MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut is on the line with us now. He is the ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and he was among the lawmakers who heard from the Navy admiral who gave the order for that second strike on a boat that was allegedly involved in drug smuggling. Congressman Himes, welcome back to MORNING EDITION.
JIM HIMES: Good morning.
MARTIN: So there have been a lot of different narratives about what happened on that boat and to that boat. In as much detail as you can share, what did you see in that video that was shown to you yesterday?
HIMES: Yeah. I saw something far more disturbing than other videos of lethal strikes that I have reviewed over the years. You know, Americans will be aware that from time to time, in a context like the taking out of Soleimani years ago, this was very, very different. When the U.S. takes lethal strikes, usually you're talking about somebody who is clearly an avowed enemy of the United States, usually a terrorist, or in the case I cited, an Iranian military commander. You know, there's often weapons around, and these individuals are active and operational. So you start with the context, which is that killing unindicted criminals - 'cause these people are criminals, not terrorists. Terrorism - terrorist has a distinct meaning. Killing them without due process, without an arrest, that context is problematic. But what's really problematic and what was really hard to watch yesterday, the notion that they were going to right their boat and continue on their mission is simply nonsensical, and anyone who sees that video would know that.
Without getting into too much detail, I would tell you that what you see in that video is the United States, for a lengthy period of time - so this is not a fog of war thing - for a lengthy period of time, observing two men with no weapons, with no radio. They've just had a massive munition go off over their head in such a way that their boat has been a conflagration. I mean, I doubt that anything survived that fire. And they are clinging to a little piece of wood. Now, this was a big boat. This was - I mean, it's 40 feet long or so. Almost all of it is underwater. So the notion that they could right it after they've had a munition go off over their head is absurd, as is the notion that they could right it, get into it, make it functional and continue on their mission. So what I saw and what I think, you know, any American would see if they didn't know the political context was two probably soon to be dead, not because of a missile, but because of drowning, shipwrecked sailors. And the United States took the decision to kill them, which, as you point out, in the Pentagon manual is the very definition of a war crime.
MARTIN: So let me play you what Republican Senator Tom Cotton said yesterday after he was briefed.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
TOM COTTON: The first strike, the second strike and the third and the fourth strike on September 2 were entirely lawful and needful, and they were exactly what we'd expect our military commanders to do.
MARTIN: You both attended the same briefing. How do you explain such a fundamentally different interpretation?
HIMES: Well, you know, sadly, the opinion about the strike yesterday seems to break precisely on partisan lines. And again, I'm not interested in persuading people along partisan lines. I'm very interested in this video being released because, again, you know, this is a - the visual is two men who are about to go under the waves, observed for a lengthy period of time, shipwrecked sailors killed by the United States. Again, not in the fog of war, not because they pointed an AK-47 at an American service member, but just because there was this absurd notion that clinging to a piece of wood, they were still capable of hostilities, which is the legal question. So, look, I - you know, Rick Crawford, my counterpart in the Republican Party, said something similar. The decisions and the interpretations are falling along partisan lines. The American people need to see this. They need to see it.
MARTIN: And what would happen when they do? How do you think that will change the conversation we're having?
HIMES: Well, the reason that's important - you know, I've said from the beginning that killing people who we have traditionally arrested and interdicted is both stupid because if you kill them, you can't interview them to find out who their bosses are, what the transshipment points are, what the routes are. But, you know, these are criminals. They are not terrorists. Terrorists have a political and a strategic objective. Narcotraffickers, as hideous as they are, are simply trying to sell a product to Americans. And so there's a distinction there.
MARTIN: OK.
HIMES: And Americans need to actually see the visual...
MARTIN: OK.
HIMES: ...Of what it is that we're doing here.
MARTIN: Before we let you go, as briefly as you can, The Washington Post reported that the defense secretary gave a verbal order to kill everybody on the boat. Did Admiral Bradley speak to that? What did he say?
HIMES: He did. I asked him very explicitly whether that order had been issued, and he said absolutely not.
MARTIN: Do you believe him?
HIMES: Admiral Bradley is - anyone who's ever worked with Admiral Bradley knows that - says that he is a man of great integrity...
MARTIN: OK.
HIMES: ...With a storied history.
MARTIN: OK.
HIMES: So given that, I don't have any reason not to.
MARTIN: That's Representative Jim Himes. He's the top Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Congressman, thank you so much.
HIMES: Thank you.
MARTIN: And I do want to mention, we've invited a number of Republican colleagues of the congressman to come on the program. That offer still stands. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
