马里兰州民主党参议员克里斯·范·霍伦(Chris Van Hollen)周日表示，他认为“很有可能发生了战争罪”政府的首次打击九月份在加勒比海对一艘涉嫌贩毒的船。
“我认为很有可能犯下了战争罪。当然，如果这是战争罪，你必须接受特朗普政府的整个构想...那就是我们正处于武装冲突中，处于与毒品团伙的战争中。当然，他们从未向公众展示过他们在这里得到的信息，”范·霍伦在美国广播公司新闻节目《本周》中说"如果那个理论是错误的，那么这就是谋杀。"
范·霍伦是参议院外交关系委员会的成员，回应一个来自《华盛顿邮报》的故事据报道国防部长皮特·赫格塞斯9月2日军事行动前的口头命令，要求军方杀死可疑运毒船上的所有人。据报道，在第一次袭击留下两名幸存者后，领导这次行动的指挥官据称遵守了Hegseth的指令，下令进行第二次袭击。
《华盛顿邮报》报道后，海格塞斯为美国军方针对船只的行动进行了辩护，美国广播公司新闻尚未证实细节。
范·霍伦告诉《本周》的主持人乔纳森·卡尔，“他们编造了这个荒谬的法律理论。但即使你接受他们的理论，认为这是一种战争罪，所以我确实认为国防部长应该为下达这种命令负责。”
“正如我们从一开始就说过的，在每一个声明中，这些高效打击都是为了致命的动能打击公开宣布的目的是阻止致命毒品，摧毁毒枭船只，杀死毒害美国人民的毒枭恐怖分子。我们杀死的每一个毒贩都隶属于一个指定的恐怖组织秘书已发布在X周四。
五角大楼的发言人说《邮报》的报道“整个叙述都是假的。”
在“本周”的另一次采访中，国土安全部部长克里斯蒂·诺姆驳斥了邮报的报道。
她说，“我不会相信那个故事和所说的话。”。“我对总统和政府充满信心和信任，相信他们会做出正确的事情来保护美国人民的安全。我非常感激为阻止这些致命毒品进入我们国家所做的大量工作。”
众议院和参议院军事委员会都表示，他们正在调查这一事件。共和党众议员唐·培根房子委员会表示，该报告是“一个大问题”，但也表示怀疑黑格斯会发出这样的命令。
“我们应该得到真相。我不认为[黑格斯]会愚蠢到做出这样的决定:杀死所有人，杀死幸存者，因为这明显违反了战争法。所以，我非常怀疑他会做这样的事情，因为这违背了常识，”培根说。
“但是，”他继续说道，“如果真如那篇文章所说，那是违反战争法的。当人们想投降时，你不杀他们，他们必须构成迫在眉睫的威胁。很难相信两个在木筏上努力求生的人会造成迫在眉睫的威胁。”
培根是乌克兰的坚定支持者，他也告诉“本周”，他觉得白宫在帮助结束俄罗斯在那里的战争的立场上发出了“混合信号”。
“我只是没有看到来自白宫的道德澄清，”培根说。
美国国务卿马尔科·卢比奥(John Kerry)、特使史蒂夫·威特科夫(Steve Witkoff)和特朗普的女婿贾里德·库什纳(Donald Trump)周日在佛罗里达州与乌克兰官员会面，继续谈判。预计维特科夫和库什纳将于本周晚些时候会见弗拉基米尔·普京。
培根称最初提出的协议为将感恩节定为“投降文件”的最后期限，会让乌克兰在未来几十年里变得虚弱，容易受到俄罗斯的攻击。
“与普京打交道，我们需要道德上的明确性。他不想与乌克兰达成和平协议，让乌克兰成为一个主权国家，”培根说。“他想控制另外三分之一的乌克兰。他想让乌克兰成为附庸国。所以，我不明白为什么政府一直在这里追求毫无意义的东西。...普京不想要和平。总统应该看看。”
他说，政府应该关注而不是在军事上帮助乌克兰，并指出普京的“邪恶意图”
Van Hollen: 'Very possible there was a war crime committed' in Venezuela boat strike
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said Sunday he believes "it's very possible there was a war crime committed" in theadministration's first strikeagainst an alleged drug trafficking boat in the Caribbean Sea in September.
"I think it's very possible there was a war crime committed. Of course, for it to be a war crime, you have to accept the Trump administration's whole construct here ... which is we're in armed conflict, at war with this particular -- with the drug gangs. Of course, they've never presented the public with the information they've got here,"Van Hollen said on ABC News' "This Week.""If that theory is wrong, then it's plain murder."
Van Hollen, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,was responding to a story from The Washington Postthat Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had reportedly givena spoken order ahead of that Sept. 2 operation for the military to kill everybody aboard the suspected drug boat. After an initial strike left two survivors, the commander leading the operation reportedly complied with Hegseth's alleged directive by ordering a second strike, according to the report.
Hegseth defended the U.S. military's operations targeting the boats in the wake of the Post report, which ABC News has not confirmed the details of.
Van Hollen told "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl,"They have concocted this ridiculous legal theory. But even if you accept their theory that it is a war crime, and so I do believe that the secretary of Defense should be held accountable for giving those kind of orders."
"As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically intended to be‘lethal, kinetic strikes.’The declared intent is to stop lethal drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narco-terrorists who are poisoning the American people. Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization," thesecretary postedon X Thursday.
The Pentagon's spokespersonsaidthe Post story's "entire narrative was false."
In a separate interview on "This Week," Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem dismissed the Post's reporting.
"I would not put any credibility to that story, to what was said," she said. "I have full faith and trust in this president and in this government to do the right thing to keep the American people safe. And I'm so grateful at the amount of work that has been done to stop those deadly drugs from getting into our country."
Both the House and Senate Armed Services committees have said they are investigating the incident. Rep. Don Bacon, a Republican who sits on theHousecommittee, said the report was "a big concern," but also expressed skepticism Hegseth would have issued such an order.
"We should get to the truth. I don't think [Hegseth] would be foolish enough to make this decision to say, kill everybody, kill the survivors because that's a clear violation of the law of war. So, I'm very suspicious that he would've done something like that because it would go against common sense," Bacon said.
"But," he continued, "If it was as if the article said, that is a violation of the law of war. When people want to surrender, you don't kill them, and they have to pose an imminent threat. It's hard to believe that two people on a raft, trying to survive, would pose an imminent threat."
Bacon, a staunch advocate for Ukraine, also told "This Week" that he feels the White House is sending "mixed signals" on its stance about helping to end Russia's war there.
"I just don't see that moral clarity coming from the White House," Bacon said.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner are meeting with Ukrainian officials to continue negotiations Sunday in Florida. Witkoff, and possibly Kushner as well, are then expected to meet with Vladimir Putin in Moscow later this week.
Bacon called the original proposed agreement thathad a Thanksgiving Day deadline a "surrender document that would've left Ukraine weak and vulnerable to Russia for decades to come."
"We need moral clarity dealing with Putin. He does not want a peace agreement with Ukraine that leaves Ukraine a sovereign country," Bacon said. "He wants to control another third of Ukraine. He would like to make Ukraine a vassal state. So, I don't know why the administration keeps pursuing the pointless here. ... Putin does not want peace. The president should see it."
He said the administration should focus instead of helping Ukraine militarily and call out Putin's "evil intentions."
