Recent revelations concerning the U.S. military's early September strike on an alleged drug-carrying vessel have sparked significant controversy. According to a source familiar with the incident, two survivors were reportedly attempting to climb back onto the boat before it was hit a second time. This information was shared by CBS News on Wednesday, shedding light on the chaotic circumstances surrounding the strike.
The two individuals, identified as survivors of the initial attack, allegedly tried to salvage some of the drugs onboard. The source indicated that they appeared to be in communication with others during this time, suggesting that there were additional boats in the vicinity capable of providing assistance. This detail was first reported by ABC News, which has been closely following the developments of this military operation.
The September 2 mission marked the first of over 20 attacks on alleged drug boats conducted by the Trump administration in recent months. The operation has drawn bipartisan scrutiny following a report by The Washington Post, which claimed that the military executed at least two strikes on the same vessel in the Caribbean, resulting in the deaths of survivors from the initial hit. According to the report, the second strike was ordered based on comments made by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who allegedly stated that everyone aboard the boat should be killed.
This week, the White House confirmed the occurrence of a second strike but denied that Hegseth ordered it. Hegseth has maintained that the decision was made by the mission's commander, Adm. Mitch Bradley, asserting that the follow-up strike was both legal and justified. This situation has prompted a range of legal opinions, with Democrats and several legal experts suggesting that the second strike could potentially constitute a war crime under both U.S. and international law, especially if the military specifically targeted survivors.
A Pentagon manual concerning the law of war stipulates that wounded, sick, or shipwrecked combatants no longer pose a threat and should not be attacked. This principle raises serious questions about the legality of the military's actions in this instance. Even prior to these revelations, the campaign of boat strikes had faced broader legal challenges. Critics argue that the president lacks the authority to order military operations against alleged drug traffickers without congressional approval, a significant departure from previous U.S. practices that treated drug smugglers as criminals rather than combatants.
The Trump administration has defended the strikes, asserting that they are lawful due to the U.S. being engaged in a non-international armed conflict with drug cartels, which they classify as terrorist organizations. Lawmakers from both parties have pledged to investigate the September 2 strike further. Adm. Mitch Bradley is set to testify before Congress on Thursday, where he is expected to present video evidence from the September 2 strike and clarify the decision-making process behind the military's actions. He will be accompanied by Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, during this critical testimony.