Republican-led congressional committees are launching deeper investigations into the Pentagon following a report by The Washington Post that War Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the killing of all crew members aboard a suspected drug-smuggling vessel in the Caribbean Sea earlier this year.

The report revealed that on September 2, a missile strike was launched against a vessel in the Caribbean. Drone footage showed two survivors from the original crew of 11 clinging to the wreckage. According to sources familiar with the operation, a second strike was then ordered by a Special Operations commander to fulfill Hegseth’s spoken directive, killing the two remaining survivors.

Multiple officials who spoke anonymously due to the sensitivity of the matter confirmed the sequence of events, raising serious concerns about the legality of the operation and compliance with international law.

We have only just begun to kill narco-terrorists.

— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) November 28, 2025

The revelations have triggered bipartisan concern in both chambers of Congress. Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi), chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and ranking Democrat Senator Jack Reed (Rhode Island), stated Friday that the committee is conducting "vigorous oversight" and has submitted formal inquiries to the Department of Defense.

A day later, House Armed Services Committee leaders Rep. Mike D. Rogers (R-Alabama) and Rep. Adam Smith (D-Washington) issued a joint statement affirming their intention to "gather a full accounting of the operation in question", stressing the committee’s commitment to rigorous oversight of US military actions in the Caribbean.

The issue is politically sensitive, especially amid Republican control of Congress and its general support for President Donald Trump's administration. Lawmakers have expressed frustration over the Pentagon’s refusal to provide full legal justifications or intelligence supporting the strikes, including the identities of those killed.

Legal experts warn of potential war crimes violations

Moreover, human rights experts and former military attorneys have raised an alarm over the operation. A group of former US military lawyers published a legal assessment arguing that under international law, targeting survivors of a sinking vessel constitutes a war crime.

They emphasized that survivors should be protected and, if applicable, treated as prisoners of war. “Violations of these obligations are war crimes, murder, or both. There are no other options,” their statement read.

On the other hand, the War Department has claimed that the strikes are lawful under both US and international law, citing a classified Justice Department memo that asserts US personnel would not be liable for future prosecution. The administration has justified the campaign because the US is engaged in a “non-international armed conflict” with designated terrorist-affiliated traffickers.

Despite that claim, critics argue that the traffickers posed no imminent threat to the United States and that the campaign, in which the US has killed 80 people so far, exceeds legal boundaries.

Following The Washington Post’s report, Hegseth defended the strikes in a post on X, calling them “lethal, kinetic strikes” and insisting that every trafficker killed was affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization. He also lashed out at media outlets, accusing them of spreading “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting.”

Hegseth claimed all military actions were reviewed by “the best military and civilian lawyers” and complied with the law of armed conflict. Still, lawmakers remain unconvinced, especially after the Pentagon failed to respond to two prior letters from Senate leaders demanding access to orders, recordings, and legal documents related to the operation.