Ahoy, Privateers! Strike Cartels with this Classic Strategy

Set sail, privateers! Ready your cutlasses and prepare the grapeshot!

Not quite, though. Utah Senator Mike Lee has sparked a discussion about reinstating letters of marque and reprisal as a strategy to combat rogue nations and non-state actors.

In the context of asymmetric warfare, a new generation of US privateers could enable America to confront its adversaries in their own domains.

Historically, a government-issued letter of marque allowed privately funded warships to set forth and capture enemy vessels, usually in international waters.

After being defeated, an enemy ship and its cargo would be brought to a friendly port, where a prize court would determine their legitimacy. Valid prizes could be sold, allowing the privateer to retain the profit.

Those holding a letter of marque were not deemed pirates but rather recognized as prisoners of war.

(Letters of reprisal were similar but had a narrower scope, intended for individuals wronged by a foreign government seeking recompense.)

Lee introduced the idea of reviving letters of marque in a thread on X last month, proposing them as a mechanism for targeting Mexican drug cartels.

His comments ignited a wave of skull-and-crossbones memes and playful “avast, me hearties” replies, alongside more serious considerations.

Erik Prince, founder of the Blackwater private security firm (let’s avoid calling them “mercenaries”), expressed support for Lee’s idea: “Only a private organization will have the capacity to act swiftly with the needed flexibility,” Prince told Breitbart News.

On February 13, Representative Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) introduced a bill allowing the president to issue letters of marque and reprisal against cartels, which the Trump administration has since classed as foreign terrorist groups.

The US Constitution empowers Congress to approve the issuance of letters of marque. Following the 9/11 attacks, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) suggested using them to target terrorists, while more recent analyses have proposed “Cyber Letters of Marque and Reprisal” aimed at tackling hackers.

But how exactly would this operate?

In Lee’s vision, Congress would appoint trained civilians or established security firms to disrupt identified supply routes and seize high-value assets without imposing financial strain on taxpayers or endangering US military personnel.

His primary target suggestion is Mexican drug cartels, which utilize boats and even ships to transport drugs into the United States, where sea operations could intercept them similarly to the privateers of the past.

However, most discussions revolve around raiding the cartels on land to confiscate their vehicles, gold, equipment, and massive cash reserves. (Selling confiscated drugs would somewhat undermine the intent, but the US government could purchase the drugs at a reasonable price and destroy them.)

It’s uncertain whether Mexico would recognize a land-based letter of marque that permits US citizens to raid cartels within its borders. Still, the Mexican government has largely lost control of areas where cartels operate, making the question somewhat academic.

If Erik Prince believes such an approach is feasible, that’s likely a more knowledgeable perspective on the matter than mine.

Moreover, some of America’s adversaries possess vessels that continue to operate despite US sanctions.

For instance, Iran is illegally transporting oil worldwide, blatantly disregarding international sanctions.

A large supertanker filled with crude oil could be valued at around $150 million just for the cargo, with the vessel itself worth perhaps $100 million. Smaller tankers would be less valuable but still significant.

Given these valuations, it seems plausible that private companies might become interested in acting as America’s sanctions-enforcement agents, especially since Iran lacks a substantial ocean-going navy.

Ships carrying Russian crude are also avoiding sanctions, and Russia currently possesses a limited navy compared to Iran. If there were ever a need to increase pressure on Vladimir Putin, letters of marque could serve as a tool.

We might even take a page from the privateers’ strategies and employ a more piratical method in our legal system.

A statute known as the False Claims Act allows “qui tam” lawsuits against individuals or organizations that make false representations to secure government funds or contracts, with the reward being a share of the proceeds from the contracts.

As universities attempt to counter Trump’s regulations dismantling DEI programs, they could expose themselves to qui tam lawsuits by asserting they have eliminated DEI when they have not.

This would unleash a power greater than that of all of Blackbeard’s crew: America’s plaintiff lawyers. Universities have significant financial resources.

Unfortunately, we won’t witness signal flags, boarding actions, or the thunder of 18-pound cannons if Lee’s proposal gains traction.

Nevertheless, in these times of budget tightening, a self-funding mechanism for either warfare or policy enforcement appears quite enticing. Arr, mateys!

Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a law professor at the University of Tennessee and the founder of the InstaPundit.com blog.