Lawmakers from both parties are calling for a thorough congressional review into recent U.S. military strikes against vessels suspected of smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, after explosive allegations surfaced that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered troops to kill all survivors during a September 2, 2025, attack. The controversy, first reported by The Washington Post on November 29, 2025, has set off a flurry of bipartisan concern, official denials, and pointed questions about the legality of America’s escalating campaign against drug trafficking at sea.
The Washington Post report, citing anonymous sources, claimed that after an initial strike on a suspected drug boat off the coast of Venezuela, two survivors remained clinging to the wreckage. According to the report, Hegseth issued a verbal order to "kill everyone" on board, prompting a Special Operations commander to direct a second strike aimed at eliminating the survivors. The gravity of this alleged order has sent shockwaves through Congress and the broader defense community, with lawmakers warning that, if true, it could constitute a war crime under both U.S. and international law.
Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.), speaking on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on November 30, did not mince words: “This rises to the level of a war crime if it’s true.” Kaine emphasized that under the Geneva Conventions, combatants who are wounded or rendered harmless must be cared for, not targeted. “And the questions that we’ve been asking for months are give us the evidence that the folks on board were really narcotraffickers,” he said, highlighting the need for transparency and adherence to the rule of law.
Republican lawmakers have also joined calls for rigorous oversight, albeit with a measure of skepticism about the allegations. Representative Mike Turner (R-Ohio), a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, told CBS that Congress is probing the matter but currently lacks evidence that such an order was given. “Obviously, if that occurred, that would be very serious and I agree that that would be an illegal act,” Turner stated. He confirmed that both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees have opened investigations, saying, “There is an ongoing investigation.”
Representative Don Bacon (R-Neb.), a retired Air Force general, echoed concerns about the legality of the alleged order but expressed doubt that Hegseth would have issued it. “We should get to the truth. I don’t think he would be foolish enough to make this decision to say, kill everybody, kill the survivors because that’s a clear violation of the law of war,” Bacon said on ABC’s “This Week.” He added, “I’m very suspicious that he would’ve done something like that because it would go against common sense.”
Trump administration allies have moved quickly to defend Hegseth and the broader military campaign. Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) dismissed the Washington Post report as “anonymous and unproven” during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union.” He noted that in other strikes, the Navy and Coast Guard had rescued and returned survivors, and praised President Trump for “protecting the United States by being proactive.”
Hegseth himself has strongly denied the allegations. In a post to X (formerly Twitter) on November 29, he called the Washington Post story “fake news,” accusing the media of “delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.” He insisted that all operations are “lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the law of armed conflict—and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command.”
Despite these denials, the seriousness of the claims has prompted an unusual show of bipartisan unity among congressional leaders. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Ranking Member Jack Reed (D-R.I.) issued a joint statement on November 29, pledging “vigorous oversight to determine the facts related to these circumstances.” The following day, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) and Ranking Member Adam Smith (D-Wash.) released their own joint statement, promising “rigorous oversight of the Department of Defense’s military operations in the Caribbean.” They added, “We take seriously the reports of follow-on strikes on boats alleged to be ferrying narcotics in the SOUTHCOM region and are taking bipartisan action to gather a full accounting of the operation in question.”
Since early September, the U.S. military has destroyed nearly two dozen boats said to be trafficking drugs from countries such as Venezuela, resulting in more than 80 deaths, according to The Washington Post. The campaign, part of President Trump’s intensified push against drug trafficking, has reportedly included both missile strikes and interdiction efforts in the region. On November 29, Trump declared on Truth Social that “Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers should consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.” The statement raised eyebrows among legal experts and foreign policy observers, as the U.S. president’s authority to close foreign airspace is highly questionable.
The controversy has also drawn attention to the legal frameworks governing military conduct. The Defense Department’s own Law of War Manual is clear: “Orders to fire upon the shipwrecked would be clearly illegal,” it states, underscoring the serious legal and ethical stakes involved in the current investigation. Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a former Navy captain, commented on CNN that a second strike on survivors “seems to” be a war crime if the reports are accurate. “I’ve got serious concerns about anybody in that chain of command stepping over a line they should never step over,” Kelly said. “We’re not Russia. We’re not Iraq. We hold ourselves to a very high standard of professionalism.”
Legal experts have warned that if the alleged order was given and carried out, it would violate both Defense Department policy and international law. The Geneva Conventions specifically require that wounded combatants who are no longer able to fight must be collected and cared for, not targeted. Attorney General Pam Bondi, when asked about the existence of an Office of Legal Counsel memo providing justification for the strikes, declined to comment but issued a warning: “Venezuela drug dealers need to tread very, very carefully.”
The fallout from the allegations has already had tangible effects. A congressional briefing on the strikes was abruptly canceled around the time of Hegseth’s alleged order, and the admiral overseeing the South American and Caribbean region stepped down in October. The controversy has also fueled an increased federal law enforcement presence in Washington, D.C., and intensified President Trump’s immigration crackdown.
As Congress pursues its investigations, lawmakers and the public alike await a full accounting of what transpired in the Caribbean. The stakes are high—not just for those directly involved, but for America’s reputation for upholding the rule of law in wartime. The outcome of these inquiries will likely reverberate far beyond the waters of the Caribbean Sea.
