Mr. Bacon: Good afternoon.
I just want to take a few minutes to bring you up to date on what's happening.
Air actions are underway. There's not much I can say about the details of those actions now, but they are ongoing.
The United States is sending some new assets into the theater as part of the NATO plan to augment the air force.
In that regard we have deployed -- Secretary Cohen today signed an order to deploy five B-1B Lancer bombers to Europe from Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota, and we are also in the process of sending five additional EA-6Bs to the theater to help with the defense suppression, at which they're so good. There will be additional tankers going as well, probably about ten additional tankers.
In addition, yesterday we sent over four additional B-52s. That's a temporary augmentation because they flew over on a resupply mission, and ultimately they or others will come back, so we'll stay at a steady state of around eight B-52s. But there's been a temporary augmentation Royal Air Force Base, Fairford.
With those announcements, I'll take your questions.
Q: Ken, where are the B-1s going to be based?
A: I don't have anything for you on that, but by tomorrow I'll probably have something.
Q: Do you know what caused the F-117 to go down?
A: We do not. We have not completed the investigation on that yet. I don't know when it will be completed. It's not just a simple issue of determining what happened. It's an issue of determining how it happened.
So if the determination were to be that it was in fact shot down by an SA-3 or any other surface-to-air missile, the next question is how did that happen, and what does it mean for the future operations.
It's precisely because of that reason, because it's very operationally sensitive, obviously, that one, we want to be very careful in pulling together as much information as we can about how it happened, and two, I must tell you that there's a chance that even when we complete this, we won't talk about it for precisely the reason that I've given you.
Q: Ken, a follow-up question, please.
We have been told within this building by, as we say, usually reliable sources, that the F-117 probably was brought down by an SA-3. And yet your concern about the technology -- we're told the F-117s are still flying missions and have been unabated. I'd like to know if that's true.
And two, when reporters were taken by the Serbs out to the wreckage, some noticed what appeared to be bullet holes in what appeared to be the top of the wing. Can you in any way give us any kind of guidance on that?
A: I cannot.
Q: What about are they operational still and have been?
A: They are still an integral part of Operation ALLIED FORCE. They are flying as appropriate. This reinforces the fact that this is an extraordinary aircraft. It has performed brilliantly over Iraq, and it's performing brilliantly today over Yugoslavia. We obviously will make every reasonable effort to protect the planes and the pilots, but that applies not only to F-117s, it applies to every plane in the inventory under use today.
Q: The Secretary addressed the technology loss issue yesterday, but is the Pentagon concerned now that the loss of this aircraft could lead to more effective countermeasures against it in the future?
A: We have a galaxy of concerns every time a plane goes down, and obviously, the first concern is the safety of the pilot, and we addressed that concern, or our combat search and rescue team addressed that concern brilliantly on Saturday.
We obviously have concerns about vulnerability, and that term transcends just technology. It applies to flight tactics; it applies to routes; it applies to a whole variety of things. And these are all among the issues that have to be determined in deciding, figuring out exactly why a plane goes down.
Q: As a result of that, though, have you altered any of the operating methods for this aircraft?
A: Well, if we had, this would not be the place to discuss it.
Q: Is the pilot returning to flying duty?
Q: Can you comment on the report today that A-10s took off? And can you just confirm that this was the first day that A-10s have been involved in action?
And a second question is -- there have been a lot of complaints that there's not been a lot of information forthcoming from here, from yourself. Most of the information we're getting is from Serb TV. Do you think it's really good for us to get most of our information from the Serbs?
A: I don't know whether you'd call it information or misinformation. I try to give you information such as it is and not misinformation. I think the Serbs frequently concentrate on misinformation. You're free to do with that what you will.
In terms of A-10s, look, we have planes taking off and landing at airports all over the world all the time. And it's not good for me or for the pilots to get into the business of telling you what planes are involved in what operations when.
The Serbs monitor TV very closely. We know that for a fact. They are very aware of reports on TV of when planes take off from where -- and they are trying to use that information to make various defensive calculations. I think that's clear. We don't have to make it easier for them to talk about what planes might be doing once they take off.
Q: Is the pilot of the F-117 returning to flying missions?
A: I'll get to you in a minute.
Q: Given the assertion that the air defenses are being degraded, why do we need to send additional EA-6Bs?
A: First of all, the degradation of air defenses involves a number of elements. It involves outright destruction of air defenses with radars and missile installations as well as the communication, nervous system that links them together. It involves the suppression of air defenses through electronic means. It also involves flight tactics. To talk about suppression of air defense you really have to consider all three things.
It is clear that suppression has been a very important part of this mission and it is one that we want to continue, and in some places augment.
Q: Does it suggest, though, that suppression is increasingly important because eradication is not happening at the pace which you expected it to happen?
A: I don't think that it pays to get into questions of expectations here. The issue is whether we are able to achieve tactical air maneuverability at acceptable risk, and I think we've shown that we're able to do that. But it requires constant effort. The air defense threat is changing all the time, and therefore, we have to change our methods all the time, and we're doing that. This is not a static situation.
Q: The B-1 bomber. What kind of weapons capabilities is it going to bring in? The last time it was used was for area bombing. Does that suggest something about a change in the desire to avoid collateral damage, that a potential area bombing weapon is being brought into the theater?
A: Well, I think you saw pictures of the B-1 bombs dropped during DESERT FOX on a barracks facility, as I recall, where they laid down a line of bombs quite accurately on a series of barracks. They have a very precise bomb drop capability. Although technically they drop what are called gravity bombs, dumb bombs, they are not precision-guided munitions. But they have a system that allows the drops to be very precise.
They can carry a load of up to 84 Mark 82 conventional 500 pound bombs, and they can also carry, as well, in addition to that, 30 anti-armor or artillery Cluster Bomb Unit munitions. So I think you can imagine when we get into talking about anti-armor or anti-artillery, some of the possible uses that the B-1 could be put to.
Q: Ken, that's 20 tons, just for the...
A: You're a whiz. Thanks. (Laughter)
Q: A two-part question, please.
Has the pilot of the F-117 returned to flying missions, or will he soon? And two, Sir David this morning said the airstrikes are now 24 hours a day, day and night. Are we flying daylight missions now?
A: There have been daylight strikes, certainly. We have said from the very beginning that we reserve the right to strike any time in any way. I think we have demonstrated that right.
Q: Has the pilot returned or will he return to...
A: I don't know whether he's returned to flight yet, but it's certainly his desire to return as quickly as possible to flying status.
Q: The Brits said they've only dropped two or three or so laser-guided bombs during this campaign, largely because of weather. Can you give us a sense of how many of the manned aircraft sorties have been weathered out?
A: I'm afraid I cannot do that because I don't know. But weather right now is in fact a factor. We, of course, have all weather capability in a number of respects. One is the JDAMs being dropped by the B-2 bombers, the second are the CALCMs being launched by the B-52s, and the third are the Tomahawk sea-launched cruise missiles, the TLAMs, coming from our fleet in the Adriatic and elsewhere.
So we can surmount some of the weather problems. But clearly, as we said from the beginning, there are three very real challenges to fighting in this environment. One is weather, one is air defenses, and one is terrain.
Q: Might this slow your ability to prosecute your target set? And to what extent?
A: Bad weather will slow our ability, but as I say, we do have some all weather capability, and we just try to shift the emphasis to that where possible.
Q: Two questions. First, can you give us some sense of what percentage of the targets you have hit or tried to hit that you have in fact hit? You obviously have had a couple of days at least to go back and look at some BDA from the first couple of nights. Can you give us at least a percentage of the accuracy?
The second question, can you tell us whether or not any tank formations or Serb forces within Kosovo have yet been struck? Any confirmed hits?
A: We are beginning to turn to hitting staging areas. There have been reports of NATO attacks against a vehicle column within Kosovo. I can't give you bomb damage assessment on that, it wasn't done by our planes.
And to answer your first question, I cannot give you percentage figures at this stage.
Q: You said that one of the goals of this operation was to diminish and deter Serb forces. Can you say, are you making progress in that regard? If so, what the evidence is?
A: Certainly we are making progress against military infrastructure, and we are reducing the Yugoslav ability to sustain operations. But the impact of choking off supply lines and eliminating ammo facilities and fuel supplies of course is a delayed impact. And it may take some time to see that. But we are making progress in choking off the ability to operate.
Q: The other week you said you saw some initial evidence of Milosevic pulling a Saddam Hussein and putting critical assets that he wants to save in urban, civilian type areas. Have you seen any more of that? Has that increased a bit as we've gone into phase two?
A: There are signs of doing things like transporting refugees in military vehicles and taking other steps that would make attacks more complicated. Yes.
Q: Shea said this morning that they've attacked the Serb's 243rd Combat Group. Can you say anything in addition to that about special police units that have been...
A: We have attacked special police and army barracks in Pristina, Prizren, Mitrovica, Urosevac, Dakovica and several others.
Q: Can you spell it? (Laughter)
A: No. you're going to find them on a map. I can spell them, but we have attacked barracks and headquarters facilities in a number of places in and around Kosovo. The Chairman showed some imagery yesterday of an attack on some facilities in Nis, N-I-S, that supported operations in Kosovo. We are doing this, but this is not attacking individual tanks and artillery. That's going to take more time and better weather than we have right now.
Q: ...formations, any of those been hit?
A: We are increasingly going after staging areas and we would anticipate there will be troops in those.
Q: ...troops themselves?
A: Well, we don't actually have in Kosovo, as I think you can appreciate, divisions of soldiers marching or driving down roads. The troops and the special police are widely dispersed throughout the area. They're operating in small groups; they're attacking villages from different directions in small groups. So there aren't huge concentrations of troops in the sense of massed armies that we encountered say in World War II in battles 50 or 60 years ago. It's a much different situation. It's more like small groups trying to either destroy and pillage villages on the one hand, or small groups going after concentrations of the Kosovar Liberation Army. So that is a complicating factor.
Q: Do you think it's a race against time to some degree? By the time you get a chance to do the things you need to do militarily, there will be few if anybody left alive in Kosovo?
A: I don't know that I'd call it a race against time. From the very beginning it's been a race against Milosevic who is the person responsible for this.
From the very beginning we've realized that that was the problem. Last year there were 2,000 people killed in Kosovo and more than 250,000 people displaced from their homes. Many of them were able to come back to their homes after the October agreement, but within several months after the October agreement the pace of violence picked up again. There was the Racak massacre in January, as you recall; there were other massacres in January. Even before the Rambouillet talks recessed, Milosevic began stationing more tanks and troops either in or close to Kosovo, and he began a series of attacks the day after the talks were suspended.
There were reports, and they were widely reported probably at the AP and elsewhere of soldiers in white snowsuits and black masks attacking Albanians in the village of Srebica and other places as well. There were summary executions. So there's no doubt as to where the responsibility for these attacks lie, and it is a race against Milosevic's murderous ways.
Q: We understand you have no plans now for the usage of ground troops. Are there any circumstances where you might consider the usage? The bombardment, while it might have some successes against Milosevic forces, it has led to a great number of people being driven out, escaping from Kosovo. There might not be any Kosovarians left by the time you finish in 30 days or three weeks or four weeks. Are there any circumstances that might lead you to consider use of ground troops?
A: As the President said, we have no intention of using ground troops except after the signing of a peacekeeping agreement.
But on the question of ground troops, let me say there is no magic military bullet here. We could not, even if a decision by some NATO countries was made to deploy ground troops from parts of Europe into Kosovo -- it would take a long while. They would not be there tomorrow. It would probably be a matter of weeks or more than a month before these troops were on the ground in Kosovo doing a job.
You have to remember, this is very heavily defended area. There are now 40,000 Yugoslav army troops with over 400 tanks, over 300 armored personnel carriers, and over 400 artillery pieces either massed in Kosovo or nearby Kosovo. There are heavy concentrations of artillery along the border between Kosovo and Macedonia. There are only 14 roads into Kosovo, two from Macedonia. These roads are mined. The bridges are mined. There are built-in, as I said, tank and artillery positions along lines of communication. No one would mount a light attack against this. It would have to be an extremely heavy and determined attack. It would take time to organize such an attack.
So there is no magic military bullet. There is not a quick solution. The question, solution, and the most acceptable solution is for Milosevic to stop his murdering today. That would end the problem. That would allow people to come back to their homes even if they're burned out, and start rebuilding their lives.
Q: ...something that would be a surprise, and you have said previously that the military, that NATO has actually done contingency planning for everything including ground troops, so why would it take two or three weeks if the plans are already on the table, granted you don't intend to use them, but they're there.
A: First of all, Dana, I have never said that NATO did contingency planning for the use of ground troops. I have never used that word about ground troops. And I don't believe...
Q: You said they plan for all contingencies.
A: What I have said -- and we discussed this yesterday at considerable length -- what I have said is that NATO looked at a number of possible options for the use of force last fall, and these options range from putting forces on the border between Albania and Kosovo on the one hand and Macedonia and Kosovo on the other, but mainly Albania and Kosovo on the one hand, to putting -- that's sort of the low end -- to putting in a peacekeeping force, to what it would take if there were to be an invasion. This is similar to what any news organization might do in deciding how to cover a campaign. Whether you assign a dozen people to cover a campaign or six people or one person. What's it going to take in terms of money; what's it going to take in terms of support. That's what NATO looked at. It was not planning for contingencies. It was merely trying to get a sense of what resource demands would be in the event of various outcomes.
There was no support within NATO for a massive ground operation. It was determined it would [require] 200,000 troops to invade and occupy Kosovo. It was never a contingency plan. It was done in the context of looking at what various outcomes might require in terms of resources.
Q: I think that was a good explanation for newspaper bean counters, but are we putting in a lot more air resources? I thought you told us a week ago we had 350, 400 aircraft, more than enough to do the job. Now we've got more B-2s, B-1s, the British are sending in more planes, and is that carrier, do you have a carrier enroute to the area with a carrier wing as well?
A: We do have the THEODORE ROOSEVELT enroute to the area, but it's ultimate destination is the Gulf. And whether or not the TR just transports through the Med or spends a couple of days there hasn't been determined, but I don't think there's been any decision to use the THEODORE ROOSEVELT battle group in this contingency now.
Q: What about the other planes? It sounds like you're really building up for, to increase the momentum.
A: We did, as I think we showed, and have shown consistently, have enough airplanes there to do the initial strikes called for in the NATO plan. The NATO plan has always been called a phased air option and it always assumed there would be an augmentation of strikes as the program went along. Now we've moved from the early phases to the middle phase and that requires more air.
So the NATO allies have agreed, as was announced over the weekend, first by the British but then also at NATO headquarters, to put more planes in, and we're in the process of doing that.
Q: Earlier you talked about the weather was impeding going after individual tanks and pieces of artillery. And then you rattled off a number of statistics of tanks and...
A: Excuse me a sec. Excuse me.
Who's doing the talking here? Excuse me. Are you on the telephone someplace? Can we stop that? Thanks.
Sorry, go ahead. I couldn't hear your question, and I felt I should concentrate totally on your question.
Q: You mentioned earlier that weather was impeding going after individual tanks and pieces of artillery, and then you rattled off a number of 300 tanks, 300 APCs, 400 pieces of artillery in Kosovo. Over the next week will the campaign gradually concentrate on that cat-and-mouse game of tank busting quite discreetly?
A: I don't want to get into specifics like that. Our goal from the very beginning has been to degrade the forces in Kosovo that are being used to throw people out of their homes and to basically impose a reign of terror and death in Kosovo. And that's what we will attempt to do.
We've started first with the infrastructure and the supply lines and will move as quickly as we can to actual forces. The problem is that although we are going to hit increasingly staging areas where we find them, as I tried to indicate, there aren't large concentrations of troops at this stage. There are things we can do and will do. We will do them as soon as weather permits.
Q: You've got JSTARS over there and the Predator drone at some point. Will those help peer through the clouds and help target, give targets to NATO pilots?
A: The Predator is now ready to go. It was weathered out yesterday. There will be a couple of days of training, then the Predator will be on the case if the weather permits. We are also in the process of sending eight Hunter UAVs over to the theater to operate, to give us more unmanned surveillance.
Q: JSTARS, is that being used?
Q: We've talked to U.S. troops in Bosnia. There have been some threats against them. Is there anything recent that happened on that front? And are you all planning to do anything different in terms of...
A: Well, we've already taken a number of steps to improve force protection in Bosnia. It's always been at a high level. The commander has the right to do whatever he thinks is necessary to meet the current threat of the day. We've done that. We've shown that we do have very alert and aggressive air CAPs flying over Bosnia, and those of course will continue.
Q: Two simple questions. Was the F-117 tracked on radar, and is the B-1 going to be dropping my favorite in the arsenal, the sensor-fuzed weapon?
A: The answer to the first question is those are all the types of questions that will be answered in the course of the report. And the answer to the second question is, I don't know.
Q: When do you estimate the B-1s will be on the ground ready to fly sorties over there? The second question is, things like the B-1s, the Predators and now the Hunters, why were these not put in place earlier, given the weeks of planning that went into this?
A: The B-1s should be flying by the end of this week, probably before the end of this week. And in terms of your second question, I'm not sure I can answer that beyond what I said earlier. When we started this, we had what we needed to do the job that NATO had called for. That job has changed, so we are augmenting the assets available to do that.
Q: With regard to UAVs, for instance. Is the fact that they weren't in place in the beginning suggest that it was not foreseen that it would be this difficult to get the information about what's happening there?
A: No, I don't think that's it at all. The Predator generally has been, in fact, every year has been used aggressively in Bosnia except during the winter. The Predator and I suspect the Hunter as well, although I don't know, can be susceptible to icing in the winter which makes it impossible to fly. So the Predator has not flown in Bosnia during the winter. The weather is pretty much the same, maybe even worse in Kosovo. So there are times during the year when they can't fly. We're now on the cusp of spring. Things are warming up, although as you can see from television reports, there's been snow over there recently, and they believe that the weather is reaching the time when they can fly.
Q: Both Macedonia and Albania are getting very nervous over the situation in Kosovo, and I believe Macedonia has asked for NATO guarantees. Are we doing anything about that? Possibly putting token troops into Albania as a show of our support?
A: First of all, as you know there are already about 10,000 NATO troops in Macedonia, and clearly we would consider any attack against Macedonia an attack against NATO troops and would respond appropriately.
Secretary Cohen has been in touch with his counterparts in Albania and Macedonia. We're very aware of their concerns, and we're addressing them.
Q: To follow up on Tony's question, can you talk about Joint Stars? Are there any over there in Europe, and are they participating? And a second question, is there any thought of bringing in some Apaches for that tank busting phase?
A: Apaches certainly are an option and it's one we're considering.
Q: Joint Stars?
A: Joint Stars I said is over there. I can't say too much more about it.
Q: Two questions. Can you estimate the percentage of missions being flown against targets in and around Kosovo? And the second question is, can you discuss -- there's a report on the wires of a possible cooperation between Iraq and Yugoslav air defense officers sharing intelligence information, maybe even spare parts.
A: First of all, [the] percentage of targets in Kosovo, as I said earlier, has started out at about 20 percent and has risen to as high as 50 percent on any given day. It varies, of course, from day to day depending on the weather, depending on commanders targeting choices, etc. But it has ranged from 20 percent in the early stages to 50 percent in the current stage. Whether it will stay at 50 every single day remains to be seen. It could drop back, it could be higher on some days.
The second question was you asked about a recent AP story about discussions between Iraqi and Yugoslav officials. That cited intelligence sources. I can't comment on intelligence. But it certainly would not be surprising if they talked. These are two countries both subject to attack by forces within NATO. They both have primarily Soviet-built or purchased air defense systems. And they are both subject to international embargoes, which limit their ability [to] purchase weapons and spare part, so they might obviously look for ways to work together to complement or supplement each other's systems.
In addition, I'm sure the Yugoslavs believe that the Iraqis have learned a thing or two over the last seven years in dealing with Western aircraft. What they've learned is that they haven't been able to deal with them very successfully, and I hope they imparted that information to the Yugoslavs.
Q: Ken, there have been very few reports from either here or Brussels on SAMs being fired, and I've seen no reports of HARM shootings or any strikes on the mobile SAM batteries. Are the Serbs still not using their SAMs, and they're not using their radars enough that we can get decent targets?
A: I know that Air Commodore Wilby, the NATO briefer, has mentioned on several occasions when SAMs have been used and several occasions when they haven't been used. They do not fire SAMs every day. It seems to be episodic, and the number they fire varies.
We have -- although we're not in the business and don't plan to get into the business of talking about specific ordnance expended on specific days -- we have fired HARMs.
Q: If inclement weather persists, do we run the risk here of being a U.S. only operation, given that the cruise missiles and the GPS-guided bombs are primarily the domain of the U.S.?
A: As you know, the HMS Splendid, a British submarine, has been participating in the operation. Weather is not always uniformly bad, and sometimes there are pockets of good weather that can be exploited. So this will always be an allied operation.
Q: Is there any problem with the supply of U.S. cruise missiles? For instance, I had seen a report that it was dropping down to 150 and that the Air Force might be considering converting nuclear cruise missiles to conventional because of the dwindling supply.
A: There is no problem with sea-launched cruise missiles. The stocks of air-launched cruise missiles are limited, and it's something we're addressing.
Q: Is that a problem? Is that a concern?
A: I wouldn't say it's a problem right now, no.
Q: Is there a risk if a lot of the roads into Kosovo are mined, that the refugees are going to walk across them and be blown up at any point?
A: These, of course, are Yugoslav mines that have been planted there and that is a risk. My sense is that, from what I've read in the press, that many of the bridges have been set with explosive charges that can be manually detonated. I suspect that many of the roads are mined with anti-tank mines that should allow civilians to cross over. But I haven't heard reports of mined roads preventing refugees from getting out.
Q: Are there any plans afoot to start running flights from bases other than those in Italy as the weather gets better, to take the pressure off of Aviano to a certain extent?
A: I'm not aware that that's the plan right now. Obviously, there are options, but we're using a variety of bases now in Europe, not all in Italy.
Q: What kind of Serb military activity, you touched on this earlier, but what kinds of things are you seeing in Kosovo? And do you have any estimates on the number of Kosovar Albanians that have been killed since the bombing started?
A: We do not have good estimates of that. That's very difficult for us to estimate without people on the ground there to verify that.
Let me just give you one example of what's happening in Kosovo. This is a report from OSCE channels about a lawyer named Kelmendi who was a prominent lawyer in Kosovo and represented many Albanians accused of terrorism by the Yugoslav authorities. His son, Kacho Kelmendi, who worked for the OSCE, the Organization for Security in Europe, the KVM monitors, he worked for them as a translator and security person when the KVM was in Kosovo.
He would check in occasionally with his former OSCE supervisor and called his supervisor regularly up until March 25th. On March 26th his uncle, the uncle of Kacho Kelmendi, called the supervisor to say that he was in trouble, that he'd been taken in by the police and his fate was unknown.
A friend called later in the day to say that the lawyer, Kelmendi, Kacho's father, had also been taken into custody by the police. He said the police had come to his house at night and beaten the attorney, Kelmendi, in front of his family, and after that the attorney Kelmendi, his son Kacho and the brother of Kelmendi, the uncle, were taken away. Kacho, when he was taken away was told to kiss his wife and children goodbye because he would not see them again.
They were taken out and shot. Their bodies were found by the road and identified by Kacho Kelmendi's wife. That's the type of activity that's taking place in Kosovo today.
Q: Air Commodore Wilby today mentioned that the 243rd Combat Group was hit today. He left unsaid whether it was troops, armor, or the headquarters. He mentioned that they were responsible for some of the worst ethnic cleansing in southern Kosovo, kind of like what you're talking about. Can you give us a sense of what was hit among that group?
A: I'm afraid I don't have more details on that than what the Air Commodore mentioned this morning. I'll try to get some.
Q: Ken, you said there were about 40,000 troops in and around Kosovo. Can you tell whether any of the air campaign stopped either them coming into Kosovo or other troops coming down from the south?
A: As I said, we think we have had an impact on cutting their supply lines and making it more difficult to sustain them.
It's hard to know whether the bombing attacks to date have stopped the flow in. We do know that there has not been much of a flow into Kosovo over the last week or so. About half the troops in terms of people are poised outside of Kosovo, and that percentage has remained true for the last week or so. There hasn't been a new movement of troops into Kosovo. The other half, approximately 16,000 to 20,000 -- 17,000 to 20,000 people are already in Kosovo. Those numbers haven't changed appreciably from what we can tell over the last several weeks. So it does appear that they're not moving new troops in.
We are trying to attack troops, their infrastructure, and where possible their equipment, both in and near Kosovo.
Q: Can you tell whether they are still in the process of sending troops from the north to the south of the country? As reinforcements.
A: I do not have any sense that the [number of] troops marshaled outside of Kosovo but near Kosovo has changed much in the last week. The numbers have remained pretty much...
Q: Jamie Shea said this morning that air defense stuff has been provided to Macedonia. Is that AAA or something else?
A: I don't know exactly what is there. There are British, French, German and other European troops there, and I assume that they have their own air defense capability that travels with them. That may be what he's talking about, but I don't have any details on that.
Q: It's all quiet on the Iraqi front?
A: Yes. I don't believe there's been a violation of the no-fly zone since March 19th.
Press: Thank you.