Daijiworld Media Network - Washington

Washington, Jan 13: Fresh controversy has erupted over the Trump administration’s first deadly strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat, after it emerged that the September operation was carried out using a secretive US military aircraft painted to resemble a civilian plane.

According to multiple officials quoted by The Washington Post, the crewed aircraft involved in the September 2 strike had no visible weapons mounted externally. Instead, munitions were fired from an internal launch tube, allowing the aircraft to maintain a civilian appearance during the attack. The strike resulted in the deaths of 11 people, including two who survived the initial assault but were later killed in a follow-up strike.

The use of such an aircraft has triggered serious legal questions within the Pentagon and among international law experts. Officials familiar with the matter said debates arose over whether concealing the aircraft’s military status amounted to “perfidy” — a war crime under the law of armed conflict that involves feigning civilian status to carry out an attack.

“If you arm these aircraft for self-defence purposes, that would not be a violation,” said Todd Huntley, a former US military lawyer. “But using it as an offensive platform and relying on its civilian appearance to gain the confidence of the enemy is.”

The Trump administration has defended the campaign of strikes — nearly three dozen so far, killing over 100 people — by arguing that the US is engaged in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels. However, this claim is widely disputed by legal experts, who argue that drug trafficking does not constitute armed conflict under international law and that such killings amount to unlawful use of force.

“This isn’t an armed conflict,” Huntley said, adding that even under the administration’s own justification, the operation could still violate international law.

The Pentagon and US Special Operations Command declined to comment on the specifics of the aircraft or the operation. Officials confirmed, however, that the aircraft was broadcasting its military identity electronically — though those on the boat would have been unaware unless they had specialised equipment.

The operation has also drawn criticism for a controversial “double tap” strike, in which US forces returned to the wreckage and killed two survivors clinging to the hull. Lawmakers have questioned whether the men were attempting to surrender, as surveillance footage reportedly showed them waving their arms moments before the second strike.

Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth had reportedly approved the mission in advance, and the final decision to carry out the follow-up strike was taken by the strike commander after consulting a military lawyer.

The revelation that a civilian-looking aircraft was used has further intensified scrutiny, with some former officials expressing concern that a highly classified capability was deployed against what they described as “civilians in a boat who posed no threat.”

The incident continues to fuel debate in Washington over the legality, transparency and moral implications of the administration’s expanding anti-narcotics military operations in international waters.