Blog

WASHINGTON — The White House said Monday that a Navy admiral ordered a second strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean Sea and insists that a September attack that has come under bipartisan scrutiny was lawful.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt offered a justification for the Sept. 2 strike after lawmakers from both parties on Sunday announced support for congressional reviews of U.S. military strikes against vessels suspected of smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, citing a published report that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a verbal order for a second strike that killed survivors on the boat in that incident.

Leavitt in her comments to reporters on Monday did not dispute a Washington Post report that there were survivors after the initial strike in the incident. Her explanation came after President Donald Trump a day earlier said that he “wouldn’t have wanted that — not a second strike” when asked about the incident.

“Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,” said Leavitt, referring to U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Frank Bradley, who at the time was the commander of Joint Special Operations Command. “Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law, directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.”

The lawmakers said they did not know whether last week’s Post report was true, and some Republicans were skeptical. Still, they said the reports of attacking survivors of an initial missile strike posed serious legal concerns and merited further scrutiny.

“This rises to the level of a war crime if it’s true,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.).

Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), when asked about a follow-up strike aimed at people no longer able to fight, said Congress does not have information that happened. He noted that leaders of the Armed Services Committee in both the House and Senate have opened investigations.

“Obviously, if that occurred, that would be very serious and I agree that that would be an illegal act,” Turner said.

Trump on Sunday vigorously defended Hegseth.

“Pete said he did not order the death of those two men,” Trump said. He added, “And I believe him.”

Leavitt said Hegseth has spoken with members of Congress who may have expressed some concerns about the reports over the weekend.

After the Post’s report, Hegseth said Friday on X that “fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.”

“Our current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the law of armed conflict—and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command,” Hegseth wrote.

Leavitt also confirmed that Trump later on Monday would be holding a meeting with his national security team to discuss the ongoing operations in the Caribbean Sea and potential next steps against Venezuela.

The U.S. administration says the strikes in the Caribbean are aimed at drug cartels, some of which it claims are controlled by Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Trump also is weighing whether to carry out strikes on the Venezuelan mainland.

Trump on Sunday confirmed that he had recently spoken by phone with Maduro but declined to detail the conversation.

The September strike was one in a series carried out by the U.S. military in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean as Trump has ordered the buildup a fleet of warships near Venezuela, including the largest U.S. aircraft carrier.

More than 80 people have been killed the strikes on small boats that the Trump administration alleges smuggle narcotics for drug cartels.

Diplomats face an uphill battle to reconcile Russian and Ukrainian “red lines” as a renewed U.S.-led push to end the war gathers steam, with Ukrainian officials attending talks in the U.S. over the weekend and Washington officials expected in Moscow early this week.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s peace plan became public last month, sparking alarm that it was too favorable to Moscow. It was revised following talks in Geneva between the U.S. and Ukraine a week ago.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the revised plan could be “workable.” Russian President Vladimir Putin called it a possible “basis” for a future peace agreement. Trump said Sunday, “There’s a good chance we can make a deal.”

Still, officials on both sides indicated a long road ahead as key sticking points — over whether Kyiv should cede land to Moscow and how to ensure Ukraine’s future security — appear unresolved.

Here is where things stand and what to expect this week:

U.S. holds talks with Kyiv then Moscow

Trump representatives met the Ukrainian officials over the weekend and plan to meet with the Russians in coming days.

Ukraine’s national security council head Rustem Umerov, the head of Ukraine’s armed forces Andrii Hnatov, presidential adviser Oleksandr Bevz, and others met with U.S. officials for about four hours on Sunday. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the session was productive but more work remains. Umerov praised the U.S. for its support but offered no details.

Zelensky’s former chief of staff and former lead negotiator for Ukraine, Andrii Yermak, resigned Friday amid a corruption scandal and is no longer part of the negotiating team. It was only a week ago that Rubio met with Yermak in Geneva, resulting in a revised peace plan.

Trump said last week that he would send his envoy Steve Witkoff to Russia. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed Monday that Putin will meet Witkoff today.

Trump suggested he could eventually meet with Putin and Zelensky, but not until there has been more progress.

Witkoff’s role in the peace efforts came under scrutiny last week following a report that he coached Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s foreign affairs adviser, on how Russia’s leader should pitch Trump on the Ukraine peace plan. Both Moscow and Washington downplayed the significance of the revelations.

Where the two sides stand

Eager to please Trump, Kyiv and Moscow have ostensibly welcomed the peace plan and the push to end the war. But Russia has continued attacking Ukraine and reiterated its maximalist demands, indicating a deal is still a ways off.

Putin implied last week that he will fight as a long as it takes to achieve his goals, saying that he will stop only when Ukrainian troops withdraw from all four Ukrainian regions that Russia illegally annexed in 2022 and still doesn’t fully control. “If they don’t withdraw, we’ll achieve this by force. That’s all,” he said.

The plan, Putin said, “could form the basis for future agreements,” but it is in no way final and requires “a serious discussion.”

Zelensky has refrained from talking about individual points, opting instead to thank Trump profusely for his efforts and emphasizing the need for Europe — whose interests are more closely aligned with Ukraine’s — to be involved. He also has stressed the importance of robust security guarantees for Ukraine.

The first version of the plan granted some core Russian demands that Ukraine considers nonstarters, such as ceding land to Moscow that it doesn’t yet occupy and renouncing its bid to become a member of NATO.

Zelensky has said repeatedly that giving up territory is not an option. One of the Ukrainian negotiators, Bevz, told the Associated Press on Tuesday that Ukraine’s president wanted to discuss the territory issue with Trump directly. Yermak then told the Atlantic in an interview on Thursday that Zelensky would not sign over the land.

Zelensky also maintains that NATO membership is the cheapest way to guarantee Ukraine’s security, and NATO’s 32 member countries said last year that Ukraine is on an “irreversible” path to membership. Since he took office, Trump has made it clear that NATO membership is off the table.

Moscow, in turn, has bristled at any suggestion of a Western peacekeeping force on the ground in Ukraine, and stressed that keeping Ukraine out of NATO and NATO out of Ukraine was one of the core goals of the war.

Putin seems to have time on his side

Zelensky, meanwhile, has been under pressure at home.

Yermak’s resignation was a major blow for Zelensky, although neither the president nor Yermak have been accused of wrongdoing by investigators.

“Russia really wants Ukraine to make mistakes. There won’t be mistakes on our side,” Zelensky said. ”Our work continues, our struggle continues. We don’t have a right not to push it to the end.”

An activist with Ukraine’s nongovernmental Anti-Corruption Center, Valeriia Radchenko, said letting go of Yermak was the right decision and would open a “window of opportunity for reform.”

Putin, meanwhile, seeks to project confidence, boasting of Russia’s advances on the battlefield.

The Russian leader “feels more confident than ever about the battlefield situation and is convinced that he can wait until Kyiv finally accepts that it cannot win and must negotiate on Russia’s well-known terms,” Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Center wrote on X. “If the Americans can help move things in that direction — fine. If not, he knows how to proceed anyway. That is the current Kremlin logic.”

Europe’s conundrum

NATO and the EU are holding several meetings this week focused on Ukraine.

Zelensky is holding talks with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris on Monday. In Brussels, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte is hosting Ukrainian Defense Minister Denys Shmyhal and EU defense and foreign ministers are gathering to discuss European military support for Ukraine and Europe’s defense readiness.

On Wednesday, NATO foreign ministers will gather again in Brussels.

The main issue for the EU right now is what to do with the frozen Russian assets in Belgium that the Trump peace plan in its initial version sought to use for postwar investment in Ukraine.

Those funds are central to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s strategy to ensure continued help for Ukraine while also maintaining pressure on Russia. But Belgium’s prime minister is holding out, worried about the legal implications of tapping the frozen assets for Ukraine, the impact that could have on the euro — and of Russian retaliation.

The diplomacy set in motion by Trump’s peace plan “painfully exposed” Europe’s weakness, Nigel Gould-Davies of the International Institute for Strategic Studies wrote in a recent commentary.

“Despite being the main source of Ukraine’s economic and military support, it is marginal to the diplomacy of the war and has done little more than offer amendments to America’s draft peace plan,” Gould-Davies wrote.