Fox News has criticized President Donald Trump concerning allegations of killing survivors following a maritime incident in the Caribbean.

In a live broadcast, the network’s Chief Political Analyst, Brit Hume, implied that Trump administration officials might face consequences if it emerges that they commanded the execution of survivors from the incident.

On September 2, the United States carried out a strike against what was believed to be a drug-trafficking vessel near Trinidad.

The Washington Post, on November 28, referenced anonymous insiders who alleged that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had instructed that all individuals aboard be eliminated. Following an initial Navy attack, it was reported that two people survived, hanging onto the boat’s debris.

Admiral Frank Bradley allegedly identified these individuals as valid targets, subsequently enforcing Hegseth’s order. Consequently, the Navy executed a follow-up strike, resulting in the deaths of the remaining survivors.

The Trump administration has attacked what it claims to be drug-running boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific, but no evidence has been provided to back up these allegations. Experts have stated that even if the targeted boats are transporting illegal drugs, the legality of the strikes remains unclear.

During his appearance on Special Report on Monday, 1 December, Hume clarified that the key issue revolves around the intent behind the second attack. He stated, “That’s what it comes down to, is what the intention of the second strike was.

“Was it to obliterate the remainder of the boat that had been hit but not fully destroyed, or was it primarily to eliminate the survivors? If the aim was to eliminate the survivors, that would be a significant issue.

“If they were killed during the destruction of the rest of the boat, if it was sufficiently intact to lead military personnel to believe that the job hadn’t been completed, that’s a different matter.”

Legal experts have suggested that deliberately targeting survivors in a second attack would constitute a severe violation of international law.

Michael Schmitt, a former Air Force attorney and professor emeritus at the U.S. Naval War College, explained to PBS, “You can only use lethal force in circumstances where there is an imminent threat – imminent like now – to life or really serious injury.”

Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman noted in The New Republic that The Defense Department’s Law of War Manual prohibits declaring “no quarter,” and forbids conducting operations “on the basis that there shall be no survivors,” while also clarifying that “persons placed hors de combat [out of the fight] may not be made the object of attack.”