CNN reported, based on sources familiar with the matter, that on September 2, U.S. armed forces conducted a follow-up strike on a suspected drug vessel in the Caribbean Sea after the initial strike failed to eliminate everyone on board. This strike on September 2 was the first in a series of regular attacks on alleged drug ships. Military estimates indicated that the first strike disabled the vessel and resulted in the deaths of some crew members, but survivors remained in the water. The second strike was carried out to eliminate the remaining people on board; as a result, the total death toll reached 11, and the vessel sank. A source stated that before the operation, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegset told troops that it was necessary to ensure the death of everyone on the ship, but it is unclear whether he knew about the survivors before the follow-up strike. The administration publicly announced the strike on the day it happened, but it was not officially acknowledged that survivors were killed. President Donald Trump stated that ground operations against suspected drug trafficking in Venezuela might occur “soon,” although questions remain about the legality of the U.S. campaign in the region. Officials have acknowledged that it is not always known in advance who is aboard the targeted vessels. Democratic Congresswoman Madeleine Dean expressed concern that the administration destroyed multiple vessels without consulting Congress; the materials she reviewed in the SCIF did not confirm transparency regarding the events. Individuals informed about the “double” strike pointed to a potential violation of international humanitarian law: the laws of armed conflict prohibit killing an enemy who is out of action due to wounds or surrender (“hors de combat”). Human rights activists and former Pentagon lawyers note that either those killed were civilians (making the strikes extrajudicial killings) or, if considered combatants, the elimination of those no longer able to fight is also prohibited. Initial reports about the strikes were published in The Intercept and The Washington Post. Hegset defended the legality of the operations on social media, claiming they complied with international law and received legal approval from both military and civilian jurisprudence, and stated that those killed were allegedly linked to “designated terrorist organizations.” According to sources, the military was aware of survivors in the water after the first strike on September 2 and conducted the second strike with the aim of both sinking the vessel and eliminating the remaining people on it. In briefings, the Pentagon explained the second strike as necessary to sink the vessel to prevent it from posing a danger to navigation. Although the U.S. Navy has deliberately sunk vessels in several instances, September 2 is the only known case where, according to sources, service members intentionally killed survivors. The reason survivors were not rescued on this occasion, and in other episodes, remains unclear: in October, after a different strike, the administration rescued two survivors and repatriated them. In a post on Truth Social, Trump identified the target of the strike as “Tren de Aragua narcoterrorists” in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. The administration is attempting to legally justify the strikes by claiming the targets are members of about two dozen cartels with whom the U.S. is engaged in armed conflict, and that the actions are “fully consistent with the law of armed conflict.” Many international law experts contend that the alleged drug traffickers are civilians, and therefore strikes against them constitute extrajudicial killings. Prior to these operations, interdicting illegal maritime trafficking was the purview of U.S. law enforcement agencies and the Coast Guard, and suspects were considered criminals entitled to trial. Meanwhile, in June-August, the Department of Justice prepared a secret opinion allegedly granting the President the authority to authorize strikes against 24 cartels for self-defense in response to an imminent threat to Americans—a position that is criticized and questioned based on facts about vessel speeds and the absence of immediate threat from the survivors. Senior military officials and allies expressed skepticism; the commander of Southern Command, Admiral Alvin Holsey, raised questions about the legality of the operations at a meeting and subsequently offered to resign; he will leave his post in December after serving a year in the role. International law attorneys within the Pentagon also voiced concerns, and the UK suspended intelligence sharing regarding suspected drug vessels in the Caribbean Sea to avoid complicity, according to media
About the Author
