Additional Coverage:
Pentagon’s Covert Aircraft in Caribbean Drug Strike Raises Congressional Eyebrows
Washington D.C. – A highly classified program and a covertly painted aircraft are at the heart of a burgeoning controversy surrounding the U.S. military’s first strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean. The incident, which has already sparked numerous Congressional briefings, involved an aircraft designed for reconnaissance and surveillance, painted to appear civilian, a detail that immediately raised “scrutiny and real concerns” among lawmakers.
Sources familiar with the classified program revealed to CNN that the aircraft, unlike typical military planes, was not painted in the standard gray. This choice prompted legislators to begin questioning the operation during briefings in September. Administration officials, however, maintained that the aircraft was not attempting to impersonate a civilian craft, citing its use of a military transponder and military tail number.
Despite lawmakers’ concerns, it remains unclear whether the aircraft’s use violated the law of war, which strictly prohibits military personnel from feigning civilian status to attack an enemy. Pentagon officials initially told lawmakers the operation was rushed and the aircraft was the most readily available.
However, sources familiar with the matter dispute this explanation, pointing to the extensive planning and months-long buildup of U.S. military assets in the region prior to the strike. “There were unlimited assets available to use, but they chose this one,” one source stated.
The New York Times was the first to report on these concerns.
Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson, in response to inquiries about the aircraft, stated, “The U.S. military utilizes a wide array of standard and nonstandard aircraft depending on mission requirements. Prior to the fielding and employment of each aircraft, they go through a rigorous procurement process to ensure compliance with domestic law, department policies and regulations, and applicable international standards, including the law of armed conflict.”
The intentional disguising of a military aircraft as civilian to deceive enemy combatants is defined as an act of perfidy under the Defense Department’s Law of War Manual. This includes actions that invite the enemy’s confidence under the guise of protection, with the intent to betray that confidence. One example is feigning civilian status before attacking.
However, legal experts contend that the situation in the Caribbean is not straightforward. The ongoing operations, which have resulted in at least 115 fatalities, have not been legally defined as a war by Congress.
The head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel informed lawmakers last year that activities in the Caribbean and Pacific Ocean do not necessitate a Congressional declaration of war and do not meet the definition of hostilities. Conversely, an October Pentagon notice to Congress indicated that President Donald Trump had determined the U.S. was in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels.
“Perfidy rules apply in war, and this was not a war,” noted Rachel VanLandingham, a former Air Force judge advocate and current law professor at Southwestern Law School. Josh Kastenberg, also a former Air Force judge and prosecutor, now a professor at the University of New Mexico School of Law, emphasized that true perfidy would involve not just camouflage, but actions “with the intended effect of getting them to believe they’re safe.”
Daniel Maurer, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and former judge advocate, explained that if the U.S. were in a legitimate armed conflict and the law of war applied, the issue would be perfidy “if the intent was to induce the boat crew’s reliance on a belief that the aircraft was non-threatening” to prevent them from fighting back or fleeing. “That assumed the crew on the boat or in the water could visually see the aircraft,” Maurer added.
“But we’re not in an armed conflict. In a law enforcement paradigm, the missile strikes were already illegal regardless of what the aircraft looked like.”