WASHINGTON, Dec 4 (Reuters) – U.S. lawmakers split along party lines after being briefed on Thursday on a strike against a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean, with Democrats saying they were horrified by a video showing survivors in distress being killed, while a Republican lawmaker defended the strike as legal.
On September 2, the U.S. military destroyed a suspected drug vessel in the Caribbean, killing 11 suspected traffickers. Officials have said the operation included a follow-on strike against the vessel after an initial attack when there were still survivors, raising questions about the legality of the operation and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s role in it.
Hegseth has already come under fire this year after a Pentagon investigation faulted him for using Signal on his personal device to send sensitive information about planned strikes in Yemen.
Admiral Frank Bradley, who was the head of the Joint Special Operations Command at the time, and top U.S. general Dan Caine on Thursday briefed lawmakers on the operation and showed an unedited video of the follow-on strike.
“You have two individuals in clear distress, without any means of locomotion, with a destroyed vessel, who were killed by the United States,” Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters after the briefing.
Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was “deeply disturbed” by the video and said it should be released to the public.
“This briefing confirmed my worst fears about the nature of the Trump Administration’s military activities,” Reed added in a statement.
But Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Bradley and Hegseth did exactly what was expected of them.
“I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat, loaded with drugs bound for the United States, back over so they could stay in the fight,” Cotton said, adding it was possible that other suspected drug boats could have come to their aid and recovered the drugs onboard.
Before the briefing, a U.S. official said Bradley, who now heads U.S. Special Operations Command, would tell lawmakers that the survivors were legitimate targets for a second attack because their vessel was still believed to contain illegal narcotics.
The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.
STRIKES PART OF TRUMP’S CAMPAIGN AGAINST CARTELS
So far, there have been 20 U.S. military strikes in the Caribbean and Pacific against suspected drug vessels this year that have killed more than 80 people.
Killing suspected drug traffickers who pose no threat of causing imminent serious injury to others would be murder under U.S. and international law. However, the United States has framed the attacks as a war with drug cartels, calling them armed groups.
The Defense Department’s Law of War Manual forbids attacks on combatants who are incapacitated, unconscious or shipwrecked, provided they abstain from hostilities or are not attempting to escape. The manual cites firing upon shipwreck survivors as an example of a “clearly illegal” order that should be refused.
Hegseth said on Tuesday he had watched the first U.S. strike in September on the suspected drug-smuggling vessel in real time, but did not see survivors in the water or the second lethal strike that he described as being carried out in the “fog of war.” But he defended Bradley’s decision to carry out a follow-up strike.
“Admiral Bradley made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat,” Hegseth said.
HEGSETH IN FOCUS OVER STRIKES, SIGNAL USE
Trump, who told reporters on Air Force One on Sunday that he would not have wanted the second strike, largely voiced support for Hegseth and the operation on Tuesday, while also saying he hadn’t been aware of the second strike.
The lethal strikes on drug vessels, including the early September one, are part of a broader campaign that the Trump administration says is aimed at cutting off the supply of illegal drugs into the U.S.
The administration has said drug cartels pose an immediate threat to the United States and justified its strikes by equating suspected drug traffickers with terrorists, though many legal experts dispute the validity of such a characterization.
While Caine, the top U.S. military officer, has been involved in the strikes, he has largely avoided criticism for the operations.
But Hegseth remains in focus for both the military campaign as well as his use of Signal.
The Pentagon Inspector General report, which was released on Thursday, said Hegseth’s use of Signal could have endangered U.S. troops if intercepted.
“(The) Secretary’s actions created a risk to operational security that could have resulted in failed U.S. mission objectives and potential harm to U.S. pilots,” the report said.
Prominent Democrats, including Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democratic lawmaker on the House Armed Services Committee, said the Signal investigation showed Hegseth lacked the judgment required of the leader of the U.S. armed forces.
(Reporting by Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart; Editing by Michael Perry and Deepa Babington)
Comments