| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
And we have a lot of bipartisan interest on our committee. | |
| I do think that these techniques can be used as a tool for good to aggregate data to help us find, you know, to help us find small, small parts that we need to focus on. | ||
| But as the doctors will remind you, it's not a substitute for medical decision-making. | ||
| No makes sense. | ||
| All right, Representative DeGuette, we're going to leave it there. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you so much for joining us this morning. | |
| I really appreciate it. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Really, really great. | ||
| Coming up shortly on C-SPAN, President Trump is expected to deliver remarks from the White House. | ||
| Fox News reports the president will focus on actions against cartels and human trafficking. | ||
| We'll have that live on C-SPAN. | ||
| You can also watch on our free C-SPAN Now mobile app and online at c-span.org. | ||
| Washington Journal. | ||
| We're joined now by Andres Martinez-Fernandez. | ||
| He's senior policy analyst for Latin America for the Heritage Foundation. | ||
| Andres, welcome. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| So we saw yesterday that there was an eighth strike on a drug boat since September. | ||
| The U.S. has traditionally responded to these kinds of boats and alleged drug smugglers as law enforcement issues, where the Coast Guard would interdict them and seize if there were drugs and things like that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Why do you think the administration is operating differently now? | |
| Well, I think what the administration and President Trump are responding to is what really has been a clearly, wholly insufficient approach to the narco-trafficking threats in our hemisphere. | ||
| And what we've seen really over the past several years is these threats have not only maintained but also expanded dramatically the growth of these criminal organizations, the cartels, not just in Mexico, but across South America. | ||
| They've become much larger, much more through significant revenue, well-armed and well-equipped, rivaling militaries in much of the world, if not exceeding, I think you could compare them, many of them, to the militaries of small European nations. | ||
| So these are increasingly military threats in that way. | ||
| And then in addition to that, we've also seen the impact on the American people very directly with 100,000 dead Americans on an annual basis because of drug overdoses, and then the destabilization through weaponized migration of U.S. cities. | ||
| So there's been really a significant spike in not only the lethality and impact of these groups, but also the urgency of combating them. | ||
| And at the same time, as I mentioned, the tools that we've been relying on in the past have just not proven sufficient to confront these threats. | ||
| So I want to show you Democratic Representative Adam Smith of Washington. | ||
| He's a ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee. | ||
| He was on an interview and he said that these attacks were extrajudicial killings. | ||
| I'll play it and then you'll respond. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What we are doing here is illegal. | |
| It amounts to an extrajudicial killing. | ||
| The president of the United States simply deciding that there's somebody that he wants to kill and killing them without legal justification. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And that is an extraordinary expansion of the power of the president of the United States, and I think it's very dangerous. | |
| What do you think? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think that's a ridiculous assertion, frankly. | |
| There's measures very much in line with this that we've seen taken across the world in the past in the defense of the United States and the American people. | ||
| And I don't know what the presentative's position on much of our activities in Europe and elsewhere have been, but I find it odd and concerning that when it comes to protecting the American people from, again, what are active and dire threats that are killing over the same methods that we've used elsewhere becomes all of a sudden a grave concern. | ||
| I think that... | ||
| Andres, do we have proof that these are drug smuggling boats? | ||
| That they're not fishing, I don't know, or doing whatever? | ||
| I mean, do we know for a fact that they are smuggling drugs into the United States? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think we can say with high confidence, and I'm sure the administration takes very seriously its intelligence gathering on these drug shipments, which, by the way, we've been bolstering over the past several months as the administration came into the office to increase our awareness of these movements. | |
| But the reality is these small ships, which are go-fast boats and especially outfitted to evade detection, crossing along the Caribbean and now the Pacific towards the United States, that's not a fishing route and that's not a pleasure seekers route. | ||
| These are activities that are exclusive to the illicit and narco-trafficking. | ||
| What do you think of the term narco-terrorists, right? | ||
| So dealing with these people as terrorists and therefore kind of outside of law enforcement. | ||
| Typically, drug traffickers are motivated by financial gain. | ||
| Terrorists are motivated by political or ideology. | ||
| So where do you see that? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I think what we've seen is over the past several years really a blurring of the lines as far as these supposed motivations. | |
| And we've seen this in the past as well within Latin America. | ||
| Obviously, narco-terrorist is a label that we've seen applied without much controversy to groups like the FARC in Colombia, the ELN, which, by the way, the ELN were targeted in one of the recent strikes against a maritime shipment of narcotics. | ||
| But these are groups, again, that have very, very directly targeted the United States with destabilizing action. | ||
| And they've not only targeted the United States, but they've targeted our partners and allies in the region using violence and terroristic methods to shift policies in their favor and again to undermine the United States and our security. | ||
| And beyond that, we've also seen very dangerous partnerships between these organizations and anti-American regimes from outside the hemisphere. | ||
| We will talk about that. | ||
| But I want to ask you about what types of drugs that these boats are allegedly carrying. | ||
| Because South America typically is where you would get cocaine. | ||
| Fentanyl comes from Mexico. | ||
| And since fentanyl is so much more dangerous to Americans, shouldn't the focus be on what's coming from Mexico? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| Well, I think it's certainly true that the majority of fentanyl comes primarily in its finished form from Mexico. | ||
| Now, certainly there's a broad supply chain, illicit supply chain that goes into Mexico from Asia and including from other parts of South America. | ||
| But at the same time, these are the same organizations, and the commingling of all these illicit supply chains across our hemisphere is something that is intrinsic to not just these cartels, but the flow of fentanyl. | ||
| So the stability of the flows of cocaine, much of which is laced with fentanyl these days, is impossible to separate from the broader criminal networks and illicit finances and illicit flows that support the fentanyl flow system. | ||
| Is the cocaine laced with fentanyl coming out of South America or does that happen later? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, with these shipments, it's not clear exactly what the composition of the actual drugs are. | |
| But again, at different points, these become illicit flows that are intrinsically linked, not just as far as their supply chains, but as far also as how they support these criminal networks, which are driving the fentanyl to the United States. | ||
| Our guest is Andres Martinez-Fernandez of the Heritage Foundation. | ||
| He's a senior policy analyst for Latin America there. | ||
| We're talking about U.S. military response against drug cartels in the Caribbean and also now in the Pacific. | ||
| If you'd like to join our conversation, you can give us a call. | ||
| Republicans are on 202748-8001. | ||
| Democrats are on 202-748-8000. | ||
| And Independents 202-748-8000. | ||
| And two, we'll start with Alan in Brooklyn, New York. | ||
| Democrat, good morning, Alan. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, good morning. | |
| A few questions here. | ||
| We have the term a fishing expedition, which is used as a term of art for an investigation that doesn't have a basis, hoping that something will be found against your opponent. | ||
| It's an ironic term here because here there's a possibility of the boats that are being attacked without warning and without any kind of evidence left over might be fishing boats. | ||
| If this were true law enforcement activity, wouldn't you want to have live witnesses who are available to point to higher-ups in the chain of command of any drug organization or physical evidence to present, to verify? | ||
| If they're not seeking to have that kind of evidence, there's no reason to trust that a man who said he would not touch the East Wing and then destroyed the East Wing is telling us the truth about his evidence that these are actually criminal trafficking boats. | ||
| And that what seems really to be happening is he's trying to expand his prerogative to treat American natives within our territory the way he's treating them and attack and destroy any evidence of a person you don't like before people can find out if he was really telling the truth about a cause for his action. | ||
| All right, Alan. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, no, again, I have significant confidence in the capacities of our military and intelligence to identify the narco-trafficking ships and differentiate them from civilian fishing vessels. | |
| Again, there are several clear markers and identifiers, including the fact that these are unflagged ships that are modified often and from the routes that they're coming from. | ||
| These are things that narco-trafficking shipments follow, and they're clear markers and identifiers on that. | ||
| I don't think that the fact that we aren't trying to prosecute and investigate and interview each one of the traffickers on these ships is an indication that we're not leveraging the full resources available. | ||
| These are often, as far as the traffickers on these vessels, not going to be sufficient as far as pointing out or unraveling a larger illicit network. | ||
| I want to talk about Colombia. | ||
| Colombia's leader is Petro. | ||
| He has accused the United States of murder. | ||
| He said that the attack, the strike last week killed a fisherman, not a drug trafficker. | ||
| In turn, President Trump has said that he is, Colombia's leader, is an illegal drug dealer and has encouraged the production of drugs. | ||
| Can you explain the relationship of the United States with Colombia and what their relationship is with drug dealers in their country? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| Well, the United States has a long-standing relationship and positive partnership with Colombia going back decades as far as countering these security threats. | ||
| And you go back to Plan Colombia. | ||
| Colombia has really been an integral part in hemispheric security. | ||
| And generally, the leadership of that country has reflected that. | ||
| The current president of Colombia, who is in many ways an outlier from Colombian politics historically, has taken a very different approach. | ||
| But he's also someone that, in addition to taking a very aggressive stance against the United States' interests and hemispheric security in many respects, and aligning himself with dictators such as the regime in Venezuela, he's also in this way isolated himself politically within his country and he's deeply unpopular. | ||
| So I think what the United States and what the Trump administration right now is trying to navigate is the fact that they have a leader in this key nation, which is deeply problematic and causing quite a bit of challenge as far as confronting these security threats while maintaining the broader relationship with Colombia with expectations that, | ||
| as all indications seem to suggest, there will be a return to stability in the relationship after their elections. | ||
| Let's talk to Deborah, Black Mountain, North Carolina, Independent Line. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good morning. | |
| This is Deborah Lee in Black Mountain. | ||
| And first thing I would like to say is if we do not have the rule of law, we have nothing. | ||
| Nothing. | ||
| And these murderers, these, I'm sorry, these are murders, these blowing these ships out of the water. | ||
| They don't board them. | ||
| They don't find any evidence. | ||
| They have nothing. | ||
| And this gentleman, bless his heart, says he trusts these powers in place to make the right decision. | ||
| Well, like the gentleman that said before, Mr. Trump said he would not touch, would not touch the White House. | ||
| And he's tearing it down right now. | ||
| This is sickening. | ||
| One more little point, not so little. | ||
| This gentleman is from the Heritage Foundation. | ||
| The Heritage Foundation are the authors of Project 2025, which distinctly says we want to destroy this government. | ||
| And they're doing it. | ||
| All right. | ||
| And any, did you author any part of Project 2025? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I was not personally involved in it, but I can assure you that Project 2025 did not call for destroying our government. | |
| Let's talk to Francis in New Jersey, Republican line. | ||
| Go ahead, Francis. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good morning. | |
| I really don't know where to start. | ||
| I mean, a lady from South Carolina apparently has never been on a fishing boat. | ||
| You don't go fishing for fish with four 500-power motors on the back of it. | ||
| What kind of fish are you running? | ||
| The bombs are hollow where they lay the cocaine. | ||
| I mean, it's been a racket for years and nobody sees it. | ||
| They're all complicit in it. | ||
| Our CIA has been involved in South America since before Reagan. | ||
| You know, I mean, I'm in my 70s. | ||
| I've seen every scam in the book. | ||
| These people are narco-terrorists. | ||
| Personally, I go down and kill them myself. | ||
| All right, Francis. | ||
| And can you explain the role that China is playing in Latin America and what kind of influence they've got there? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| Well, it's significant and a vast influence that China has. | ||
| Now, there's the political side where using particularly economic tools, China has really bolstered its influence over countries, democratic governments, and leaders in our nation through its investments, which it then holds over the head of regional governments in many ways to ensure that other decisions don't go against the interests of China. | ||
| So it's really a significant attack on the interest and sovereignty of countries in our hemisphere. | ||
| At the same time, what we see is China also being very deeply involved in the criminal networks that are underpinning all of this activity, including the flow of fentanyl in particular, that we see Chinese precursor chemicals really being one of the core drivers of the fentanyl in the United States. |