Latest Pacific Attack Kills Four as Congressional Scrutiny Intensifies
The United States military has conducted its 22nd strike on a suspected drug trafficking vessel in the Eastern Pacific, killing four people aboard according to the Pentagon. This latest operation, part of Operation Southern Spear, comes amid escalating bipartisan criticism over a controversial September incident where the military conducted follow-up strikes on survivors of an initial attack, which some lawmakers have called a potential war crime.
Operation Southern Spear Escalates
Since early September 2025, the Trump administration has launched at least 22 strikes on vessels in the Eastern Pacific and Caribbean, resulting in at least 87 deaths according to military officials. The operations target what the administration calls 'narco-terrorist' organizations, with President Trump designating major drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations to justify the military campaign.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has been a vocal advocate for the operations, recently posting on social media: 'Just sunk another narco boat.' However, the approach has drawn sharp criticism from both domestic and international observers who question its legality and ethics.
Congressional Investigations Deepen
The controversy reached a boiling point this week as lawmakers were shown classified video of the September 2nd incident. According to multiple reports, after an initial strike disabled a suspected drug boat, a second missile attack targeted survivors who were attempting to salvage their vessel.
Democratic Congressman Jim Himes, who viewed the footage, stated: 'This was the most disturbing thing I've ever seen. Two individuals who were clearly in distress at a destroyed ship were killed by the U.S.'
Republican Senator Tom Cotton defended the operation, telling reporters: 'I saw how the survivors kept trying to right their boat full of drugs for the U.S., so they could continue fighting.'
Legal and Ethical Questions Mount
International law experts have raised serious concerns about the operations. The Geneva Conventions prohibit attacks on 'wounded, sick or shipwrecked' combatants, and critics argue the second strike on survivors may violate these protections.
According to CBC News reporting, both Senate and House Armed Services Committees have opened bipartisan investigations into the strikes. Lawmakers from both parties have expressed concern that the operations constitute 'extrajudicial killings' that bypass normal legal processes.
Administration's Defense
The Trump administration maintains that all operations are lawful and necessary to protect American citizens from drug trafficking. Officials argue that designating drug cartels as terrorist organizations provides legal authority for military action under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.
However, as UPI reports, the strikes have strained relations with allies including Colombia and Britain, who have reportedly limited intelligence sharing with the U.S. due to concerns about the operations.
What Comes Next
With congressional hearings expected in the coming weeks and the administration signaling plans to expand operations into Venezuelan territory, the controversy shows no signs of abating. The fundamental question remains: Can military strikes against suspected drug traffickers in international waters be justified under both U.S. and international law, or do they represent a dangerous expansion of executive power that undermines long-standing legal norms?
As one senior military official told CNN: 'We're operating in uncharted legal waters here. Every strike creates new precedents and new questions about where the line should be drawn.'