TRANSCRIPT OF BACKGROUNDER
GIVEN BY
PETER DANIEL
IN BRUSSELS
ON SATURDAY, 15 MAY 1999

PETER DANIEL:
You've all received the statement this morning, you received the overnight
report so I'm not going to take a long time this morning in going through
it all. What I'd just like to do is take a few questions and of course
we'll back at 3 o'clock as we normally are so Mark, go ahead!


MARK LAITY (BBC):
On the Korisa incident, could you comment on what kind of weapons were
involved in this, bombs whatever and is there any suggestion that this
could be, if you like, a human shield, that these civilians were put there
deliberately around the military camp?


PETER DANIEL:
We told you in the statement that we have not used cluster bombs on this
particular occasion but I'm not prepared to tell you what munitions were used.


As to the human shield, much as I'd like to address that question, we're
not on the ground, you're not on the ground. We've seen reports of this
type of thing under bridges, I think you're all familiar with it but I
can't comment any further on that.


As to the target, this was a valid military target, a command post. We've
told you in the statement what we believe to have been there. The pilot
validated the target prior to the strike, the pilot validated the target
the way that pilots do that prior to the strike.


QUESTION :
Vous dites dans le communiqué que le pilote ou les avions ont reconnu juste
avant de bombarder que c'était bien une cible militaire. C'était dans la
nuit. Est-ce qu'il est possible qu'il y ait eu confusion entre des
tracteurs et des camions militaires?


PETER DANIEL:
Je vous ai dit et je vous le répèterai maintenant, qu'il y a des procédures
à suivre pour valider la cible. Ç'a été fait par le pilote en question
juste avant la frappe.


QUESTION (SKY NEWS):
Pete, just to be absolutely clear, are you saying the target was validated
as it appears to suggest, immediately before the bombs were dropped or was
this some hours before the bombs were dropped?


PETER DANIEL:
I said that the pilot validated his target prior to the strike.


SAME QUESTIONER:
Immediately before?


PETER DANIEL:
That's right!


QUESTION (BBC):
Is it possible to say anything about the altitude at which this attack was
carried out? It has been said on occasions that the pilots have been
flying low where conditions allow and where circumstances suggest that was
possible. Is it possible to say anything on this occasion?


PETER DANIEL:
I'm not prepared to go into where the pilots were flying, at what altitude.
I think these questions have been asked before and the answer that I'm
giving you is going to come out again and is that I'm not prepared to
address that in this particular case or in other cases.


QUESTION:
Can you tell us how far this apparently large group of refugees was from
the military positions that were attacked? How far exactly, was it close,
was it at a distance? And can you tell us either if the pilot did not
see those tractors or took them for military vehicles?


PETER DANIEL:
We had a legitimate military target, it was a command post with artillery,
riveted positions. The riveted positions were validated by the pilot
prior to the strike.


QUESTION:
Were the tractors on the scene, Sir?


PETER DANIEL:
I can't tell you what is on the ground, I'm not on the ground and you're
not on the ground either. I've seen the footage.


QUESTION:
Are you assuming at this point that you by mistake - I don't know exactly
how - attacked those refugees and those tractors?


PETER DANIEL:
I am telling you, as we put out in our statement this morning, that we
believed this to be - and do believe this to be - a legitimate military
target that was validated according to the procedures prior to the pilot
launching his strike.


QUESTION:
But you also regret the civilian victims that fell there accidentally so do
you assume that NATO bombs were responsible for that?


PETER DANIEL:
Look! We regret all civilian loss of life wherever it might be. This is a
statement that we made. People have claimed there has been loss of life,
we regret the loss of life, civilian or military for that matter.


QUESTION:
Do you assume that you were responsible for the civilian victims on the
scene, Sir?


PETER DANIEL:
I cannot address that question. I can tell you that we were striking what
we believed to be - what we validated to be - a legitimate military target.
We're not on the ground, you're not on the ground. It would be nice to be
able to go there and examine exactly what did happen. We know through our
pilots that this target was on the list, it was validated according to the
procedures prior to the strike being launched and that is what we know. We
have gone, as you know, all through the night looking at this incident. We
kept you waiting - I am sorry for that - before we released the statement
this morning but we wanted to be absolutely sure of what we knew, what we
had struck. You have had three questions, let me move on to somebody else
in the front row and then I'll move back.


QUESTION:
Could you have a go at explaining to us exactly what "validating the
target" means? It's a phrase you've used a couple of time now and I don't
understand it.


PETER DANIEL:
As I understand it, another word I could use would be "eyeball".


QUESTION:
Could you please describe this command post a little more, could you tell
us how much artillery was there, how many people were in there presumably
and what type of revetement? Secondly, was there any other target in the
area? And thirdly, were there any artillery exchanges on the ground, I'm
talking about Serbian artillery perhaps exchanging fire with UCK or any
other type of missile or ammunition being used on the ground aside from
that of NATO?


PETER DANIEL:
All I can tell you is - maybe you have seen this too - that there is a
report from, Amnesty International which points out very clearly that
Korisa and the area around Korisa was a very active military area; there
has been continuous shelling and military activity between Serb forces and
IDPs in this area for some time and if you want the Amnesty report I can
give it to you, I happened to look at it this morning.


Whether there was, just at the moment that we were there or not, as I say,
we are not on the ground, we do observe yes but pilots are involved in the
missions that they have been assigned and again I want to repeat this was
an assigned mission, this was a target that we knew to be a military
target, a command post with artillery pieces and other equipment, this was
riveted, that the pilot before he launched his strike validated in
particular the riveted positions of the Serb military before launching his
strike.


QUESTION:
You can't say more about this command post?


PETER DANIEL:
I can't….


QUESTION:
..the activities of this command post in the area?


PETER DANIEL:
I cannot say any more.


QUESTION (INAUDIBLE):


PETER DANIEL:
I think, as I told the gentleman there, validating means you look at it.


QUESTION:
What about the procedures for the pilot?


PETER DANIEL:
That you would have to ask an air force person, I can't answer that but I'm
sure that somebody from the military side would be willing to talk you
through what the procedures are, I can't answer that question.


QUESTION:
If they validated it, they'd look at it and presumably pilots are also
validating and looking at in this Prizren area extensive ethnic cleansing,
which is what we have been told about for the past week. Given the fact
that there has been an extensive push of the people out of there and we
know there are many refugees trying to get to the border, does it make
sense to conclude that things that look like command posts are really being
used as command posts when we know refugees would be seeking shelter in any
place they can, any place they can find? That is my first question.


Secondly, I'd like to ask you about your sense of the waning support among
the Japanese people who feel very uneasy as member of the G8 to have to
support a campaign in which the civilian casualties are mounting?


PETER DANIEL:
First of all, as to the activity in the area, there has been a lot of
movement in the Prizren area as you know, there have been a lot of people
moved out, there is absolute validation of a lot of refugees that have been
moved out of that area and across the borders to Albania but more
particularly to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. There is
movement constantly on the ground of people and we've shown you some
pictures yesterday of some of the people that we could see from the air but
the way we do these things is that this was not a last-minute "We're gonna
hit this!" This was on the target list, was a validated target, we
believed this, as we put out in our statement, to be a military command
post with artillery and other equipment there and Serb military forces.


I remember in the early days sitting in the back of the room while Jamie
was constantly badgered as to why we weren't hitting the forces in Kosovo,
the people doing the killing for weeks and weeks and we told you how this
campaign was going to unfold, that we had various phases that we were going
to go through and that we would eventually be hitting those forces doing
the killing, the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and hitting them hard and now
that is exactly what we're doing and we're trying to do it in a way that
minimises to the maximum extent possible any collateral damage. I don't
know how many times we've addressed this question over the last 53 days.
This is something that we make every effort to avoid. In this particular
case, it is a military target, a legitimate military target with military
equipment, validated in the regular way as procedures would dictate by
these pilots, there was forward air control on this mission and we told you
in the statement what we believe and have received in the way of
information from the pilots.


As to the Japanese question, I can't comment on political events or public
opinion in a country first of all that is not a member of this Alliance and
secondly, which is very far away and one with which I am not entirely
familiar.


SAME QUESTIONER:
An ally the United States has in Asia, was a member of the G8…..concerned
about that?


PETER DANIEL:
I agree they are a member of the G8 but they are not a member of NATO. I
can look at public opinion polls and read the reports which I saw on the
front page of the newspaper today but I am not prepared to comment on them.


QUESTION:
I may have missed this bit but could you just tell us if you know what time
the attack took place and how many bombs were dropped? Secondly, just to
get the thrust of what you are saying politically, are you saying that
because this was a military target that the collateral damage was
essentially a price that was worth paying, that you don't actually regret
this in hindsight or what?


PETER DANIEL:
I can absolutely and categorically disagree with the last statement you
made. This was approached in a professional way, it was identified as a
military target, it was on the list, it was validated and it was struck and
we have gone through the entire night in trying to back-track through the
whole system as to what exactly happened here and you can ask questions
formulated in any way you wish and I am going to give you the same answer
because that is the answer.


SAME QUESTIONER:
What I am trying to understand is are we saying now that if there are
civilians for example deployed in a shield, we would not seek to attack or
are we saying that if it is a military target we will attack it anyway?


PETER DANIEL:
I think that if we clearly saw that civilians were being put in harm's way
by the Serbs that we would do the right thing and not attack.


I will take one more. I will be back at 3 o'clock, we are going to have a
lengthy session, I am sure, this afternoon.


QUESTION:
When can we expect some images - you always show us photos and images of
successful attacks - when can we expect images of this and also when can we
expect some information that is not on the statement?


PETER DANIEL:
First of all, I haven't seen the images myself yet and we are still going
through the process that we go through in each one of these particular
occasions as I think you are well aware, I think you have been here for a
little while now and if there is further information to give you we will be
here to give it to you this afternoon or tomorrow, we are here twice a day
every day.


SAME QUESTIONER:
But do you intend to show us any imagery from the strike?


PETER DANIEL:
I can't give you that answer right now, I haven't seen the stuff myself.


QUESTION:
Can someone from SHAPE explain exactly what the validation procedure is?


PETER DANIEL:
There will be somebody from SHAPE here at 3 o'clock, there is every day.
Thank you!