Hegseth 'Kill Them All' May Face War Crimes: Report
Pete Hegseth speaking with attendees at the 2023 Pastors Summit hosted by Turning Point Faith at the Omni Nashville Hotel in Nashville, Tennessee. Photo courtesy of Gage Skidmore under CC BY-SA 2.0.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth finds himself increasingly isolated as reports mount that he allegedly ordered a follow-up missile strike killing survivors clinging to a wrecked suspected drug-smuggling boat. The controversy centers on a second strike that reportedly killed two survivors after an initial attack in the Caribbean in September 2025. Once backed by key Senate Republicans, Hegseth now faces a growing chorus of lawmakers who are hesitant to publicly defend his actions amid accusations that the strike may constitute a war crime.
Republicans Hold Back on Support
Several Republican senators who previously supported Hegseth's confirmation are now reportedly reluctant to endorse his leadership without a full accounting of the facts. When asked if he still had confidence in Hegseth, Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said the answer depends on the facts as they emerge and that committee discussions are ongoing, as reported by Mediaite. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) declined to evaluate Hegseth's performance, emphasizing that others can make those judgments. Punchbowl's Andrew Desiderio added that what matters most is whether the country is safer under President Trump's leadership, which he affirmed.
Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said he had spoken with Hegseth and stressed the importance of classified briefings to uncover the "ground truth" behind the strike, as reported by Mediaite. Wicker and his Democratic counterpart, Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), have promised "vigorous oversight" to determine the facts related to the incident, as reported by POLITICO.
Bipartisan Alarm Over Possible War Crimes
The strike has drawn sharp criticism from lawmakers across the aisle. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), speaking on CBS's "Face the Nation," warned that if the reports are accurate, the order to kill survivors would violate both Department of Defense laws and international law, potentially amounting to a war crime, as reported by POLITICO. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) echoed this view. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), in an interview on CNN's "State of the Union," called the order "clearly not lawful." Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) went further, labeling Hegseth a "war criminal" on social media and calling for his immediate firing.
On the Republican side, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) acknowledged that if the strike occurred as reported, it would be a serious and illegal act, as reported by POLITICO. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), speaking on ABC's "This Week," expressed skepticism that Hegseth would have made such an order, calling it "against common sense," but admitted suspicion remains.
White House Confirms Authorization Amid Denials
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed that Hegseth authorized a second strike on the boat in the Caribbean, carried out by Admiral Frank Bradley, as reported by The Hill. The follow-up attack allegedly killed two survivors who were clinging to the burning vessel after the initial strike.
"This administration has designated these narcoterrorists as foreign terrorist organizations. The president has the right to take them out if they are threatening the United States of America, if they are bringing illegal narcotics that are killing our citizens at a record rate, which is what they are doing," Leavitt said, as reported by The Hill.
The administration has been questioned about the legal basis for the strikes, which have reportedly killed at least 80 alleged drug traffickers in recent months. According to Mediaite, the Pentagon initially denied the Washington Post's report that Hegseth gave a verbal order to "kill everyone" on the boat, but the White House later confirmed the second strike took place under his authorization. The phrase "kill everyone" or "kill them all" is attributed explicitly to the Washington Post report, with the Pentagon initially denying the characterization.
Legal Experts Weigh in on the Strike's Legality
Legal scholars and former military officials have expressed grave concerns about the strike's legality. In an interview with The New Yorker, Todd Huntley, director of the National Security Law program at Georgetown University Law Center and a former Navy judge advocate, explained that even if the U.S. is engaged in an armed conflict with drug cartels, targeting survivors who are shipwrecked and out of the fight violates customary international law and the laws of armed conflict. Such actions would constitute murder under domestic law and qualify as war crimes.
Huntley reportedly noted that the administration's legal justification for the strikes is inconsistent. While claiming a non-international armed conflict with drug cartels, the facts do not support the level of organization or intensity of violence required to meet that standard. He also highlighted that the intentional nature of the strike, targeting survivors, sets it apart from other controversial U.S. military actions where civilian deaths were often accidental or due to faulty intelligence.
The legal expert reportedly emphasized that an investigation is necessary and that prosecutions should follow if evidence confirms violations. Since Hegseth is a civilian, any criminal case against him would fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice rather than a military court. Admiral Bradley, as a military officer, could face court-martial proceedings.
A GOP Split Over Loyalty and Legality
The controversy exposes a rift within the Republican Party. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a vocal critic of the administration's drug boat strikes, questioned whether Hegseth was lying or incompetent after the Pentagon initially denied and then confirmed the second strike, as reported by Mediaite. Paul's skepticism underscores the unease among some Republicans about the administration's handling of the incident.
This internal GOP hesitation contrasts with the White House's firm stance that the strikes are lawful and necessary to combat narcoterrorism. The administration's framing of drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations grants the president broad authority to use lethal force, a position that remains highly contested in legal and political circles.
Oversight and Investigation Loom
Both Republican and Democratic leaders of the Armed Services Committees have pledged to investigate the strike thoroughly. The bipartisan commitment to oversight signals the seriousness with which Congress views the allegations. The outcome of these investigations could have significant implications for U.S. military policy and the accountability of civilian and military leaders involved in lethal operations abroad.
As the inquiry unfolds, Hegseth's position remains precarious. The growing reluctance among Senate Republicans to publicly back him reflects the high stakes of the controversy. Whether the Defense Secretary can weather this storm depends on the findings of classified briefings and congressional investigations that aim to uncover the full truth behind the deadly boat strike.
The episode highlights the complex intersection of military authority, legal constraints, and political loyalty in an era of unconventional warfare against non-state actors. For now, Pete Hegseth is left in the balance, as the Senate GOP grapples with the fallout from a strike that many fear crossed a line that should never be crossed.
References: Senate GOP Leaves Hegseth Hanging On a Limb Over Boat Strike | Lawmakers warn Hegseth may have committed war crimes following second-strike report | White House confirms Hegseth authorized second strike on drug boat | The Legal Consequences of Pete Hegseth's "Kill Them All" Order | The New Yorker | Pete Hegseth said to kill everybody, officials say
