Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “bomb first, question later” approach has led to suspects walking free because the U.S. destroyed critical evidence needed for prosecution.
The Washington Post reported that a strike directed by Hegseth on October 16 hit a semisubmersible vessel that the Pentagon claimed was transporting drugs from Ecuador. Two people were killed in the attack, while two others survived, including Andrés Fernando Tufiño Chila, an Ecuadorian with a history of drug trafficking.
The alleged narco-trafficker survivor did not end up in jail despite being on the boat. After the U.S. military captured Tufiño, he was sent back to Ecuador for prosecution. However, prosecutors in Ecuador had no usable evidence against him because the drugs, which were evidence was destroyed.
Also, the GPS records were missing and any phones that could have provided information about routes, contacts, or intent were also blasted away. To sum it up, the strike obliterated the physical proof, taking the case with it. Ecuadorian authorities had no choice but to release him, according to the Post.
This outcome makes the administration’s tough-on-crime sound insincere, especially since officials have described the strikes as a warlike answer to a national crisis. The Post noted that the October 16 incident is part of a campaign of lethal strikes against maritime drug trafficking targets. However, critics of the policy believe this approach blurs the line between law enforcement and extrajudicial killing.
Democrats on Capitol Hill are already raising the obvious question of if the targets were so dangerous that they “deserved” to be killed, why were the survivors captured only to be released without a case against them? Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), who serves on the House intelligence and foreign affairs committees, asked the Post, “If these people were drug traffickers and deserving of death, how is it that you would pick them up and just let them go?”
The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment, according to the report. However, it defended the operation’s premise, asserting that the targets were not random fishermen or low-level couriers.
“We have consistently said that our intelligence confirmed these boats were trafficking narcotics destined for America. That same intelligence also confirms that the individuals involved in these drug operations are narco-terrorists, and we stand by that assessment,” the Pentagon stated to The Post.
The October case comes after Hegseth is already embroiled in controversy over a previous strike series that critics labeled a “double tap.” This involved a follow-up attack that allegedly killed survivors of an initial strike on September 2 against another suspected drug boat.
The Washington Post previously reported that Hegseth issued a verbal order for that operation, but later reporting suggested that it was a US Navy admiral who ordered the controversial strike.
When details about that incident surfaced, Hegseth intensified his rhetoric rather than stepping back, declaring, “Biden coddled terrorists, we kill them.” However, in this case, they did not kill the alleged terrorist and seemingly helped him walk free.
Trump, meanwhile, attempted to shift responsibility, claiming, “I didn’t know about the second strike. I didn’t know anything about people. I wasn’t involved,” while still supporting Hegseth amid the fallout.
This case adds another wrinkle to the boat strikes approach, as it appears that survivors made it to trial, but there is no evidence to convict them.
