403
Sorry!!
Error! We're sorry, but the page you were looking for doesn't exist.
US lawmakers seek answers on controversial Venezuelan boat strikes
(MENAFN) US legislators are demanding detailed explanations from the Trump administration regarding recent military strikes on vessels suspected of smuggling drugs from Venezuela, after reports suggested a follow-up attack was ordered to kill survivors of an initial strike.
Republican-led committees overseeing the Pentagon have pledged to conduct “vigorous oversight” into these operations in the Caribbean. Reports indicate that a US strike on September 2 left two survivors, prompting a second attack allegedly to comply with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's supposed directive to “kill everybody” on board. Hegseth has dismissed the claims as “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory,” while President Trump publicly stated he believed the secretary “a 100%.”
Since early September, the US has intensified its military presence in the Caribbean, targeting suspected drug-trafficking boats near Venezuela and Colombia as part of an anti-narcotics campaign. More than 80 people have reportedly died during these operations. The administration maintains that the strikes are conducted in self-defense against shipments of illicit drugs bound for the United States.
Lawmakers from both parties emphasized the need for congressional review of the strikes, citing serious legal implications if reports of attacking survivors are true. Democratic Senator Tim Kaine warned, “This rises to the level of a war crime if it's true,” while Republican Congressman Mike Turner called such a follow-up strike potentially “an illegal act” and stressed that Congress had no verified information confirming it occurred.
The Senate Armed Services Committee has launched inquiries to determine the facts surrounding the alleged strikes, with Republican Chair Roger Wicker and Democratic counterpart Jack Reed pledging “vigorous oversight.” The House Armed Services Committee is also investigating to gather a complete account of the operations.
Hegseth defended the actions on social media, asserting the strikes were “lawful under both US and international law” and claiming that “every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization.” Trump reinforced his support for Hegseth during a briefing on Air Force One, adding that the administration would “look into” the matter and expressing that he would not have wanted a second strike.
Meanwhile, Venezuela’s National Assembly condemned the strikes, vowing a “rigorous and thorough investigation” into the reported second attack. The Venezuelan government accused the US of heightening regional tensions with the aim of toppling the administration.
Although the US is not a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, its military legal advisers have previously stated that operations should be “consistent with its provisions,” which generally discourage lethal force against vessels in international waters except in specific cases like a “hot pursuit.” Experts note that, under these rules, non-lethal measures are usually preferred to intercept suspected trafficking vessels.
Republican-led committees overseeing the Pentagon have pledged to conduct “vigorous oversight” into these operations in the Caribbean. Reports indicate that a US strike on September 2 left two survivors, prompting a second attack allegedly to comply with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's supposed directive to “kill everybody” on board. Hegseth has dismissed the claims as “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory,” while President Trump publicly stated he believed the secretary “a 100%.”
Since early September, the US has intensified its military presence in the Caribbean, targeting suspected drug-trafficking boats near Venezuela and Colombia as part of an anti-narcotics campaign. More than 80 people have reportedly died during these operations. The administration maintains that the strikes are conducted in self-defense against shipments of illicit drugs bound for the United States.
Lawmakers from both parties emphasized the need for congressional review of the strikes, citing serious legal implications if reports of attacking survivors are true. Democratic Senator Tim Kaine warned, “This rises to the level of a war crime if it's true,” while Republican Congressman Mike Turner called such a follow-up strike potentially “an illegal act” and stressed that Congress had no verified information confirming it occurred.
The Senate Armed Services Committee has launched inquiries to determine the facts surrounding the alleged strikes, with Republican Chair Roger Wicker and Democratic counterpart Jack Reed pledging “vigorous oversight.” The House Armed Services Committee is also investigating to gather a complete account of the operations.
Hegseth defended the actions on social media, asserting the strikes were “lawful under both US and international law” and claiming that “every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization.” Trump reinforced his support for Hegseth during a briefing on Air Force One, adding that the administration would “look into” the matter and expressing that he would not have wanted a second strike.
Meanwhile, Venezuela’s National Assembly condemned the strikes, vowing a “rigorous and thorough investigation” into the reported second attack. The Venezuelan government accused the US of heightening regional tensions with the aim of toppling the administration.
Although the US is not a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, its military legal advisers have previously stated that operations should be “consistent with its provisions,” which generally discourage lethal force against vessels in international waters except in specific cases like a “hot pursuit.” Experts note that, under these rules, non-lethal measures are usually preferred to intercept suspected trafficking vessels.
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the
information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept
any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images,
videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information
contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright
issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.

Comments
No comment