The Memo: Hegseth observes decrease in political risks from boat collisions

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth received a significant reprieve this week that may help him fend off mounting criticism. The development occurred on Thursday when Adm. Frank Bradley reportedly informed lawmakers in a closed-door session on Capitol Hill that he had never been issued any directive to kill them all or give no quarter prior to the U.S. strike on a Caribbean boat on September 2.

The strike has sparked intense debate because two individuals initially survived the attack, only to be targeted again while clinging to debris. The second strike resulted in their deaths, which some critics have described as potentially constituting a war crime. Democratic senators, including Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) and Chris Van Hollen (Md.), have questioned whether the action violated international law.

Hegseth faced heightened scrutiny following a November 28 report in The Washington Post suggesting he had verbally instructed forces to eliminate everyone on the boat. The article did not indicate that Hegseth explicitly ordered the second strike during the operation, but it implied that the attack was carried out in accordance with his guidance. Bradleys briefing to lawmakers casts doubt on that narrative.

While Democrats and Republicans interpreted the briefing differently in terms of broader implications, they concurred that the admiral denied receiving such an order. I asked him very explicitly whether that order had been issued, and he said absolutely not, Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) told NPR.

The admirals clarification gives Hegseth an opportunity to respond to his critics. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell called for The Washington Post to retract its story, labeling it misleading and offensive to military personnel.

Nevertheless, the controversy surrounding U.S. strikes on maritime targets remains unresolved. Over 20 attacks on vessels have resulted in more than 80 deaths, raising legal and moral questions. President Trump has asserted that these actions are justified under an armed conflict with drug traffickers, though experts consider this rationale debatable. Democrats have also pushed for the release of a classified Justice Department memo explaining the legal justification for the Caribbean strikes.

Criticism has not been limited to Democrats. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has questioned the evidence supporting the administrations claims of drug trafficking and called for Hegseth to testify under oath regarding the September 2 strike, along with the public release of related video footage.

Democratic senators who reviewed the footage report that those killed appeared unable to pose further threat. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) described the material as deeply troubling and said releasing full footage would mark only the start of the investigation. Some Republicans, however, have been less aggressive in challenging Hegseth. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) acknowledged his tenure at the Pentagon had been bumpy but suggested that, based on briefings, actions taken seemed justified.

Concerns about Hegseths decision-making persist. A recent Pentagon inspector general report highlighted safety risks to troops and policy violations linked to his use of a personal cellphone to discuss potential attacks on Houthis in Yemen. Additionally, The Wall Street Journal noted that Hegseth had pushed out Admiral Alvin Holsey, head of U.S. military operations in the Caribbean, partly due to Holseys initial legal concerns about strikes on suspected drug vessels.

While new information could still place Hegseth under scrutiny, the admirals briefing has provided him with a notable political reprieve for now. President Trump has historically supported Hegseth, and his recent statements about the September 2 strike appeared to rely on the secretarys account of events.

Author: Ethan Caldwell