Recent US actions across multiple international fronts have sparked widespread concern about America's increasingly unilateral approach to foreign policy, raising questions about respect for international law and sovereignty.

On October 14, former President Trump announced via social media that US forces conducted a "lethal strike" against a vessel in international waters, claiming it was linked to designated terrorist organizations and drug trafficking. The operation resulted in six deaths, with Trump stating that "intelligence confirmed the vessel was trafficking drugs and was associated with illegal narcotics terrorist networks." The strike occurred in international waters along what was described as a known trafficking route.

However, the unilateral action has drawn sharp criticism from Latin American nations. Venezuela condemned the strike as "indiscriminate killing of innocents" and accused the US of intimidation tactics without proper evidence. The incident has reportedly caused Venezuelan fishermen to avoid going to sea due to security concerns.

Colombian President Petro previously criticized US anti-drug policies during a UN General Assembly speech, arguing that US missiles in the Caribbean region are not truly aimed at stopping drugs but rather at "conquering southern peoples." He called US claims about preventing drug flow "a lie."

Even within the US, some officials have expressed concern about the legal implications. Republican Senator Rand Paul criticized the "despicable and reckless" nature of "glorifying killing without trial."

According to available data, US forces have conducted five similar operations, resulting in at least 27 deaths total.

**US-Argentina Relations and Electoral Interference**

On the same day, Trump hosted Argentine President Javier Milei at the White House, where Milei presented Trump with a framed letter nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize. In return, Trump made explicit comments about US support for Argentina, stating that if Milei loses upcoming elections, "we won't be generous to Argentina."

This statement coincided with the US Treasury Department's announcement of a $20 billion bilateral currency swap arrangement to help Argentina intervene in foreign exchange markets. Western media outlets have interpreted this as direct support for Milei ahead of crucial elections scheduled two weeks later.

The explicit nature of Trump's conditional aid statement has been characterized by observers as unprecedented acknowledgment of direct foreign electoral interference by a US president.

**Visa Restrictions and UN Access**

Following President Petro's criticism of US policies at the UN, Washington revoked his visa, effectively preventing his future participation in UN activities. This action contradicts the US obligation under UN headquarters agreements to provide visa facilitation for officials attending UN meetings.

Similarly, Palestinian President Abbas was denied a visa for this year's UN General Assembly, forcing him to deliver remarks via video rather than in person.

**NATO Spending Disputes**

Trump also criticized Spain on October 14 for failing to meet what he claimed was a 5% GDP defense spending target for NATO members. He threatened trade penalties and potential expulsion from the alliance, despite NATO data showing US defense spending at 3.4% of GDP in 2024.

Spain has maintained that its resources should prioritize domestic social programs over military expansion. The country has also been vocal in criticizing Israeli actions in Gaza, with Prime Minister Sanchez emphasizing that ceasefire agreements should not lead to impunity for previous actions.

**International Response**

China has voiced concern at the UN Security Council regarding US unilateral enforcement actions in international waters, arguing that such operations violate international law and threaten maritime freedom and safety. Chinese representatives criticized these actions as serious violations of sovereignty and legitimate rights of other nations.

The accumulation of these incidents on a single day highlights growing tensions over US foreign policy approaches and their implications for international relations and legal frameworks. The actions have raised broader questions about the consistency between stated US values and foreign policy implementation.

These developments come at a time when international observers are closely monitoring US foreign policy direction and its impact on global diplomatic relationships and legal precedents.