The White House has stepped forward to clarify the chain of command behind a controversial military strike on a suspected drug boat, confirming Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth's authorising role. This statement comes directly after US President Donald Trump publicly defended his top Pentagon official against allegations detailed in a media report.
Clarification from the White House Press Briefing
During a press briefing on Monday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed the growing controversy. She stated that an admiral ordered the strikes after securing the necessary authorisation from Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth. Leavitt emphasised that the admiral was acting within his legal rights when he approved a follow-up strike on the vessel.
This official clarification seeks to address the allegations that emerged from a Washington Post report published earlier. The report had claimed that Hegseth himself, on September 2, gave a direct order for a "follow-up strike" on a boat that was under surveillance.
The Allegations and Trump's Defence
The Washington Post's investigation painted a grim picture of the event. According to their sources, an initial missile strike targeted a boat carrying 11 people. After this attack, two survivors were reportedly seen clinging to debris. The report alleged that a subsequent "double-tap" strike was then ordered to ensure no one survived, ultimately killing all 11 individuals on board. This second strike was purportedly carried out to comply with a directive from Hegseth to leave no survivors.
Prior to the White House's remarks, President Donald Trump had already come to the defence of his Defence Secretary. When questioned by Bloomberg about the incident, Trump stated, "I’m going to find out about it, but Pete said he did not order the death of those two men." Expressing his personal view on the follow-up strike, the President added, "No, I wouldn’t have wanted that, not a second strike. The first strike was very lethal."
Unfolding Narrative and Ongoing Scrutiny
The sequence of events—from the media report to the President's comments and finally the White House's detailed clarification—highlights the sensitive nature of the operation. The core of the issue revolves around the precise nature of the orders given and the legal authorisations involved in the lethal military action.
While the White House has confirmed Hegseth's role in authorising the admiral to proceed, it distills the decision for the specific follow-up strike to the naval officer on site. This distinction is central to the ongoing political and legal examination of the event. The story continues to develop as more details are sought regarding the rules of engagement and the intelligence that prompted the operation.
