Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) arrives to the Capitol for votes regarding the continuing resolution to fund the government on Friday, March 14, 2025.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said he thinks it`s "very possible" that a reported follow-up strike on two survivors of an initial U.S. attack in the Caribbean in September could constitute a war crime.

"I think it`s very possible there was a war crime committed," Van Hollen said in an interview on ABC News`s "This Week," when asked about The Washington Post reporting about the U.S. strike on an alleged drug boat on Sept. 2, which the administration previously confirmed killed 11 people they deemed "narco-terrorists."

The Post reported on Friday, however, that the initial strike left two survivors clinging to the wreckage. The news outlet reported that the special operations commander, who was in charge of the military operation, ordered a second attack to comply with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth`s earlier order to "kill everybody" aboard the vessel.

Hegseth fired back against the report later on Friday, calling it "fake news" and insisting that the U.S. military`s strikes against alleged drug-smuggling boats, which have taken place in both the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, are "lawful."

Van Hollen called into question the legality of the initial strike, setting aside the question of whether it would violate the laws of warfare for the U.S. military to target survivors of a strike who pose no imminent threat.

"Of course, for it to be a war crime, you have to accept the Trump administration`s whole construct here, which is we`re in armed conflict, at war, with this particular - with the drug gangs. Of course, they`ve never presented the public with the information they`ve got here. But it could be worse than that, right? If that theory is wrong, then it`s plain murder," Van Hollen said, confirming that he was referring to the first strike.

"I`m saying that it`s either murder from the first strike, if their whole theory is wrong - and I think, you know, the weight of the legal opinion here is that they have concocted this ridiculous legal theory," he said. "But even if you accept their theory, then it is a war crime."

"And so I do believe that the secretary of Defense should be held accountable for giving those kinds of orders," he added.