U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Saturday he supports a September 2 strike on a suspected Caribbean drug boat, affirming he would have ordered the second attack himself, even as concerns rise over the legality of targeting shipwrecked survivors.

Speaking at the Reagan National Defense Forum in California, Hegseth confirmed he fully supported the second strike on the vessel. “I would have made the same call myself,” he said, reiterating his stance amid scrutiny from lawmakers and the public.

The Pentagon previously showed Congress a video of the attack behind closed doors, depicting two men clinging to the wreckage after the vessel was destroyed. Sources familiar with the footage said the men were unarmed, shirtless, and carried no visible communications equipment.

Trump administration clarifies roles

Trump administration officials stated Hegseth did not directly order the second strike. Admiral Frank Bradley, who led the Joint Special Operations Command, reportedly decided to neutralize the wreckage, citing the possibility that it contained cocaine.

Hegseth acknowledged seeing the first strike on September 2 but left the room before the second strike occurred. He declined to confirm whether the administration would release the full video, saying the matter is “under review.”

Part of broader anti-drug campaign

The September 2 incident was the first of 22 U.S. military strikes against vessels in the southern Caribbean and Pacific aimed at curbing the flow of illegal drugs to the United States. These operations have reportedly killed 87 people, including a strike in the eastern Pacific earlier this week.

The Trump administration has framed the attacks as part of a war against drug cartels, labeling the vessels as armed groups and arguing that the drugs transported pose a lethal threat to Americans.

The incidents have raised concerns about potential war crimes. The Defense Department’s Law of War Manual forbids attacks on incapacitated, unconscious, or shipwrecked combatants who abstain from hostilities. Firing on such survivors is cited as a “clearly illegal” order that should be refused.

Lawmakers reviewing the video have questioned the legality of the strikes, particularly the targeting of two men clinging to wreckage after the first attack.