← The President's Daily Brief
The President's Daily Brief
PDB Afternoon Bulletin | February 25th, 2025: Could The U.S. Use Privateers To Fight Cartels? & Europe Pledges Billions More For Ukraine
00:13:41
Loading summary
Transcript5 lines
- [00:12]
Mike Baker
It's Tuesday, the 25th of February. Welcome to the PDB Afternoon Bulletin. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage. Let's get briefed. First up, could the United States turn to privateers to bring the fight to South America's drug cartels will explore the unconventional idea that's being floated in some corners of Congress and the potential dangers of a return to legal piracy. Later in the show, as the US Appears to step back in its support of Ukraine, European leaders are doubling down, announcing plans to authorize a billion dollar arms package for Kyiv at an emergency summit scheduled for next week. But first, today's afternoon spotlight. Today we take a closer look at an intriguing question. Could the US Turn to privateers to combat drug cartels? And another question. When was the last time you heard the word privateers? While privateering traditionally involved armed ships targeting enemy vessels in wartime, the concept. Well, it raises an interesting possibility. Could private entities be authorized to disrupt cartel operations, intercept drug shipments, and strike at these criminal organizations in ways that conventional forces can't? The idea stems from the US Congress's power to issue what are called Letters of mark and reprisal. These are official government authorizations that allow private citizens to attack and seize enemy vessels or assets. In essence, it's a legal way for individuals to become pirates on a specific mission. And really, who hasn't wanted to be a pirate at some point in their lives? I mean, the clothes, the rum, the. The parrot. As long as the parrot has a sense of humor, I suppose. Now, using privateers in armed conflict isn't exactly a new idea in US History. It's just hasn't been done that often. It played a major role during both the American Revolution and the War of 1812. Back then, with a small navy that was unable to compete with the British, the US Government issued letters of marque allowing private ship owners to attack enemy vessels. During the Revolution, these privateers disrupted British supply lines and pressured Parliament to end the war. In the War of 1812, they captured over 1300 British ships, inflicting significant economic damage and helping to push the British to the negotiating table. The idea of using privateers against the cartels, well, that is a new idea, but it's been floated a number of times recently, with one of the most vocal proponents being Utah Senator Mike Lee. He suggested that Congress could issue letters of mark and reprisal to authorize private security firms to intercept cartel operations, especially those involving drug shipments or human trafficking across the border. Senator Lee said these privateers could focus on disrupting supply lines, capturing high value targets, and seizing cartel assets like boats, vehicles, cash and gold. And the concept is gaining attention with an opinion piece by Professor Glenn Reynolds from the University of Tennessee published yesterday in the New York Post, where he discusses the potential of privateers in the fight against the cartels. So you think to yourself this might seem like a wild idea, but allowing privateers to target drug cartels could offer several potential benefits. For one, it could expand enforcement capabilities by supplementing U.S. military and law enforcement efforts with highly motivated, privately funded operators. Additionally, it could be a more cost effective solution as privateers could operate on a price based system, seizing cartel assets, drug shipments and illicit funds, rather than relying on solely on taxpayer dollars. Of course. Well, there are obvious issues with that aspect of this idea, but it could also introduce an unpredictable, decentralized threat to cartels, forcing them to defend against non government actors operating with different tactics and rules of engagement. Another advantage is that privateers could bypass the bureaucratic constraints that slow down government forces. What are we saying? That there are bureaucratic constraints within the operations of government, allowing them to pursue cartel targets across borders with fewer political and legal limitations. And lastly, it could serve as a deterrent, possibly raising the risks and costs for cartels, potentially making drug trafficking a less lucrative enterprise. However, before you get too excited and you start rummaging through your closet for that old Halloween costume, eye patch and puffy shirt, well, there are some obvious pitfalls. For starters, much of the cartel's booty. And yes, this is the first time we've ever used the word booty on the pdb. Well, that booty consists of illicit goods like drugs and contraband. This means privateers wouldn't be able to sell what they see as for profit, which of course undermines the traditional incentive structure of privateering. There are also legal and ethical concerns. Private actors operating with government approval might blur the line between law enforcement and vigilantism, raising questions about accountability. Additionally, there's a risk that this approach could escalate violence. There is definitely that risk, as cartels could retaliate aggressively against privateers, potentially leading to more chaos than less. International law could also come into play as privateers targeting cartel assets across borders could spark diplomatic conflicts. And finally, well, there's the danger of corruption. Privateers might abuse their power, engage in criminal activities, or get co opted by the very cartels that they're meant to fight. So while the concept of using privateers against drug cartels is definitely unconventional, it is an idea that's being floated as perhaps another option. For fighting cartels given the growing challenges in combating these criminal organizations. Up next, the eu the European Union scrambles to authorize a billion dollar arms package for Ukraine at an emergency summit scheduled for next week. I'll be right back.
- [06:34]
Ryan
Hello, it is Ryan. And I was on a flight the other day playing one of my favorite social spin slot games on chumbacasino.com I looked over the person sitting next to me and you know what they were doing? They were also playing Chumba Casino. Everybody's loving having fun with it. Chumba Casino is home to hundreds of casino style games that you can play for free, anytime, anywhere. So sign up now@chumbacasino.com to claim your free welcome bonus. That's chumbacasino.com and live the Chumba Life.
- [06:58]
Mike Baker
Sponsored by Chumba Casino. No purchase necessary. VGW Group void where prohibited by law.
- [07:03]
Ryan
21/ Terms and Conditions apply.
- [07:06]
Mike Baker
Welcome back to the Afternoon Bulletin. As the United States shows signs of stepping back in its support of Ukraine. Ukraine European leaders are doubling down, setting the stage for an emergency summit next week to hammer out a new military aid package as Kiev enters its fourth year of war against Russia, going on four years now. On Monday, Kayakalas, the EU's chief diplomat, confirmed that European foreign ministers had reached broad consensus on a new initiative to arm Ukraine. But key details while they remain unresolved, Collis stated, quote, the details, especially the numbers, will be decided and discussed at the extraordinary European summit on March 6, end quote. While no firm figure has been set, the EU has already provided 21 billion in military aid annually since Russia's invasion in 2022. That's a benchmark that many diplomats argue must be increased. The underlying concern is clear. Without sustained Western backing, Ukraine may be forced into territorial concessions that could further embolden Moscow. Collis warned that Europe must put Ukraine in a, quote, position of strength to prevent an unjust peace agreement. The upcoming summit comes as ceasefire talks between Washington and Moscow are ongoing, but notably exclude Ukraine and EU nations, leaving European leaders to question whether their interests are being sidelined. But European unity on the issue is far from guaranteed. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, one of Russian President Putin's staunchest allies in the bloc, fiercely opposed further arms shipments, claiming they will, quote, prolong the war. Orban's government has repeatedly used its veto power to block key EU aid measures, forcing European leaders to explore workarounds in order to neutralize Budapest's obstructionism across the Atlantic. President Trump's escalating criticism of Ukrainian President Zelensky has deepened European anxieties. That's putting it mildly. Leaders are concerned that Washington could pressure Kyiv into accepting a ceasefire that could favor the Kremlin's territorial gains. Despite Orban's resistance, several European nations have wasted no time ramping up their support. On Monday, Nordic and Baltic leaders released a joint statement pledging to bolster Kyiv military capabilities, warning that the war's outcome will have, quote, fundamental and long lasting effects on European and transatlantic security, end quote. As part of the new push, the EU is preparing to send Ukraine nearly 4 billion in March, while the UK is committing close to $5 billion. Canada, for its part, has pledged 25 armored vehicles, four F16 simulators, and $5 billion in frozen Russian assets. Other aid from EU member states is expected to push into the billions. Meanwhile, Denmark, facing growing concerns over Russia's aggression, announced a dramatic increase in its defense spending, committing an additional $7 billion over the next two years. The Danish prime minister warned that Europe must massively rearm in order to counter future threats from Moscow. As European leaders work to finalize their next steps, Ukraine remains at a pivotal crossroads due to the ongoing negotiations between Washington and Moscow combined with Trump's skepticism of Zelensky. Well, the EU sees the upcoming summit as a crucial test of whether they can fill the void if U. S support for Ukraine continues to wane. And that, my friends, is the BDB afternoon bulletin for Tuesday 25th February. If you have any questions or comments, please reach out to me at pdb@thefirst tv.com and don't forget, if you're thinking to yourself, I love the PDB but would really love an ad free version. Well, it's simple. Just become a premium member of the President's Daily brief by visiting PDB premium.com I'm Mike Baker and I'll be back tomorrow. Until then, stay informed, stay safe, stay cool. It.