A significant bipartisan inquiry is underway in Washington following explosive allegations regarding U.S. military conduct during anti-narcotics operations in the Caribbean. The controversy centers on a Washington Post report alleging that a secondary military strike was ordered specifically to eliminate survivors from an initial attack on a suspected Venezuelan drug-smuggling vessel on September 2nd.
According to the report, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a directive to ‘kill everybody’ on board one such vessel. A Special Operations commander overseeing the mission subsequently ordered a follow-up strike to comply with these instructions, targeting the two survivors from the first engagement.
The report has triggered a vigorous response from Congressional oversight committees. Both the Republican-led Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee have announced bipartisan investigations to determine the factual circumstances of these operations. In a rare show of unity, lawmakers from both major parties have expressed profound legal and ethical concerns, with Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) stating the allegations ‘rise to the level of a war crime if true.’
Secretary Hegseth has vehemently denied the allegations, labeling them as ‘fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory’ in a social media post. He maintains that all strikes conducted as part of Operation Sentinel are ‘lawful under both US and international law,’ asserting that every targeted trafficker was ‘affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization.’
President Donald Trump offered his full support to his defense secretary, telling reporters aboard Air Force One, ‘He said he did not say that. And I believe him a 100%.’ The President added that his administration ‘will look into’ the matter and stated, ‘I wouldn’t have wanted that – not a second strike.’
The military operations, which have resulted in over 80 fatalities since early September, represent a significant escalation of U.S. anti-narcotics efforts in international waters off Venezuela and Colombia. The Trump administration justifies these actions as acts of self-defense against vessels transporting illicit drugs toward American shores.
Internationally, the incident has drawn sharp condemnation from Venezuela’s National Assembly, which has vowed to conduct its own ‘rigorous and thorough investigation.’ The Venezuelan government has consistently accused the United States of using anti-drug operations as a pretext to stoke regional tensions and undermine its sovereignty.
Legal experts have raised questions about the operations’ compliance with international maritime law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which generally prohibits interference with vessels in international waters except under specific circumstances such as ‘hot pursuit.’ Professor Luke Moffett of Queens University Belfast noted that while ‘force can be used to stop a boat… generally this should be non-lethal measures.’