ELN Denies U.S. Claims After Drone Strike on Suspected Narco Vessel
Executive Summary
The National Liberation Army (ELN) of Colombia has publicly denied U.S. government allegations that one of its vessels was targeted in an American military strike on Oct. 18, 2025, in the Eastern Pacific. The strike, confirmed by the Pentagon as the eighth such operation against alleged “narco-terrorist” vessels under the Trump administration, reportedly killed two individuals aboard what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described as a drug-smuggling craft “operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization.” The ELN responded by rejecting any involvement in narcotrafficking and accusing U.S. agencies of fabricating links between the group and the drug trade.
Key Judgments
1. The ELN’s denial directly challenges the U.S. government’s narrative linking the group to maritime narcotics smuggling.
Evidence: In a communiqué dated Oct. 20, 2025, the ELN’s Central Command (COCE) declared that it “has not and will not have any vessels linked to drug trafficking activities” and reiterated its “ethical commitment” against narcotics production and distribution. The group accused the CIA and DEA of conducting “setups” to falsely associate the ELN with drug trade logistics. (ELN Voces; Abolition Media)
2. The U.S. strike marks an escalation of Washington’s militarized counter-narcotics policy, expanding from the Caribbean into Pacific waters.
Evidence: Defense Secretary Hegseth confirmed via social media that the Oct. 21 strike—the eighth overall—was the first conducted on the Pacific side of South America. Previous operations occurred in the Caribbean and targeted both Colombian and Venezuelan vessels. (USNI News)
Analysis
The ELN’s categorical denial reflects its ongoing attempt to distinguish its insurgent identity from that of criminal cartels, a distinction central to its self-portrayal as a political rather than a narcotics-motivated actor. While independent reporting has long documented some ELN factions’ involvement in protection rackets or taxation of coca cultivation in Colombia’s borderlands, the group maintains that it does not directly participate in production or trafficking. The U.S. strike narrative—linking the ELN to a narco vessel—undermines that claim and reinforces Washington’s framing of the group as a hybrid “narco-terrorist” organization.
Operationally, the Oct. 21 strike represents an expansion of the U.S. campaign into the Pacific theater, suggesting intelligence-sharing with regional partners or maritime surveillance assets along Ecuadorian and Colombian coastlines. The Pentagon’s assertion that the targeted vessel was “operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization” implies prior targeting intelligence specifically identifying the ELN—a claim difficult to verify given the absence of physical evidence or independent investigation.
Diplomatically, the episode risks aggravating U.S.–Colombia relations. President Petro’s administration has opposed unilateral U.S. military actions and favors negotiated disarmament with insurgent groups, including the ELN. Public anger in Colombia over civilian casualties from earlier strikes adds to domestic skepticism about U.S. intent.
The ELN communiqué’s call for an “International Commission” to verify its anti-narcotics stance echoes prior guerrilla diplomacy strategies—framing external accusations as imperialist disinformation while projecting moral legitimacy. Regardless of factual accuracy, the messaging aims to consolidate internal discipline and international sympathy at a moment of heightened military pressure.
