The first deadly US strike on an alleged narcoterrorist boat in the Caribbean was reportedly launched by military plane disguised as a civilian air craft in what one expert labeled a 'war crime.'
The September 2 strike that killed 11 was ordered by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who claimed that every person on the supposed drug trafficking ship was on a military target list.
In addition to the plane being disguised, the Pentagon also hid the munitions by not visibly carrying them under the craft's wingers. Ever since, the military has started using MQ-9 Reaper drones and more traditional military aircraft.
Retired Maj. Gen. Steven J. Lepper told The New York Times that these acts of subterfuge may have led the US to commit an offense known as 'perfidy,' which is a war crime.
'Shielding your identity is an element of perfidy. If the aircraft flying above is not identifiable as a combatant aircraft, it should not be engaged in combatant activity,' said Lepper, who served as a deputy judge advocate general for the United States Air Force.
The Trump administration has defended the legality of the attacks by stating that the US is in an armed conflict with narcoterrorists.
'The U.S. military utilizes a wide array of standard and nonstandard aircraft depending on mission requirements,' Pentagon spokesperson Kingsley Wilson said in a statement.
'Prior to the fielding and employment of each aircraft, they go through a rigorous procurement process to ensure compliance with domestic law, department policies and regulations, and applicable international standards, including the law of armed conflict.'
The first of several US strikes on alleged narcoterrorist boats in the Caribbean is accused of being disguised as a civilian air craft in what could be labeled a war crime
The September 2 strike that killed 11 was ordered by Pete Hegseth because everyone on the supposed drug trafficking ship was on a military target list
A spokesperson for US Southern Command declined The Daily Mail's request for comment. The White House did not return request for comment.
The Department of War's communications account shared a post by Lee Zeldin, current EPA Administrator.
Zeldin, who taught the law of armed conflict in the US Army, called the claims idiotic.'
'What the military can't do is add certain symbols to pretend the plane is Red Cross, UN, or something otherwise protected,' Zeldin explained.
'Likewise, if you paint a Delta or American Airlines logo on the side, for example, that feigns a civilian aircraft.'
He then determined: 'A military plane not having any of these symbols at all doesn't just make it a de facto civilian aircraft no matter how much TDS has overwhelmed your system.'
Multiple sources told The New York Times that the aircraft's transponder was sending along a military tail number.
But retired Navy Captain Todd Huntley said that would not solve the perfidy issue and still remain legally tenuous and added this sort of aircraft was not meant to be used for offensive attacks.
'The critical question is whether there is a credible alternative reason for using an unmarked aircraft to conduct the attack other than exploiting apparent civilian status to gain some tactical advantage,' added Geoffrey Cron, a retired lieutenant colonel JAG officer.
Ever since the initial strike, the military has started using MQ-9 Reaper drones and more traditional military aircraft.
The Trump administration has argued that its attacks are legal because the president is 'determined' the United States is in an armed conflict with those he calls narcoterrorists
It's not known what sort of plane was used in the strike but users of r/Aviation have suggested they could be modified 737s.
The September 2 strike began a series of at least 35 boat attacks that have killed 123 people.
Legal experts say the attack in question could be a crime if the survivors were targeted. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have demanded accountability.
Admiral Frank 'Mitch' Bradley told lawmakers in early December that all of those onboard were known to officials as narco-terrorists and as such could be lethally targeted, according to NBC News.
The admiral reportedly testified that the list includes individuals who are eligible for being targeted with lethal action if the opportunity should arise, two officials and one other source told the network.
All 11 on board the boat that was hit on September 2 had been identified, Bradley reportedly told lawmakers.
The admiral was summoned to Capitol Hill to answer questions from concerned lawmakers over the legality of the strike.
The sources also told NBC News that Bradley made it clear in these meetings that he acted legally throughout the bombing.
It's not known what sort of plane was used in the strike but users of r/Aviation have suggested they could be modified 737s
Admiral Frank 'Mitch' Bradley, seen here on Capitol Hill in December, told lawmakers that all 11 on board the boat that was hit on September 2 have all been identified
Bradley said that he carried out orders from Hegseth as instructed, killing everyone on the list, destroying the drugs onboard and sinking the boat, the sources added.
It emerged that some onboard survived the initial strike. Bradley confirmed this to lawmakers adding that a third and fourth strike followed to sink the boat.
Hegseth mentioned the operation during a speech at the Reagan Defense Forum earlier that month.
He also outlined the country's defense priorities and attacked the post-Cold War foreign policy of the nation.
The secretary also declared the age of American 'utopian idealism' was over while demanding allies now defend themselves and suggested a shift in policy concerning China's defense.
'Out with idealistic utopianism. In with hard-nosed realism', he told those who gathered at the defense forum,' Politico reported.
Hegseth also refused to back down over the strikes, saying: 'If you bring drugs to this country in a boat, we will find you and we will sink you.'
He also confirmed that it was himself that gave the order, and confirmed he left the room five minutes after the first strike.
According to Hegseth he was told that Bradley had ordered a second strike due to their being several survivors, Hegseth said he was told those who survived could 'still be in the fight', according to the Wall Street Journal.
Hegseth also said that he agreed with how Bradley carried out the attack, adding: 'I said "Roger, sounds good".
'From what I understood then and what I understand now, I fully support that strike. I would have made the same call myself.'
Donald Trump has stood behind Hegseth as he defends his handling of the attack, but pressure is mounting on the defense secretary.
Hegseth has said the aftermath of an initial strike on the boat was clouded in the 'fog of war.'
He has also said he 'didn't stick around' for the second strike, but that Bradley 'made the right call' and 'had complete authority' to do it.
Democrats are demanding that the Trump administration releases the full video of the attack, as well as written records of the orders and any directives from Hegseth.
While Republicans, who control national security committees, have not publicly called for those documents, they have pledged thorough review.