U.S. Military's Controversial Boat Strike Raises Questions

On September 2, the U.S. military attacked a boat in the Caribbean, resulting in the deaths of survivors who were reportedly waving for help. According to CBS News, two individuals clung to the wreckage for approximately 45 minutes before a follow-up strike killed them.

This second strike has drawn accusations of potential war crimes from critics, including some Democrats and legal experts who assert that targeting shipwrecked survivors does not meet the criteria for lawful engagement.

Adm. Frank Bradley, who ordered the follow-up strike, argued that the survivors and the remaining wreckage posed a threat. However, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington disputed this, noting that there was ample time to assess the situation and that the men did not pose a threat.

The Trump administration has been conducting a campaign against alleged drug trafficking via boat, claiming it is necessary to combat narcotics trade, yet critics argue that these operations violate international law.

The military has conducted over 20 such strikes, resulting in more than 80 deaths, raising significant ethical and operational concerns about military engagement rules. The Justice Department has provided a legal opinion suggesting that boats involved in drug trafficking can be considered lawful military targets, which further complicates the legal landscape surrounding these strikes, according to The Intercept.

The incident has sparked a heated debate in Congress, with differing interpretations of the video evidence shown to lawmakers, illustrating the deep divisions on military engagement policies.