The recent controversy surrounding US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth's alleged 'Kill Them All' order during a Caribbean military strike has sent shockwaves through Washington. However, a closer examination reveals this incident is not a shocking departure from American norms, but rather a stark, unvarnished expression of a foreign policy doctrine honed over more than a century. This moment strips away the diplomatic pretense, exposing the enduring reality of how American power has often been projected globally.
From Fiction to Reality: The Calvin Dexter Ideal vs. The Hegseth Doctrine
Author Frederick Forsyth once created a compelling fictional hero in Calvin Dexter from his novel 'Avenger'. Dexter, a former Vietnam 'Tunnel Rat' turned mercenary, operated on a unique principle: he would capture villains alive and deliver them to an American courtroom for a fair trial. This character embodied an idealistic America that proves its moral superiority through due process, even for its enemies.
In stark contrast stands the reality of the recent Caribbean incident. According to reports, US forces tracked and struck a vessel suspected of running narcotics for the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. When two wounded survivors were seen clinging to the wreckage, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth allegedly issued a verbal order to 'kill everybody.' SEAL Team 6 executed a follow-up attack, obliterating the survivors. The Pentagon later claimed this was to 'remove maritime hazards,' but sources indicate it was to ensure no one lived to contradict the official narrative.
The White House and Pentagon have pushed back forcefully. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell called the story 'completely false,' while press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated the follow-up strike was ordered by Admiral Frank M. Bradley and was 'within his authority and the law.'
A Century in the Making: The Historical Roots of Decisive Force
To view the Caribbean strike as an isolated event is to misunderstand American history. The US habit of decisive, extraterritorial force did not begin with recent administrations. In the early 20th century, under President Theodore Roosevelt and his successors, American marines were routinely dispatched across the Caribbean and Central America to enforce Washington's will, toppling and reorganizing governments under the expansive interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine.
By the mid-20th century, this power took a covert turn. President Dwight Eisenhower oversaw operations that toppled governments in Iran and Guatemala. Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson escalated clandestine activities and sabotage campaigns, particularly in Southeast Asia. These actions, often justified by the need to contain communism or promote democracy, normalized the idea that the US could unilaterally designate and neutralize threats far from any courtroom.
This established tradition meant that when President Bill Clinton embraced precision cruise-missile strikes in Sudan and Afghanistan, he was refining an existing tool. President George W. Bush's global war on terror and President Barack Obama's systematized targeted-killing program were further evolutions, adding layers of bureaucratic procedure and legal justification to the same core principle: the US reserves the right to use lethal force against those it deems a threat, anywhere.
The Modern Polish and the Unvarnished Truth
The post-1990s era added a sheen of surgical precision to this old instinct. Strikes were presented as carefully calibrated, legally vetted actions. However, the fundamental principle remained unchanged. President Donald Trump's first term significantly loosened rules of engagement and reduced oversight, saying aloud what previous administrations often only implied.
In Trump's second term, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth inherited this primed system. The key shift in the Caribbean was the strategic reclassification of suspected drug traffickers as 'narco-terrorists.' This linguistic move transformed a law-enforcement issue into a counterterrorism operation, a maritime zone into a battlefield, and unarmed survivors into legitimate military targets.
This worldview directly challenges established international law and military doctrine, which insist that shipwrecked or wounded individuals are protected persons. The logic applied here suggests that a designated threat remains a threat regardless of incapacitation, and survival invites 'resolution,' not rescue.
The Revealing Aftermath and a Doctrine Exposed
The predictable outrage in Washington—with Congress demanding briefings and commentators questioning legality—masks a quiet truth. For decades, lawmakers have largely acquiesced as the executive branch accumulated extraordinary power to target individuals beyond US borders. The Caribbean incident is unsettling not because the US killed suspected criminals, a practice with historical precedent, but because the order was so bluntly expressed, exposing the raw instinct usually hidden behind diplomatic language.
In the end, the most disturbing aspect is the openness of the act. Every preceding administration prepared the ground by broadening definitions, stretching legal mandates, and normalizing exceptions. Hegseth's alleged directive simply removed the curtain. Calvin Dexter's fictional world imagines an America that insists on trials. Pete Hegseth's reality reflects the America that has long existed: one that often prefers final solutions that leave no survivors to testify. The 'Kill Them All' order is not an innovation; it is a moment of stark revelation, making visible the architectural foundations of a policy built long before the first modern precision-guided missile was ever fired.
