trinidad and Tobago Defense Forces held joint training exercises in both urban and rural environments across Trinidad and Tobago, which is just seven miles away from the Venezuelan shoreline. Operations took place during daytime and after dark, and some incorporated 22nd MEU helicopters.

Last Saturday, Trinidad and Tobago Acting Foreign Affairs Minister Barry Padarath said that joint military training with Washington will continue. “We have said, very clearly, that part of our mandate from the nation has been to restore peace and security,” Padarath said, “and therefore we are partnering with the United States and continuing these joint efforts.”

All these past activities, plus President Trump’s threats, have caused Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to mobilize some 200,000 soldiers. With the announcement that the Gerald R. Ford was deploying to the Caribbean, Venezuelan Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López raised the military alert levels in the country, according to El Pais newspaper. That meant, the newspaper wrote, “placing the entire country’s military arsenal on full operational readiness, as well as the massive deployment of land, air, naval, riverine, and missile assets; weapons systems; military units; the Bolivarian Militia; Citizen Security Organs; and the Comprehensive Defense Commands.”

Last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Monday’s U.S. State Department designation of Cartel de Los Soles, the Venezuelan criminal group Trump claims Maduro controls, as a “foreign terrorist organization (FTO).” Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said, “It gives more tools to our department to give options to the President,” and “nothing is off the table, but nothing is automatically on the table either.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and opponent of the attacks on alleged narco-trafficking boats, told Sunday’s CBS’ Face the Nation, “I think by doing this [naming Venezuela an FTO] they're pretending as if we are at war. They're pretending as if they've gotten some imprimatur to do what they want. When you have war, the rules of engagement are lessened.”

Looking at the political implications, Sen. Paul added, “I think once there's an invasion of Venezuela, or if they decide to re-up the subsidies and the gifts to Ukraine, I think you'll see a splintering and a fracturing of the movement that has supported the President, because I think a lot of people, including myself, were attracted to the President because of his reticence to get us involved in foreign wars.”

A CBS poll released Sunday showed just one in five Americans had heard a lot about the U.S. Caribbean military buildup, but of that knowledgeable group, 70 percent opposed going to war with Venezuela in the first place. In addition, 75 percent said Trump needed Congress’ approval before taking action in Venezuela, including just over half of Republicans.

Nominations for outstanding leaders in national security and intelligence are now open for the 2026 Cipher Brief Honors Dinner. Find out more here.

As for the legal side, Sen. Paul said, attacking boats “is really going against the rule of law in the way in which we interact with people on the high seas, and it has no precedent.”

At Wednesday’s hearing, Adm. Lunday gave the following explanation of how the Coast Guard legally carries out its non-lethal interdiction operations under maritime and U.S. laws.

“In the Eastern Pacific or the Caribbean or other locations, but principally in those areas,” Adm. Lunday explained, “we normally receive information. It could be from a surveillance aircraft or other means that there is a suspected drug smuggling boat that is headed north and then we will interdict that boat. We use an armed helicopter to disable the boat [by firing at their outboard engines] and then we will go aboard, seize the boat, and typically take a representative or take the samples, the cocaine that's on the boat if we can recover it. We'll destroy the boat as a hazard to navigation. Then we'll take the detainees who were operating the boat and we'll process them and…then arrest and then seek to prosecute.”

Lunday made clear “the helicopter interdiction tactical squadron which are…very specialized crews that do this work and they are trained and they're effective at disabling the engines. The time they would use lethal force was if they were fired upon from the drug smuggling boat under our mode of operating as a law enforcement agency.”

Near the end of last Wednesday’s hearing, Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) asked Lunday, “Admiral, yes or no. Does the US Coast Guard have a role in these military strikes on vessels in the Caribbean or Pacific?”

Lunday responded, “Senator, thank you for the question. So, under our Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Authority, we're not involved in the Department of War’s operations that you're describing. That's under the Department of War.”

Asked by Sen. Lujan if he had been to meetings about the strikes on vessels, Lunday replied he had “not been involved in meetings regarding those military activities specifically,” and later added, “I have not had a conversation with Secretary Hegseth about these strikes. No, Senator.”

Sen. Lujan closed by saying to the non-present Pete Hegseth: “Mr. Secretary, if you're out there, if you're listening to this…If you've ignored the Admiral, give him a holler, pull him in, have a good conversation, and learn from this wise person.”

That’s not a bad idea.

The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals.

Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.

Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to Editor@thecipherbrief.com for publication consideration.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief

Interview transcript:

 

Terry Gerton The nation’s waterways may have some more reckless driving on them. Among the Trump administration’s cuts to government spending, the Coast Guard planned to cut funding for boating safety grants to states and nonprofits. To find out what this could mean for the maritime community, and to get a little more insight into how they work, Federal News Network’s Eric White spoke with David Kennedy, government affairs manager for the boat insurance company BoatUS.

Eric White Mr. Kennedy, thanks for joining us.

David Kennedy Thanks, Eric, for having me.

Eric White So how does this Coast Guard recreational boating safety grant work, or how do these grants work? You know, how much are we talking about here and where does the money necessarily go to?

David Kennedy What we’re initially talking about here are the Coast Guard Nonprofit Recreational Boat Grants, which I am happy to report have been renewed for 2025, which was one of the things that was in question, but we have those going forward. And these go out to several different groups, and I’ll say including the BoatUS Foundation for Clean Water and Safe Boating. But it’s used for a variety of issues. One of the groups is the National Association of Boating Law Administrators, and these are the state-level folks who really deal with recreational boats in their states and their safety programs. It trains law enforcement, local law enforcement and the operation of boats, helps coordinate, gives us uniform laws. Another group supported by it is the American Boat and Yacht Council, which is really the standard-setting body for the design of recreational boats, making sure we have safe recreational boats. So overall, this program is supported through the something called the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund. This is a program that takes the taxes paid by boaters through motor fuel tax, tax on fishing equipment, about six different sources of funds, that then goes back out to boating safety and boating access and environmental programs. So it’s a long-standing program that we have a lot of support for. The nonprofit grants are about $6.5 million a year. The overall trust fund is in the neighborhood of $650 million to $700 million dollars per fiscal year.

Eric White Okay. And so from that fund, there is also some federal funding that comes into play here. Those go to fund boating safety programs and the like. Do I have that correctly, or what is the government participation in this?

David Kennedy Sure. So like I said, it’s talking about the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund that takes in boaters’ taxes, and anglers — I should say recreational anglers. So every time you buy a fishing pole, there’s a tax on that. And those funds come into the come into the federal government and they’re then dispersed back out to programs that benefit the end users. So we call it a “user-pay, user-benefit” program. The nonprofit grants are one example. It also funds Coast Guard’s program to the states for their boating safety programs. So you go to Virginia or Maryland, they have their state DNR, or every state does it a little bit differently, that provides a level of their funding as well. And that also is matched by boat registration fees and other fishing licenses, so that it’s a real compounding effect. We call it a cycle of success that really supports the overall system that then our members go out and enjoy.

Eric White We’re speaking with David Kennedy, the manager of government affairs at BoatUS. All right, so then the idea came about, hey, let’s stop all that. Let’s cut that bit of funding out, reallocate resources, whatever they had planned for. What was the controversy at stake?

David Kennedy I think the question was folks not really understanding what the program was and what it did. And so that’s where roles for association like BoatUS come in. And we were able to have a dialog with the administration, with the folks in Congress who support us. We have great support from the House Transportation Committee Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larsen, from Sen. Cruz and Sen. Cantwell, and just to bring them up to speed on what this program means and how it is able to go out and support and, as I said, we’re able to happily report that it has in fact been funded for 2025. Now, you know, it’s certainly incumbent on us to continue to make sure folks understand why this is important and how it goes back into the programs that the boaters and the anglers all support.

Eric White Not to have you have to rehash old turf, but what was in your pitch in those conversations with the government officials on the effect that these grants have on boating safety and any other restoration efforts?

David Kennedy I think for a number of the nonprofits that get this group, this is a decent part of their funding. And they were going to have to make some hard choices about which you know which programs they were able to support, which they could do going forward. So I think it was helping them to understand what these programs did. And I’ll go back to the example of the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators, where they really provide a link between Coast Guard and the states, and the state on water law enforcement. So I think that was that was a piece of it. Understanding the standard-setting piece of it and how that really makes the whole process of getting safety design updates out there into the system. And at this point, the you know, the U.S. standards are the world standards. You know, everybody looks to the United States and to ABYC for how they’re going to safely design a boat. And we wanted to make sure folks understood that keeping that piece running was important. So those were some of the things we touched on. And then we do things like, we have a life jacket loaner program. So, you know, you’re going to take the grandkids out and you don’t have a child-sized life jacket. Well, you can come to BoatUS and borrow one. So there’s programs like that as well that are just real simple, good safety and make it so people can go out and have fun and be safe on the water.

Eric White Can you give us a snapshot of the effect that programs like this have on boating safety and where we stand as a country when it comes to boating safety? Growing up here in Maryland, I still see that the waterways are as crowded as ever. But as we know, more participation means more potential situations for trouble. Where do things currently stand?

David Kennedy That’s the good news. It’s a very safe activity. And like anything, you have to be cautious and think about the risks. But overall, in 2024, we had the lowest number of fatalities that we’ve had since they started keeping records. In 1971, they passed the [Federal Boat Safety Act]. The estimate is that we’ve prevented over 100,000 deaths since that passed. So I think all of these programs are going to improve boating safety, but we’ve got to continue that work. And that was one of the things that we emphasized when we were discussing this program and continue to do. I mean you speak about Maryland — Maryland was actually the first state that put in a requirement for on-water education, or for boater education, I should say. And since then, that that concept has really spread across the nation. And in fact, BoatUS’s own foundation, we’re the largest provider of free online boating education. So people can come to boatus.org and they can get their boater education certification … and again, that’s how we’re keeping boating safe and trying to improve that. So those are the kinds of things that this all supports.

Eric White On that theme of continuance, you had mentioned that you know, you’re all set for 2025, after having to do a little bit of lobbying on your part. What do things look like going forward? Do you think that you’ll be able to maintain that level of communication with the powers that be, you know, whether or not any different personnel may be involved?

David Kennedy I mean, I believe so, but that’s my job to believe such things. And again, we’ve got a great working relationship with the Coast Guard and with the Department of Homeland Security. I always will point out to folks when people are 18 years old and deciding to go to the Coast Guard Academy for their career, they did it because they wanted to help people. And so that’s why it’s such a great agency to work with. The trust fund is up for reauthorization in the coming year. It’s done about every five years. The legislation has been introduced, it’s bipartisan. This is one of these issues that is supported by everyone out there. They understand how it works, and there’s a really good community of interest groups like ourselves that work with and make sure that folks understand that this works. So I remain optimistic. It really is a system that that feeds itself. I think you get to boaters and anglers, they understand that we’ve got the most interest in protecting the resource and we’ve got to contribute to it. So I feel like we’ll be okay. But we have to continue to tell the story and let folks know why it’s important.

The post What keeps recreational boaters safe, and what happens if the funding dries up? first appeared on Federal News Network.