Were any formal investigations opened into Pete Hegseth or his unit for alleged war crimes in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Executive summary
No public criminal prosecutions or military courts related to alleged war crimes by Pete Hegseth for actions in Iraq or Afghanistan are reported in the available sources; current formal probes focus on a September 2025 Caribbean boat strike while Hegseth is Defense Secretary (not his prior unit service) and Congress and multiple watchdogs have opened or signaled investigations into his conduct around that strike [1] [2] [3]. Reporting shows bipartisan congressional inquiries, an Inspector General review of Hegseth’s Signal use, and public calls for other investigations—but the record in these sources does not show prior formal investigations tied to his deployments to Iraq or Afghanistan [3] [1] [4].
1. What reporters are actually investigating now: the Caribbean boat strikes, not historic unit war-crime cases
The avalanche of coverage in late 2025 centers on allegations that Hegseth ordered follow‑up strikes that killed survivors of an initial attack on an alleged drug‑smuggling boat on Sept. 2, 2025, and on whether his directives or messages contributed to those decisions; congressional armed‑services committees have opened bipartisan investigations into his role in those strikes [1] [2] [5].
2. Multiple oversight channels have been activated — Congress, IGs, and publicity-driven complaints
Reporting says the two congressional committees that oversee the Defense Department began bipartisan probes into Hegseth’s actions regarding the second strike; a classified Inspector General report about his use of Signal was sent to Congress and spurred further scrutiny, and external complaints (including one to the Inter‑American Commission on Human Rights) have been filed in response to the boat‑strike allegations [2] [3] [1]. Available sources note other entities that could investigate (academic observers list up to five possible mechanisms) though they also warn prosecutions appear unlikely [6].
3. No evidence in current reporting of formal war‑crimes investigations tied to his Iraq/Afghanistan deployments
The assembled sources document Hegseth’s service in Iraq and Afghanistan and note past controversies about his conduct and statements, but they do not report any formal investigations or prosecutions into alleged war crimes from those deployments; sources instead focus on present probes tied to his actions as Defense Secretary and to the Caribbean operation [4] [1] [3]. Available sources do not mention earlier formal war‑crime investigations against Hegseth stemming from his unit service in Iraq or Afghanistan [4] [1].
4. Competing narratives: accused wrongdoing vs. denials and political defense
News outlets and commentators are sharply divided. Some legal experts and former military lawyers called for investigations and even prosecution after reporting that Hegseth allegedly ordered forces to “kill everybody,” with former JAGs urging congressional review [7] [8]. The White House and Hegseth deny unlawful conduct; allies note the operational chain of command and defense officials (including an admiral) have asserted the follow‑up strike was lawful and that Hegseth’s version differs from anonymous reporting [5] [9] [10].
5. Limits of the public record and why prosecutions would be difficult
Observers cited in the sources warn that even where calls for accountability are loud, practical and legal hurdles make criminal charges unlikely: questions about whether an armed conflict existed, classification and control of evidence, diplomatic and jurisdictional limits, and the role of senior officials complicate any path to prosecution [6] [8]. The Conversation piece and other analysis explain multiple forums could examine the matter but that historical precedent shows accountability for senior U.S. officials in similar cases is rare [6].
6. What to watch next — hearings, unredacted footage, and IG findings
Key near‑term developments to monitor, as identified in reporting, are: congressional depositions (including closed briefings with Adm. Frank Bradley), release or withholding of unedited strike footage, the full Inspector General report on Hegseth’s Signal use, and whether the Justice Department or military prosecutors initiate formal inquiries—none of which the sources report have yet produced criminal charges tied to his past deployments [2] [3] [5] [1].
Limitations: this analysis uses only the provided reporting. If you want, I can track and summarize subsequent public filings, released transcripts, or IG and congressional reports as they become available.