Pete Hegseth’s first deadly strike on an alleged Venezuelan drug boat in September was carried out by a secretive military aircraft that was painted to look like a civilian plane, according to multiple anonymous officials.
It has not been made clear exactly what the aircraft was, but officials acknowledged it was not painted in the typical military gray and had no military markings.
Eleven people died in that attack, including two who were subjected to controversial follow-up strikes.
The crewed aircraft did not have any weapons showing when the attack occurred, instead munitions were fired from a launch tube mounted inside the plane. Officials also said the aircraft’s transponder was transmitting a military tail number identifying its military identity, but the boats would not likely have been equipped to pick up the signal.
Feigning civilian status and then carrying out an attack with explicit intent to kill or wound the target is known as “perfidy” under the law of armed conflict, a war crime, according to legal experts.
Todd Huntley, a former 9/11 era military lawyer, explained that if these aircraft were used for self-defense it would not be against laws of war.
“But using it as an offensive platform and relying on its civilian appearance to gain the confidence of the enemy is.”
The Trump administration claims that lethal strikes against the drug boats are legal because the U.S. has claimed it is in “armed conflict” with drug cartels.
But several experts say the U.S. is not at war with drug cartels, making the strikes tantamount to murder.
“This isn’t an armed conflict,” said Huntley, director of the national security law program at Georgetown Law. “But what makes this so surprising is that even if you buy their argument, it’s a violation of international law.”