• Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claims he did not see survivors after the first strike on a drug boat.
• The second strike, which killed survivors, has prompted bipartisan scrutiny and allegations of potential war crimes.
• Hegseth cites the 'fog of war' as a reason for the chaos surrounding the strikes.
• President Trump distanced himself from the follow-up strike while supporting the operation's commander.
• Congress has initiated probes, questioning the legality of Hegseth's orders and the strikes conducted under his supervision.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth defended a follow-up military strike on September 2 against an alleged drug-smuggling boat, stating he “did not personally see survivors” due to the chaos of battle, which he described as the “fog of war.” Speaking during a Cabinet meeting at the White House, Hegseth stated, “That thing was on fire... you can’t see anything,” clarifying his decision-making process surrounding the controversial second strike that led to casualties among survivors clinging to the wreckage, according to Los Angeles Times and BBC.

Concerns regarding the legality of the strikes prompted bipartisan investigations in Congress, where both Democratic and Republican lawmakers are questioning whether Hegseth's directives constituted war crimes, especially given the reports that he previously ordered no survivors to be left alive, reports Reuters and India Times.

During the meeting, Hegseth also acknowledged that Admiral Frank Bradley, commanding the operation, made the decision to attack the vessel again later. Hegseth reiterated, “Admiral Bradley made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat,” reflecting the administration's position that the strikes are part of a necessary military campaign against drug trafficking, as reported by Al Jazeera and The Hill.

Legal experts have warned that the actions taken during these strikes may breach international laws regarding the treatment of survivors, specifically prohibitions on targeting those who are already incapacitated or unarmed. The Pentagon’s manual on the laws of armed conflict clearly delineates these restrictions, casting further scrutiny on the actions carried out under Hegseth’s command, according to India Times and Reuters.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has stated that Admiral Bradley acted “within his authority and the law,” maintaining the administration’s stance on the legitimacy of the strikes. However, the increasingly critical atmosphere from legislators indicates a deepening divide over U.S. military strategies in combating drug trafficking that could lead to further consequences for those involved in operational decisions, as reported by The Hill and Reuters.