A senior U.S. member described a video of a military attack on a suspected drug vessel that was handed to legislators on Thursday as “one of the most frightening things” he has seen since it showed survivors clearly distressed when they were slain.
The leading Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Jim Himes, made comments that increase pressure on those responsible for the September 2 U.S. military assault on a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean that resulted in the deaths of eleven accused traffickers.
The legality of the operation and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s involvement in it have come under scrutiny when officials revealed that the operation involved a follow-on hit on the vessel after an initial assault while there were still survivors.
This year, Hegseth has already faced criticism after a Pentagon inquiry found that he sent classified information about impending operations in Yemen using Signal on his personal computer.
Top U.S. general Dan Caine and Admiral Frank Bradley, who led the Joint Special Operations Command at the time, briefed senators, including Himes, about the operation on Thursday and shown an uncut video of the subsequent attack.
“What I witnessed in that room was one of the most frightening things that I have seen in my experience in public service,” Himes said to reporters after the briefing.
“You have two people who were slain by the United States when in obvious danger, without any way to go, and with a ruined vessel.”
However, he said that he admired the admiral, who is now in charge of the U.S. Special Operations Command, and that Bradley and Caine “did the right thing.”
Prior to the briefing, a U.S. official said that Bradley would inform Congress that the survivors’ vessel was still thought to carry illicit drugs, making them valid targets for a second assault.
When asked for comment, the Pentagon did not reply.
Over 80 individuals have died in 20 U.S. military raids on suspected drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific so far this year.
According to U.S. and international law, it would constitute murder to kill suspected drug dealers who do not represent an immediate danger of significant harm to others. Nonetheless, the US has described the assaults as an armed conflict with drug cartels.
Attacks on fighters who are disabled, unconscious, or shipwrecked are prohibited under the Defense Department’s Law of War Manual as long as they do not participate in hostilities or are not trying to flee. According to the guideline, shooting on survivors of a shipwreck is an example of a “obviously unlawful” instruction that ought to be disregarded.
Hegseth said on Tuesday that he had seen the first American hit on the suspected drug-smuggling ship in September in real time, but he did not witness any survivors in the sea or the second deadly strike, which he claimed was executed in the “fog of war.” However, he supported Bradley’s choice to launch a follow-up attack.
Hegseth said, “Admiral Bradley took the right choice to finally destroy the boat and neutralize the danger.”
HEGSETH IN SIGNAL USE AND FOCUS ON STRIKES
On Tuesday, Trump mostly expressed support for Hegseth and the operation while also claiming he was unaware of the second attack. On Sunday, Trump told reporters on Air Force One that he would not have wanted the second strike.
The Trump administration claims that the deadly attacks on drug boats, such as the one in early September, are a part of a larger strategy to stop the flow of illicit substances into the United States.
Although many legal experts contest the veracity of such a characterisation, the administration has claimed that drug cartels constitute an urgent danger to the United States and justified its attacks by comparing suspected drug traffickers with terrorists.
Both the military campaign and Hegseth’s employment of Signal continue to be of interest.
According to the Pentagon Inspector General investigation, which was made public on Thursday, Hegseth’s use of Signal may have put American soldiers in risk if it had been intercepted.
According to the study, “[The) Secretary’s actions presented a risk to operational security that might have resulted in failed U.S. mission goals and probable injury to U.S. pilots.”
The Signal probe, according to prominent Democrats, including the senior Democratic congressman on the House Armed Services Committee, demonstrated that Hegseth lacked the judgment necessary to command the U.S. armed forces.
