Connect with us

INTERNACIONAL

‘Depart immediately’: State Department warns Americans as al Qaeda threatens to overrun African Nation

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

As the West African country of Mali teeters on becoming the first nation on the continent to be ruled by an al Qaeda–linked terror organization, a State Department spokesperson warned American citizens to leave or not travel there.

Advertisement

On the situation in Mali, the spokesperson told Fox News Digital, «Do Not Travel for any reason due to crime, terrorism, kidnapping, unrest and health risks,» while cautioning, «U.S. citizens should avoid travel to Mali, and those currently in Mali should depart immediately.»

The U.S. embassy in Mali also posted on their website, «U.S. citizens should depart using commercial aviation, as overland routes to neighboring countries may not be safe for travel due to terrorist attacks along national highways.» 

It also warned Americans not to try to travel outside the capital city. «The U.S. Embassy in Bamako is rarely able to provide emergency services or support to U.S. citizens outside the capital,» noting the information was still relevant as of Monday.

Advertisement

NIGER FALLOUT UNDER BIDEN LEAVES US TROOPS ‘BLIND’ IN BATTLE WITH TERROR GROUPS

A general view of Modibo Keita International Airport in Bamako, Mali, as the State Department warns Americans to avoid the country and urges those already there to leave amid rising terror threats, blocked routes and worsening insecurity, officials say. (AFP via Getty Images)

A former senior military official with detailed knowledge of the situation has told Fox News Digital that the situation in Mali has made a threat to the U.S. homeland «increasingly likely.»

Advertisement

Islamist JNIM fighters have surrounded its capital, Bamako, preventing fuel tankers from reaching the city and setting fire to some vehicles. The Malian army has tried to break the blockade by mounting armed convoys for the trucks, but JNIM has attacked several of these.

Maj. Gen. Kenneth P. Ekman, a retired Air Force general, told Fox News Digital he believes Mali’s success at keeping JNIM at bay is important — for Washington. Ekman was a key player for the U.S. military in Mali, Niger and other Sahel countries as the Department of Defense’s West Africa Coordination Element lead for U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) until he retired earlier this year.

«The U.S. still has security interests in West Africa,» he said. «An external operations threat to the American homeland is intolerable, increasingly likely and far more difficult to detect given the dearth of remaining U.S. forces and intelligence assets in the region.»

Advertisement
April 24, 2012 - FILE photo: Fighters from Islamist group Ansar Dine stand guard during a hostage handover in the desert outside Timbuktu, Mali.

April 24, 2012 – FILE photo: Terrorists from al Qaeda-linked group in Timbuktu, Mali. (AP)

He continued, «This threat also affects the safety and security of U.S. diplomats and their families in Bamako, Ouagadougou, Niamey (Niger) and other West African nations.»

US DRAMATICALLY ESCALATES SOMALIA AIRSTRIKES AS TRUMP ADMIN TARGETS ISIS, AL QAEDA TERRORISTS

U.S. and French troops were asked to leave Mali a year ago by the military junta that controls the country, which brought in the Russian Wagner/Afrika Corps mercenary group instead — the Kremlin’s private army. The Russians, reportedly more interested in extracting the region’s minerals, have not, Mariam Wahba told Fox News Digital, «been very helpful.» Wahba is a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).

Advertisement

Referring to the risk of the al Qaeda-linked group taking over Mali’s capital city, Ekman said, «Both Bamako and Ouagadougou (capital of neighboring Burkina Faso) are at risk.»

He continued, «JNIM seems to be gaining momentum and appears to have both expanded objectives and greater resolve.»

Geese walk in the road as trucks cross the border between the Ivory Coast and Mali in the village of Nigoun, near Tengrela, on Oct. 31, 2025. In northern Ivory Coast, truck drivers prepare to head back to neighboring Mali, aboard their tanker trucks loaded with fuel and anxiety. One acronym strikes fear into the hearts of all the truck drivers: JNIM, the name of the jihadist group affiliated with al Qaeda that decreed two months ago that no more tanker trucks would be allowed to enter Mali from a neighboring country.

Geese walk in the road as trucks cross the border between the Ivory Coast and Mali in the village of Nigoun, near Tengrela, on Oct. 31, 2025. In northern Ivory Coast, truck drivers prepare to head back to neighboring Mali, aboard their tanker trucks loaded with fuel and anxiety. One acronym strikes fear into the hearts of all the truck drivers: JNIM, the name of the jihadist group affiliated with al Qaeda that decreed two months ago that no more tanker trucks would be allowed to enter Mali from a neighboring country. (Issouf Sanogo /AFP via Getty Images)

«During and after the 2024 withdrawal of American forces from Niger, the U.S. (under the Biden administration) also chose to forego keeping those forces in the region,» the former major general added. «Resultantly, the U.S. surrendered its ability to monitor and respond to the activities and growth of Sahel terrorist organizations, come to the assistance of U.S. embassies under threat, and solve crises like the October kidnapping of an American missionary.»

Advertisement

The missionary, a pilot, was kidnapped in Niger on Oct. 21 and has not been heard from since.

JNIM has been designated both a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) by the State Department.

«The Malian army is fighting an irregular and asymmetric enemy,» Wahba said, adding, «They are jihadists, at the end of the day, and the government is having trouble out-predicting them. If this continues, Bamako may fall in days or weeks.»

Advertisement

Mali’s fight with an al Qaeda terror group is on the administration’s threat radar. Last month, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau flew to Bamako and met with the junta’s foreign minister, Abdoulaye Diop, «to discuss our shared security interests in the region.»

Caleb Weiss, senior analyst at the Bridgeway Foundation and editor at the FDD’s Long War Journal, told Fox News Digital he is worried strict Sharia Muslim law will be enforced by the terrorists in Mali, stating JNIM, «Al Qaeda’s branch in West Africa, is putting intense economic and social pressure on Bamako, likely in hopes that the military junta there will concede in some fashion.»

Weiss continued, «The regime in Bamako is absolutely overstretched, and its allies in Russia’s Wagner/Afrika Corps are proving to be ineffective.»

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«JNIM is also consolidating its position in other areas of Mali, in which they are allowed to enforce Sharia for an end to a blockade, siege or violence in general. It’s possible this is what they are seeking with Bamako as well. JNIM is far less likely to accept anything but a Mali governed by its strict interpretation of Sharia law,» he said.

Ekman said things could have been different: «Whatever access and relationship other U.S. government agencies are able to develop in countries like Mali will likely fall short of what the U.S. could have achieved in redistributing its military capabilities as they exited Niger.»

Advertisement



terrorism,al qaeda,africa,mali,conflicts

Advertisement

INTERNACIONAL

‘Credible intelligence’ reveals North Korea’s successor to Kim Jong Un, South Korea says

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

South Korea’s National Intelligence Service (NIS) thinks that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s daughter has been lined up to be her father’s eventual successor, lawmakers noted on Monday, according to Reuters.

Advertisement

The NIS indicated to lawmakers that its analysis stems from what it characterized as «credible intelligence» that it had gathered, Reuters reported, citing briefings by ruling and opposition party members following a closed-door parliamentary meeting.

Video footage posted last month showed Kim and his daughter on a tank.

KIM JONG UN APPEARS WITH TEENAGE DAUGHTER AT LIVE-FIRE ROCKET TEST IN NORTH KOREA

Advertisement

This photo provided by the North Korean government shows its leader Kim Jong Un, front right, his daughter, reportedly named Kim Ju Ae, and other soldiers on a tank at a military training base in North Korea, on March 19, 2026. (Korean Central News Agency/Korea News Service via AP, File)

The South Korean agency indicated that the scene of the girl driving a tank was meant to emphasize her supposed military aptitude and counter doubts concerning a female successor, lawmakers noted, according to the outlet.

North Korean state-run media KCNA published photos of the North Korean leader and his daughter with a tank last month, following prior images of the girl utilizing firearms, Reuters reported.

Advertisement

The daughter is thought to be about 13 years old and named Ju Ae.

IRAN’S WAR AGAINST THE US AND ISRAEL IS BEING FUELED BY NORTH KOREAN WEAPONS, EXPERT WARNS

Kim Jong Un's daughter, center, tries out a new pistol at a factory producing pistols

In this photo provided by the North Korean government, its leader Kim Jong Un’s daughter, center, tries out a new pistol at a factory producing pistols and other light arms at an undisclosed place in North Korea Wednesday, March 11, 2026.  (Korean Central News Agency/Korea News Service via AP)

The outlet reported that ruling Democratic Party lawmaker Park Sun-won indicated that the scenes are meant to pay «homage» to the North Korean leader’s military appearances years ago when he was being set up to succeed his father as regime leader.

Advertisement

​Korea Institute for National Unification analyst Hong Min said the tank scene is not enough to determine that she has been established as her father’s successor, pointing out that she appeared with her father rather than independently, unlike her father’s independent military appearances as he was being groomed to take the helm.

NORTH KOREA TESTS SOLID-FUEL MISSILE ENGINE AS KIM BOOSTS THREAT TO US MAINLAND

This picture taken on December 20, 2025, and released by North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) via KNS on Dec. 23, 2025, shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Un (R) and his daughter Ju Ae (L) inspecting the Milyong Hotel, which was recently completed in the Samjiyon tourist district of Ryanggang Province.

This picture taken on December 20, 2025, and released by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) via KNS on Dec. 23, 2025, shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Un (R) and his daughter Ju Ae (L) inspecting the Milyong Hotel, which was recently completed in the Samjiyon tourist district of Ryanggang Province. (KCNA VIA KNS / AFP via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

North Korea is one of the world’s only nuclear-armed nations.



world, north korea, kim jong un

Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Newsom’s California rail project now expected to cost $126B, official admits, with still no tracks laid

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

California’s delayed, over-budget high-speed train from Los Angeles to San Francisco is running fast in only one direction: Rising costs to even get rolling, which are now estimated to be $126 billion.

Advertisement

«Today, we estimate with the right optimization just over $125 billion,» California High Speed Rail Authority board member Anthony Williams told CBS’s «60 Minutes» on Sunday. «I think $126 billion is the current estimate for that.»

That is nearly four times the $33 billion price tag presented to voters in 2008, making the long-delayed project a black eye for Democratic-run California, derided as the latest political example of «waste» in deep-blue America and a «train to nowhere.»

«We’re now in 2026: There are no trains; there’s no track laid; it was a complete bait and switch,» Rep. Vince Fong, R-Calif., told «60 Minutes,» saying the project «needs to stop.»

Advertisement

NEWSOM TOUTS CALIFORNIA’S NUMEROUS LEGAL FIGHTS WITH TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IN FINAL STATE OF THE STATE

Construction continues on California’s high-speed rail project in Fresno County on March 24, 2025. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg)

«The California high-speed rail nightmare is the probably quintessential example of government waste and mismanagement.»

Advertisement

California’s long-troubled high-speed rail project is facing renewed scrutiny after state Transportation Secretary Toks Omishakin acknowledged that many of its critics have a point.

«There were mistakes made,» Omishakin told CBS. «Some of the criticisms on this project, I think, are very fair.»

TRUMP ADMIN UNCOVERS ‘STAGGERING’ $8.6 BILLION IN SUSPECTED CALIFORNIA SMALL BUSINESS FRAUD

Advertisement

«I don’t think the voters fully understood, and neither did we in the public sector, what it was going to take to actually get this project delivered,» Omishakin added.

Taking aim at California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, President Donald Trump called California’s project «the worst cost overrun, I’ve ever seen,» a statement he has in the past reserved for Federal Reserve Board Chair Jerome Powell’s Federal Reserve Building in Washington, D.C.

«This administration is working to usher in a Golden Age of Transportation,» Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy told CBS in a statement. «That vision includes high speed rail and we’re exploring opportunities to efficiently build that infrastructure in America.

Advertisement

NEWSOM’S FAILED LEADERSHIP HAS LET CALIFORNIA BECOME A LAND OF FRAUD AND SCAMS

«What this administration won’t stand for is boondoggle projects like Newsom’s Train to Nowhere that wasted billions in taxpayer dollars yet delivered nothing to the American people,» Duffy said. «Under President Trump, America is building again. We defunded Newsom’s disaster and created the first Trump Infrastructure Dividend. Those dollars will now actually fund critical projects that enhance safety on rail networks across America.»

Newsom himself cast doubt on the full San Francisco-to-Los Angeles plan in 2019, and the project now faces a funding gap of roughly $90 billion.

Advertisement

«For $10 billion, Elon Musk put 300 rockets in orbit; for $11 billion, the state of California has built 1,600 feet of elevated rail with no rail,» Palantir CTO Shyam Sankar said in 2024.

State officials say they remain confident more money can be found to dump into the project, but for now California’s high-speed rail stands as a costly symbol of ambition, delay and deep public skepticism.

‘THE DAILY SHOW’ ROASTS GAVIN NEWSOM ON HOMELESSNESS, HIGH-SPEED RAIL IN SATIRICAL ‘LEADING MAN’ VIDEO

Advertisement

«The ultimate 494 miles of building this out without the federal government’s help will be challenging: There’s no doubt about that,» Omishakin said.

Nearly two decades since the start of the project, no track has been laid, and the only major visible progress is on a Central Valley segment between Bakersfield and Merced, according to the report.

The project’s earliest projected opening is now 2033, far later than originally promised. Critics, including Bakersfield’s Fong, a member of the House Transportation Committee.

Advertisement

CALIFORNIA IS BROKE, BUT IT’S NOT TOO LATE FOR THE REST OF US

«The business plan that was put out in 2008 was very theoretical,» Fong said. «You know, ‘This is what we think is gonna happen.’

«And it became very clear that they didn’t have the specifics worked out.»

Advertisement

Fong has sought oversight and accountability on the waste, including 597 change orders that have cost more than $2.3 billion alone as of November 2025, which is nearly 7% of the initial $33 billion project estimate.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Ian Choudri shaking hands with Iron Workers Local 155 members at a railhead site

Gov. Gavin Newsom and California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Ian Choudri, middle, greet Iron Workers Local 155 members at the Southern Railhead site in the Wasco/Shafter area in Wasco, Feb. 3, 2026. (Damian Dovarganes/AP)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«Taxpayers deserve full transparency and accountability,» Fong wrote in a statement in February. «The high-speed rail nightmare is a glaring example of structural mismanagement.

Advertisement

«Reckless, repeated contract amendments have squandered resources and precious tax dollars. Hardworking California taxpayers cannot afford to let this continue. This project should be canceled before even more money and time are wasted.»

los angeles, costs, gavin newsom, san francisco, california

Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Trump se regodea en sus amenazas de cometer crímenes de guerra en Irán

Published

on


WASHINGTON — Centrales eléctricas, plantas desalinizadoras, pozos petrolíferos, carreteras, puentes y demás infraestructura.

Son la base de la vida civil en Irán, y su destrucción por parte de las fuerzas estadounidenses e israelíes causaría un sufrimiento generalizado entre los 93 millones de habitantes del país, y en la mayoría de los casos se consideraría un crimen de guerra según el derecho internacional.

Advertisement

Sin embargo, el presidente Donald Trump ha amenazado repetidamente con hacer precisamente eso, con el objetivo de hacer retroceder a Irán «a la Edad de Piedra, donde pertenece», como lo expresó en un discurso el miércoles.

Durante el fin de semana de Pascua, escribió en línea que «todo el infierno caerá sobre los iraníes» a menos que cumplan con el plazo del lunes para hacer concesiones o abrir el estrecho de Ormuz al tráfico marítimo, y agregó:

El presidente fue enfático respecto a los objetivos en una publicación posterior.

Advertisement

«El martes será el Día de la Central Eléctrica y el Día del Puente, todo en uno, en Irán. ¡No habrá nada igual!», escribió. Maldijo, mencionó el infierno nuevamente y dijo: «Alabado sea Alá».

No se refiere únicamente a instalaciones civiles con usos militares, que pueden considerarse objetivos legítimos.

En su discurso del miércoles, afirmó que atacaría «todas y cada una» de las centrales eléctricas del país, «probablemente de forma simultánea».

Advertisement

Al día siguiente, tras la destrucción de un gran puente cerca de Teherán, la capital de Irán, el ejército estadounidense exclamó en las redes sociales: «¡Y aún hay más!».

Según un funcionario iraní, al menos 13 civiles murieron y 95 resultaron heridos.

Inédito

Advertisement

Ningún otro presidente estadounidense reciente ha hablado tan abiertamente sobre la posibilidad de cometer crímenes de guerra, según afirman expertos legales, historiadores y exfuncionarios estadounidenses.

Los presidentes estadounidenses en tiempos de guerra y sus asesores solían insistir en que intentaban cumplir con el derecho internacional y el derecho militar estadounidense, incluso si en algunos casos lo infringieron.

Las leyes internacionales destinadas a prevenir los horrores de la guerra total están codificadas en una serie de acuerdos, entre ellos los Convenios de Ginebra, los Convenios de La Haya, los Principios de Núremberg y la Carta de las Naciones Unidas.

Advertisement

Los ataques deliberados contra civiles e infraestructura civil violan estos convenios.

Lo mismo ocurre con el saqueo de un país, que Trump ha sugerido que podría llevar a cabo apoderándose del petróleo iraní.

El lenguaje y las acciones de la administración Trump podrían tener consecuencias de gran alcance.

Advertisement

Dentro de Irán, es probable que aviven la oposición a Estados Unidos, incluso entre algunos iraníes comunes que han protestado contra su propio gobierno.

“No creo que los iraníes se hayan unido en torno a un régimen profundamente impopular, pero la destrucción de infraestructuras y el creciente número de víctimas civiles refuerzan la narrativa del régimen de que se trata de una guerra contra la nación, no solo contra sus gobernantes”, afirmó Karim Sadjadpour, experto en Irán de la Fundación Carnegie para la Paz Internacional.

En el ámbito internacional, esto podría menoscabar aún más la posición de Estados Unidos y debilitar las normas de conducta estatal en tiempos de guerra, cuyo objetivo es proteger a la población civil.

Advertisement

Expertos legales afirman que dichas normas se han erosionado en los últimos años debido a la guerra de Rusia en Ucrania, la guerra civil sudanesa y la guerra de Israel contra Hamás en la Franja de Gaza, país que ahora está invadiendo el Líbano y atacando a Irán junto con Estados Unidos.

El presidente estadounidense ha sido inequívoco en su desdén por el derecho internacional.

En una entrevista de dos horas en el Despacho Oval en enero con The New York Times, Trump declaró:

Advertisement

«No necesito el derecho internacional».

Cuando se le preguntó si existía algún límite a su poder global, respondió:

«Sí, hay uno. Mi propia moral».

Advertisement

Realidad

El mundo está viendo cómo esa forma de pensar se desarrolla en tiempo real.

El jueves por la noche, tras un día de críticas públicas por parte de expertos legales sobre el ataque al puente, Trump redobló su postura, escribiendo en línea que el ejército estadounidense “ni siquiera ha empezado a destruir lo que queda en Irán.

Advertisement

¡Los puentes son lo primero, y luego las centrales eléctricas!”.

Los asesores de Trump están de acuerdo.

El secretario de Defensa, Pete Hegseth, declaró el mes pasado que «seguiremos presionando, seguiremos avanzando, sin cuartel ni piedad para nuestros enemigos».

Advertisement

Una orden de «sin cuartel» —que implica matar a todos los soldados enemigos, incluso a los que estén gravemente heridos o se rindan— constituye un crimen de guerra según el derecho internacional y el código militar estadounidense.

El 3 de abril de 2026, varias personas observan el puente B1 en Karaj, Irán.  (Arash Khamooshi/The New York Times)

Cuando se le preguntó el lunes pasado sobre la nueva amenaza de Trump de ampliar los objetivos a sitios civiles, el secretario de Estado Marco Rubio argumentó que el presidente prefiere la diplomacia, pero que los líderes iraníes son «unos lunáticos».

«Están dementes», dijo en una entrevista con ABC News.

«Son fanáticos religiosos».

Advertisement

El Pentágono remitió las preguntas al Comando Central de Estados Unidos, que supervisa las operaciones en Oriente Medio.

El comando no respondió a los correos electrónicos en los que se preguntaba si había atacado deliberadamente objetivos civiles o si lo haría.

«Claramente ilegal y profundamente desacertado»

Advertisement

El lenguaje empleado por la administración ha alarmado a muchos expertos legales, quienes afirman que el mensaje que se envía a los miembros de las fuerzas armadas estadounidenses —y a las naciones extranjeras, incluidos los adversarios— influye en el comportamiento en el campo de batalla.

Cien expertos legales y abogados expresaron su preocupación en una carta abierta publicada por Just Security la semana pasada.

Afirmaron que la conducción de la guerra y la retórica de los funcionarios estadounidenses “suscitan serias inquietudes sobre violaciones del derecho internacional humanitario, incluidos posibles crímenes de guerra”.

Advertisement

Señalaron que el mero hecho de que Estados Unidos atacara a Irán constituye una violación de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, ya que no existe evidencia de que Trump actuara para defender a su país ante una amenaza inminente.

Además, el presidente no obtuvo la autorización del Congreso para la guerra, lo cual contraviene la Constitución.

“Es algo tan claramente ilegal y profundamente desacertado”, dijo Oona A. Hathaway, profesora de derecho de Yale, coautora de la carta y exasesora especial del Pentágono.

Advertisement

“Es difícil comprender hasta qué punto se han ignorado por completo las normas”.

Trump comenzó a amenazar con atacar la infraestructura civil de Irán el 13 de marzo, cuando escribió en internet que podría decidir «destruir» las instalaciones petroleras en la isla de Kharg, el principal centro de exportación de petróleo de Irán.

El lunes pasado, amplió la amenaza para incluir todas las centrales eléctricas, pozos petroleros y plantas desalinizadoras del país.

Advertisement

Al preguntársele si Estados Unidos podría cometer posibles crímenes de guerra, Karoline Leavitt, secretaria de prensa de la Casa Blanca, declaró en una rueda de prensa que «esta administración y las fuerzas armadas estadounidenses siempre actuarán dentro del marco de la ley».

Sin embargo, añadió que, para lograr sus objetivos, el presidente «seguirá adelante sin detenerse y espera que el régimen iraní llegue a un acuerdo con la administración».

El Comando Central de Estados Unidos informó el miércoles que las fuerzas estadounidenses han atacado más de 12.300 objetivos en Irán desde que Trump e Israel iniciaron la guerra el 28 de febrero.

Advertisement

Algunos de los ataques, dirigidos contra instalaciones militares cercanas a zonas civiles, han provocado la muerte de cientos de civiles, incluyendo a casi 200 escolares en un ataque con misiles.

Testimonio

«Me encuentro muy mal; los ataques ya han alcanzado estructuras civiles», declaró Amir Sarkandi, un empresario tecnológico de Teherán, en un foro en línea tras el ataque al puente el jueves.

Advertisement

«Nuestras inversiones y tesoros nacionales están siendo destruidos».

Israel también ha atacado objetivos civiles.

Sus funcionarios insisten en que están destruyendo infraestructura de doble uso.

Advertisement

En represalia, Irán ha atacado objetivos civiles en Israel y en países árabes del Golfo.

El Pentágono impulsa la «letalidad»

Los emplazamientos civiles pueden considerarse objetivos legales si son utilizados por las fuerzas armadas, afirmó Brian Finucane, ex abogado del Departamento de Estado especializado en derecho de conflictos armados y asesor sénior del International Crisis Group.

Advertisement

Esta determinación suele realizarse caso por caso.

Sin embargo, Hegseth ha despedido y reasignado a abogados uniformados y ha desmantelado muchas de las oficinas creadas para prevenir los ataques contra civiles y lugares relacionados.

En cambio, no ha dejado de hablar de aumentar la “letalidad”.

Advertisement

«Este secretario de defensa tiene un historial de denigrar el derecho internacional humanitario y a los abogados militares», declaró Finucane.

«Es muy preocupante porque desconocemos hasta qué punto esta retórica se traducirá en ilegalidad».

Según veteranos, si los militares estadounidenses ejecutan órdenes que consideran crímenes de guerra, esto podría traumatizarlos.

Advertisement

Algunos infantes de marina en servicio activo ya llaman a la agencia de Hegseth el «Departamento de Crímenes de Guerra» en lugar del «Departamento de Guerra», nombre que el presidente le da al Departamento de Defensa, afirmó el representante Seth Moulton, demócrata por Massachusetts, quien sirvió en Irak como infante de marina.

Durante un enfrentamiento con Irán en su primer mandato, Trump amenazó con destruir 52 sitios culturales del país.

Mark T. Esper, entonces secretario de Defensa, reconoció que atacar dichos sitios sería un crimen de guerra y afirmó que el Pentágono no lo haría.

Advertisement

La segunda administración Trump ha adoptado un enfoque diferente.

Para empezar, ha desatado una violencia militar de forma más descarada en un corto período de tiempo, llevando a cabo ataques aéreos en ocho países en tan solo un año.

Además, la administración ha sido objeto de condenas por casi 50 ataques contra embarcaciones civiles en el Caribe y el Pacífico oriental, que han provocado al menos 163 muertes.

Advertisement

Trump ha afirmado, sin presentar pruebas, que las embarcaciones transportaban drogas a Estados Unidos y que este país se encuentra en un “conflicto armado” con los cárteles de la droga.

Sin embargo, expertos legales sostienen que los ataques constituyen un asesinato en toda regla.

El 4 de marzo, un submarino estadounidense torpedeó una fragata iraní cerca de Sri Lanka con aproximadamente 180 personas a bordo.

Advertisement

El destructor regresaba a casa tras realizar ejercicios militares en la India, en los que también había participado Estados Unidos.

El ejército estadounidense pidió a Sri Lanka que rescatara a los supervivientes, pero no lo hizo directamente, lo que, según algunos expertos legales, podría constituir una violación de los Convenios de Ginebra.

En un discurso, Trump relató una conversación con oficiales militares estadounidenses sobre la fragata:

Advertisement

«Les dije: «¿Por qué no capturamos el barco? Podríamos usarlo. ¿Por qué los hundimos?».

Me respondieron: «Es más divertido hundirlos».

Les gusta más hundirlos. Dicen que es más seguro hundirlos. Supongo que probablemente sea cierto».

Advertisement

c.2026 The New York Times Company

Continue Reading

Tendencias