From: bergman@AFPAN.PA.AF.MIL (CMSgt Mike Bergman)
Newsgroups: soc.veterans
Subject: DoD News 08/18/92 (long)
Date: 19 Aug 92 14:58:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: afnews.9208191458.AA20553
Organization: Hq Air Force News Agency/SCC


  <<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><>>
  <<>> Assistant Secretary Of Defense                                    <<>>
  <<>>        Public Affairs                     August 1992             <<>>
  <<>>    Pentagon, Washington DC       Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat      <<>>
  <<>>        DSN  225-3886                                      1       <<>>
  <<>>       - - - - - - -               2   3   4   5   6   7   8       <<>>
  <<>>  DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE NEWS       9  10  11  12  13  14  15       <<>>
  <<>>                                  16  17  18  19  20  21  22       <<>>
  <<>>   TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, 1992       23  24  25  26  27  28  29       <<>>
  <<>>                                  30  31                           <<>>
  <<>>                                                                   <<>>
  <<>>                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -                   <<>>
  <<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><>>

                                                                      No. 226-M

MEMORANDUM  FOR  CORRESPONDENTS                                 August 18, 1992

     On August 20, 1992, Vietnamese date, technical representatives of Vietnam
and the United States are scheduled to begin joint investigations and remains
recovery operations pertaining to unaccounted for Americans in Vietnam.  This
will be the 19th joint field activity conducted by U.S. and Vietnamese repre-
sentatives since September 1988.  The activity will be conducted in the
Vietnamese provinces/districts of Nghe An, Ha Tinh, Quang Binh, Thua Thien Hue,
Quang Nam, Quang Ngai, Binh Thuan, Ninh Thuan, Ba Ria Vung Tau, and Dong Nai.

     The joint team plans to investigate 19 priority cases and conduct recovery
operations at six sites over a 30-day period.  They also intend to investigate
as many as 69 other cases in these provinces.  The 51 U.S. team members will be
under the operational control of Joint Task Force Full Accounting and will be
joined by personnel from the Vietnamese Office for Seeking Missing Persons.

     There are 2,266 Americans still listed as missing or otherwise unaccounted
for in Indochina.  Of that total, 1,658 are listed as unaccounted for in
Vietnam.  To date, 268 Americans previously listed as missing in Vietnam have
been accounted for.

     During the most recent operation in Vietnam, conducted from June 19 to
July 18 of this year, a joint U.S./Vietnamese team investigated 37 cases and
conducted recovery operations at five sites.  Remains recovered during this
operation were repatriated to U.S. control in Hanoi on August 3, 1992.  Those
remains are currently being analyzed at the U.S. Army Central Identification
Laboratory in Hawaii (CILHI).  

     Accounting for Americans still missing or otherwise unaccounted for in
Southeast Asia as a result of the Vietnam War is a matter of highest national
priority for the United States.  The United States welcomes and appreciated the
cooperation of Vietnam in this upcoming field operation.

                                     -END-
      
DoD Contracts


                                     ARMY

	MTS Systems Corporation, Eden Prairie, Minnesota, is being awarded a
$5,100,000 firm fixed price contract for design, fabricate, and install 1
all-angle simulator for testing assembled artilery and tank weapons.  Work will
be performed at Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, Illinois, and is expected to
be completed by May 23, 1994.  Contract funds wil not expire at the end of the
current fiscal year.  There were 24 bids solicited on October 31, 1991, and 3
bids received.  The contracting activity is the U. S. Army Armament, Munitions
and Chemical Command, Rock Island, Illinois (DAAA08-92-C-0092).

                                     NAVY

	Grumman Aerospace Corp., Bethpage, New York, is being awarded a $9,449,800
order against a basic ordering agreement for 39 engineering change proposal
(ECP) 1227 kits for 500-hour time compliance requirement changes for the F-14
aircraft.  Work will be performed in Behtpage, New York, and is expected to be
completed in November 1993.  Contract funds will not expire at the end of the
current fiscal year.  This contract was not competitively procured.  The Naval
Air Systems Command is the contracting activity (N00019-90-G-0275).

	Grumman Aerospace Corp., Bethpage, New York, is being awarded a
$115,150,000 contract for 120 basic modification equipment kits for the A-6E
configuration block change II requirements in accordance with an approved
engineering change proposal (ECP).  These pieces of aircraft equipment will be
to install 120 Boeing composite wings onto the A-6E and will upgrade the A-6E
configuration to the A-6E systems weapons integration program (SWIP) block II
configuration in order to resolve metal wing aging and fatigue problems.  Work
will be performed in Bethpage, New York, and is expected to be completed in
December 1997.  Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal
year.  This contract was not competitively procured.  The Naval Air Systems
Command is the contracting activity (N00019-92-C-0275).
:END








DoD News Briefing
Tuesday, August 18, 1992 - Noon
Mr. Pete Williams, ASD (Public Affairs)

     Mr. Williams:  Good afternoon.

     A couple of announcements.  First of all, the United States and Vietnam
are ready to begin the next joint effort on the POW/MIA mission.  On August
20th, a Vietnam date, technical representatives of Vietnam and the United
States are scheduled to begin joint investigations and remains recovery
operations pertaining to unaccounted for Americans in Vietnam.  This will be
the 19th joint field activity conducted by U.S. and Vietnamese representatives
since September of 1988.  We have a Memorandum for Correspondents that lists
the provinces and the districts in Vietnam where these activities will be
conducted, but for the record, let me put them in the record:  Nghe An, Ha
Tinh, Quang Binh, Thua Thien Hue, Quang Nam, Quang Ngai, Binh Thuan, Ninh
Thuan, Ba Ria Vung Tau, and Gong Nai.

     The joint team plans to investigate 19 priority cases and conduct recovery
operations at six sites over a 30-day period.  They also intend to investigate
as many as 69 other cases in these provinces.  The U.S. team will be composed
of 51 members who will be under the operational control of Joint Task Force
Full Accounting, and they'll be joined by personnel from the Vietnamese Office
for Seeking Missing Persons.

     During the most recent operation in Vietnam, this would have been the 18th
field activity which was conducted from June 19th to July 18th of this year, a
joint U.S./Vietnamese team investigated 37 cases and conducted recovery
operations at five sites.  Remains recovered during that operation were
repatriated to U.S. control in Hanoi at a ceremony on August 3rd.  Those
remains are now being analyzed at the U.S. Army Central Identification
Laboratory in Hawaii.  

     Let me talk a little bit about Somalia and then Angola and then I'll be
pleased to take your questions on any other subjects.

     Last Thursday, the President directed the Defense Department to offer U.S.
military airlift to take a United Nations guard force to Somalia to help
provide security for humanitarian relief efforts there.  The UN has been
working with the government of Pakistan, which will provide the 500 member
guard force, and as soon as the Pakistani guards are ready, the United States
military will airlift them to Somalia as quickly as possible.

     Then last Friday, the President directed the Department of Defense to
begin emergency airlift operations as soon as possible to help deliver food
inside Somalia and to northern Kenya for Somali refugees there and for Kenyans
who are also experiencing a drought.

           The overall coordinator for all U.S. relief activities for Somalia
is Andrew Natsios who is the Assistant Administrator of the Agency for
International Development's Food and Humanitarian Assistance Office.  The DoD
airlift operation, which is nicknamed Provide Relief, will be under the command
of Brigadier General Frank Libutti of the U.S. Marine Corps.  By the way, we
have General Libutti's biography available for you.  He takes this position
from his current assignment.  He is currently serving as the Commander, Forward
Headquarters Element, and Inspector General of the United States Central
Command at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida.  He's been a commander of the 11th
Marine Expeditionary Unit and, most recently, he served as the Marine Corps
member of the Chairman's staff group until March of '92.  He took his current
position in July of 1992, but his biography is available for you.  As I say, he
is going to command the DoD airlift operation.

     General Libutti left MacDill Air Force Base early Sunday afternoon, along
with a team of 33 others from Central Command.  They arrived in Mombasa in
Northern Kenya early yesterday morning, Eastern time.  They are now evaluating
the condition of airfields in the area, checking on the availability of fuel
for airplanes and looking at other logistical arrangements.  The team flew to
Mombasa in a C-141 cargo plane.  Since then, two other C-141's, both out of
Charleston Air Force Base, from the 437th MAC base there, have arrived to join
them.

     The situation in Somalia is chaotic.  There is no functioning government
in Somalia.  About a dozen rebel groups based on local clans each hold a region
in the country and frequently engage in hostilities against their rivals.
There are also large numbers of free lance bandit groups who attack food
convoys and prevent distribution of relief supplies.

     Several humanitarian relief groups have been operating in the port city of
Mogadishu which is the nominal capitol city, but the port remains closed to
commercial traffic and has not proven to be a reliable relief route, partly
because of the very tenuous security situation there.

     So that has led the planners of this operation, Operation Provide Relief,
to look elsewhere, particularly to the area south and west of Mogadishu where
the people there are completely dependent upon airlifts of food.  Our planners
have concluded that the best way to distribute food into Somalia is to use
C-141's to shuttle supplies from warehouses in Nairobi and Mombasa in Kenya to
Wajir in Northern Kenya.  Some of it will be distributed there, both to Kenyans
and Somali refugees.  And then from the air bases in Kenya, eight C-130's,
which are smaller cargo planes, will fly food into air- strips in south central
Somalia where international relief organizations will receive and distribute
it.  None of the airstrips in that region of Somalia can accommodate the larger
C-141's.

     So in all, the plans now call for Operation Provide Relief to use four
C-141's in Kenya and eight C-130's that will fly into Somalia.  As I said,
three of the C-141's are already in Mombasa.  The fourth comes in tomorrow.
The C-130's are scheduled to arrive Thursday and Friday.  General Labutti says
the airlift from Mombasa will probably start on Thursday, and the operation
could last as long as 60 days, and then we'll review it and see if we need to
continue it.  Although this is the first involvement by the Department of
Defense in the international humanitarian relief effort for Somalia, the U.S.
government has been providing assistance since January of 1991, when the coup
started.  In FY91 the U.S. sent 12,000 metric tons of food there.  In FY92,
we'll end up by the end of this fiscal year providing 112,000 metric tons.  And
as the President said last Friday, in FY93, we'll provide 145,000 tons.

     One other point for you, Mr. Natsios from the AID office will lead a group
of experts in a news briefing this afternoon in more detail on the Somali
refugee effort at the State Department briefing room at 2:00 o'clock this
afternoon.  Robert Wolthius, who is our Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
for global affairs, will be there.

     One other note, was have about 150 military personnel right now on the
ground in Mombasa and in the region, but it's mostly in Mombasa.  The 34
members of that advance surveillance team which I already talked about are in
Mombasa doing the survey work; about 100 more Air Force personnel from what is
called a Tactical Airlift Control Element have come in.  They're like air
traffic controllers.  They will control the flow of aircraft into and out of
these rather austerely staffed air fields and organize the loading of cargo.
We expect about 90 more will be needed.  Some security personnel on the ground
will be needed as well.  I don't know exactly how many or precisely where
they're going to come from.

     Again, there are food supplies in Nairobi and Mombasa now.  This effort's
going to be based out of Mombasa.  C-141's will fly from Nairobi and Mombasa to
Wajir, where they'll supply both Kenyans -- (pointing to map) this is Kenya,
this is Somalia, this is Ethiopia, just to orient you.  The planes will fly
from Nairobi and Mombasa, the C-141's, to Wajir, to provide humanitarian aid to
the Kenyans in this area who are having their own drought problems, and to the
Somalis who come across from Somalia into northern Kenya.  Then smaller C-130's
will fly from probably these two bases, although there is a possibility that
they could use this as a forward airhead, and there's no solid decision on that
yet.  But they will fly into this region here, what I would describe as south
central Somalia, to provide humanitarian assistance in this region.

     Obviously, one of the things this assistance surveillance team is doing
right now is to try to identify which air strips in Somalia they want to use.
We will provide you the names of those air strips after the first planes have
landed, but for security purposes, because there isn't really very elaborate
security -- some of these are dirt airstrips, and that's one of the reasons we
have to use the C-130's -- we will not provide the names of the airstrips
before the flights begin.

     Q:  Pete, you said 150 military personnel were on the ground in Mombasa
and elsewhere in the region.  You said about 100 Air Force personnel, like
flight traffic controllers, will be needed.  Are those part...  They're part of
the 150?
     A:  Yes.

     Q:  And you say about 90 more will be needed, about 90 more Air Force
personnel, on top of the total of 150?
     A:  Correct.  

     Q:  So it looks now like you'll have pretty close to 240 to 250 there?
     A:  Yes, and it could go up from that if we decide we need more
security...

     Q:  But as of now it looks like 240 to 250?
     A:  As of now, 150.  It looks like we'll need about 90 more at least for
the air traffic control folks.  Then as you bring in the additional C-130's,
they'll have their own crews.  So the number will go up probably, Charlie,
higher than 250 when we finally get the whole thing going by the end of the
week.
         Q:  When you talk about additional security, you mean more Air Force
air police or some other service? 
     A:  I don't know where it will come from.  It could be the Marine Corps,
it could be Army.  I don't know who will provide that.

     Q:  Are all these aircrews going to be active duty Air Force, or will they
be a combination of Air active and reserves?  National Guard and...
     A:  It's a good question.  As far as I know, these folks are all active
duty, but let me double- check that.

     Q:  Where are you dropping off the 500 Pakistanis?  You're bringing them
in, right?
     A:  We will bring them in.  The United Nations will tell us where.  I
don't know that there's any decision on where we should deliver them yet.

     Q:  Will they be involved in security measures protecting U.S. military
flights in and out of Somalia or...
     A:  That's possible, but irrespective of the U.S. operation, irrespective
of Provide Relief, the United Nations has decided that they need these
additional Pakistanis.  As I said before, they need additional UN guards.  As I
said before, the situation in Mogadishu is very chaotic.  Supplies that come
into Mogadishu are frequently raided by these rival clans and looters.  There
are guys driving through the streets with pickup trucks and machine guns
mounted on the back and the local relief people call them Mad Max units.
They're virtually terrorizing the relief operations.

     Q:  Given all of that, what provisions can you make to protect U.S.
military flights going in there?
     A:  We'll have to do the best we can, relying on the UN guards and on the
people who are on the planes.  If we need more, we'll send more.

     Q:  All these supplies are going to be landed, they're not going to be
dropped.  There's not any plans for airdrops?
     A:  This plan that I've just sketched out for you envisions taking
material that's already in Nairobi and Mombasa.  More will be coming, probably
by ship, into Mombasa and by plane into Nairobi.  That's a constant flow that
comes in.  

     After discussing this problem with the UN, the decision was that the
people in Somalia who are most dependent upon airlifted supplies are those in
south central Somalia.  You cannot rule out at this point the possibility of
airdrops.  That may come in the future.  But for now, the concept, as I briefed
it to you, is where we'll start out.  There may be additional land convoys and
so forth that other international humanitarian relief organizations are
providing.

     Q:  What happens after you land at these airstrips someplace in Somalia?
Who then takes the food and distributes it?
     A:  There are, at the places that we would fly into, already international
humanitarian relief organizations, Doctors Without Borders, the UN Commission
for Refugees, and so forth; CARE, other international relief organizations are
already there.

     Q:  Is there any discussion of Military Sealift Command ships or U.S. Navy
ships that would bring extra assets down to the region?
     A:  Not that I know of.

     Q:  Is there any plan to deploy any medical teams at all?
     A:  Not that I've heard of.  I should have said before that the 437th, I
think, from Charleston is an Air Mobility Command base, it's not a MAC base.
That's the new major command which replaced MAC on June 1, 1992, as I should
have known.

     Let me briefly touch on Angola.  On July 30th, the President instructed
the Department of Defense to deploy U.S. Air Force C-130 aircraft and crews to
Angola to support the Angolan peace process.  Specifically, the mission is to
provide transportation to the former combatants of the government of the
People's Republic of Angola and UNITA from nine assembly areas around the
country where they've been gathered back home.  The current estimates are that
about 40,000 demobilized troops and family members are in these assembly areas
and need to be taken back home.  So the airlift will transport them, and will
also transport election officials and their equipment, tents, vehicles and
supplies, to polling centers in preparation for the Angolan elections which
will be September 29th and 30th.  This deployment responds to requests for
assistance from the Angolan President dos Santos; from the UNITA President
Savimbi; and from the United Nations Secretary General Boutras Ghali.

     The operation has been going on on a kind of warmup basis over the last
several days and officially began yesterday and it, too, will probably last
about 60 days.  There are four C-130 U.S. aircraft that are in the region.  The
435th Airlift Wing based at Rhein-Main, Germany, provided three of them; the
others from the 317th Airlift Wing from Pope Air Force Base in North Carolina.
Ken Satterfield at our Directorate for Defense Information can give you the
sort of itineraries of where in Angola they're stopping and what the routes
are, which flights are direct and which are nonstop and that kind of thing.

     Those are my announcements.  Any other questions?

     Q:  On the reports that the U.S. and its coalition partners are planning
on imposing some sort of no-fly zone below the 32nd parallel in southern Iraq,
can you tell us where that stands?
     A:  Formally I think the statement I would make would be that the United
States and its coalition allies, as well as the United Nations, continue to
discuss a common concern that Iraq needs to do a better job of abiding by
various UN Security Council resolutions.  I can't speculate on what specific
actions might be taken to compel Iraq to comply with those sanctions, but I
would only say that it's a subject of continuing concern, and the United
States, as well as its coalition allies, are discussing possible options to
compel Iraqi compliance, but I can't be more specific than that.

     Q:  Does that only involve Iraqi air attacks?  What about efforts to
suppress or repress their people on the ground?
     A:  I just can't speculate on what additional steps the coalition or the
United Nations might take.

     Q:  Can you tell us why this special concern has arisen at this time, more
than a year or so after this repressive activity started?
     A:  A simple answer:  It's based on Iraq's performance in complying with
the Security Council resolutions.  The reason that the concern has been
heightened is because of a heightened disregard for the Security Council
resolutions on the part of Iraq.  Specifically, if you look at the Iraqi
compliance with UN resolutions that require admittance of UN inspectors to
facilities, you're all well aware of the showdown at the Agriculture Ministry a
few weeks ago.  In terms of the Shia population in the south and UN resolutions
which prohibit Iraq from repressing the human rights of people inside Iraq,
there's been an escalation of Iraqi activity in southern Iraq over the past
month, probably peaking with the use for the first time since the war by Iraq
of combat aircraft, bombing Shia populations in the south.  

     So is there a heightened concern about this?  Yes.  Why?  Because Iraq is
increasingly disregarding the resolutions.

     Q:  What incidents have you seen since the July 23rd one you spoke about?
     A:  We've seen almost daily flights of helicopters in southern Iraq.  

     Q:  ...helicopters?
     A:  Yes.  Now this includes security and reconnaissance patrols, but it
also includes use of fixed wing, as I said on July 23rd, but also helicopters
attacking insurgent groups when they encounter them in southern Iraq.

     Q:  Since July 23rd?
     A:  Yes.

     Q:  Does the daily that you just mentioned also apply to fixed wing of
not?
     A:  No, it does not.  Let me separate the two out.  In terms of just sheer
flights in southern Iraq, aircraft flying around, probably on training and
reconnaissance missions, that has been going on every day.  Probably since
June, or was it May when the Iranian aircraft flew into Iraq and Iraq started
to fly its aircraft again?

     Q:  April.
     A:  All right, the spring in any case.  They've been doing training
flights almost every day.  The helicopter flights against the Shia in the
south, I think we've noted an increase of them over the last several weeks.

     Q:  Any fixed wing attacks since July 23rd?
     A:  No, not that we're aware of.

     Q:  How about escalation in the use of ground forces?
     A:  If I had to characterize it, I would say it's a different kind of use
of ground forces.  There have been these counterinsurgency attacks against the
Shias in southern Iraq for many months.  But recently they've been much more
intrusive and much more directed against the general population.  For example,
ground forces are going in and building more roads into the Shia population
areas, which obviously gives them better access.  They're draining the marshes,
which is a traditional kind of defense that the Shia have used.  It's one of
the oldest forms of defense in the world, just a water defense.  They're
draining marshes.  There's a more generalized attack, although not necessarily
an escalation of the level of attack.  It's just a more generalized attack
against the Shia population in general.

     Q:  When you say there are fixed wing flights, what are they for?  You
said those are the training flights?
     A:  Yes.  Reconnaissance, security patrols, and training missions for
fixed wing flights.

     Q:  What are they training for?  Are these training for bombing missions?
Are these obviously training for possible combat missions?  They're not just up
there learning their coordinates.
     A:  That's very hard to guess.  I'm not sure that I can take it much
further.  For the generalized fixed wing flights throughout Iraq, and obviously
they're not flying north of the 36th Parallel, but throughout Iraq since April
or whenever it was that they resumed their flights, they've just been doing
generalized training.  It's hard for us to conclude what the purpose is for
other than to get their pilots reacquainted with how to do their jobs.

     Q:  And also, then, this is coordinated, then, with the movement on these
ground forces or preparations.  Are you saying it appears that they're
preparing for an even broader attack against the Shia populations?  More
coordinated?  How do you...
     A:  That's a very hard thing to conclude.  We can only observe the level,
and I think I have to leave it at what I've already said.

     Q:  The Iranian news agency is reporting, or has reported, that those
planes have used napalm against villages.  Can you confirm that?
     A:  We cannot.  We've seen the reports, but we can't.

     Q:  Also, you've never been inclined in the past to say what kind of
planes these are other than to say they're fixed wing.  Could you give us any
better idea what they might be?  Like Sukhoi's or MIG 21's?  Could you tell us
what...
     A:  I can do that.  In terms of the planes based in southern Iraq, the
numbers that fly, they're fluctuating from day to day.  They move planes around
the country.  On average, there are about 30 fixed wing aircraft on any given
day in southern Iraq.  That would include the SU-25 Frog Foots, the PC-7, sort
of a light attack airplane.  There are about 40 helicopters which include the
MI-8 HIP the SA-342 Gazelle, and a few MI-25 Hinds.

     The numbers of flights a day, what I gave you is the number of aircraft
that are in southern Iraq on any given day.  The number of flights a day over
southern Iraq also fluctuates, but it's usually in the range of 20-30 which is
around 15 to 20 percent of the total number of flights in all of Iraq on any
given day.

     Q:  Usually in the range of. . .did you say 30?
     A:  Twenty to 30 flights a day.

     Q:  Those are fixed wing?
     A:  Yes.

     Q:  Those involve...
     A:  The planes that I just mentioned.

     Q:  But there are no MIGs?  You didn't mention MIGs.
     A:  No, I did not.

     Q:  How about helicopter flights?
     A:  It's not clear to me whether the number I just gave you is strictly
fixed wing or total flights including helicopters.  My assumption is that it's
fixed wing, but let me double-check that.

     Q:  In some of the published reports about unofficial plans to create some
sort of no-flying zone, the 32nd parallel has been referred to.  Is there
anything in the Pentagon's view of the Iraqi situation that delineates that
parallel or makes that some sort of a definitive line there?  Is it referred to
in any of the UN resolutions?
     A:  It's pretty hard for me to answer a general question about what do you
think of the 32nd parallel without speculating on what the coalition may or may
not decide to do in order to compel Iraqi enforcement with the Security Council
resolutions.  So I'll simply dodge the question.

     Q:  Is the 32nd parallel not referred to in any Pentagon plans about that?
     A:  I just can't get into discussing that.  I have to stay where I am on
that.

     Q:  Building roads and draining swamps could be construed as a
humanitarian development.
     A:  Not by the Shia it isn't.

     Q:  Is there anything else you can give us to sort of help us understand
why you see hostilities increasing in this area?
     A:  To give you a more serious answer to your question, I don't think the
Shia view the building of roads and the draining of swamps by the Iraqi
military as any kind of humanitarian assistance.  I think they view it as part
of a pattern of repression of the Shia in the south.  The Shia don't need paved
roads to do their own business, but if you were going to undertake a military
operation, a road would be to your advantage.  The Shia don't need the swamps
drained.  They've been living in that area for a long time and, in a sense, the
swamps are kind of a defense for them.  I think when you look at the totality
of what's happening there over the last several weeks, you see -- I already
noted the kind of escalation in late July of the air attacks against the Shia
-- and as I said before in answer to John's question, the kind of thing that
ground forces are doing is more directed toward the Shia population as a whole
in terms of entire villages being targets, rather than just these kind of
scattered counterinsurgency operations that we saw for so many months after the
war ended.

     Q:  Are you seeing any increased activity in terms of moving tanks and
Republican Guard units into the area?
     A:  No, not recently.  Right now the status of forces in southern Iraq. .
.the Iraqis probably have about 60,000 combat forces, probably in excess of
60,000 combat forces, including eight to ten divisions and Republican Guard
elements.

     Q:  How would you compare the plight of the Shia with that of the Bosnians
under Serbian attack?
     A:  I would compare it this way:  I would, first of all, say that
comparisons like this are. . . they're more dissimilar than similar throughout
the world.  But the simple fact is that the Shia is a population that faces
repression by an organized military led by Saddam Hussein.  That's number one.
Number two, there's a UN resolution that clearly forbids that.  Number three,
it's a sophisticated kind of operation including aircraft and a
well-coordinated military.  The situation in Yugoslavia, by contrast, involves
not just one group of people but Bosnians, Serbs, Croatians, different ethnic
makeups, different religions, different sorts of nation states, all
intermingled -- a very disparate group of people who are undertaking military
action, not necessarily with a central military command.  So there are many
more distinctions than there are similarities.

     Q:  You mentioned that BG Libutti was forward deployed to Somalia and
Kenya.
     A:  But he's in Mombasa, and I think that's where the operation is going
to be based.

     Q:  Is General Mike Nelson forward deployed, and his staff, forward
deployed to the Gulf region, and are his people getting eminent danger pay?
     A:  These two are totally unrelated.  This is Operation Provide Relief.
General Nelson is in the region conducting military-to-military discussions.

     Q:  But is he considered forward deployed?  Is the Central Command air
component commander forward deployed to the Gulf region?
     A:  I'll have to ask CENTCOM.  I don't know the answer to that.

     Q:  Can you take that?
     A:  Ask CENTCOM.

     Q:  Why did General Nelson and 30 of his operations planners head for
Saudi Arabia last week?
     A:  Gee, I wonder why.  The answer to the question is he's conducting
military-to-military discussions.  That is the answer I will give you.  No
matter how much you continue to beat me up, the answer will be he is conducting
military-to-military discussions in the region.

     Q:  Not just in Saudi Arabia?
     A:  In the region.

     Q:  Is it connected to the situation in southern Iraq?
     A:  I'm not going to go beyond saying that General Nelson is in the region
conducting military-to-military discussions.  To answer any other questions
would be to do something that we never do, which is to discuss possible future
operations.  We never do that.

     Q:  Are you aware that there's another round of inspections of certain
areas in Baghdad.  The team is just coming out.  Do you know if there's a
schedule, and is it eminent or...
     A:  I don't know what the next schedule is for UN inspectors.  They
usually don't announce it very far in advance.  I would have to be announced by
the UN in New York, and I don't know what the schedule is.

     Q:  Last night Mr. Cheney said that even though he didn't see military
action eminent within the next hours or days, he did say that there's the
capability in the region to go on very short notice.  Could you give us a
rundown of, as you have in the past, what's there?  Where the carrier is and
other types of...
     A:  Yes, I can do that.

     Q:  Also with an update of what's happening with the exercises?
     A:  Okay,  let's go through all that.  I would put one little coda on.  I
think you accurately described what the Secretary said last night, but he also
said that readiness to do something on a moment's notice has been the case
since the end of the war.

     Q:  It's more than just readiness.  It seems like he has the idea, was
trying to extend the idea that the military capabilities in the region would be
adequate should the President decide...
     A:  Yes, but that's also been the case since the end of the war.  He did
say that, but he also noted that's not a new development.  I think he said,
literally, that's nothing new.

     I think the easiest way to do this is going to be to do the exercise
first, and then go back to a generalized rundown on what's in the Middle East,
because the exercises are a subtotal of that.

     The two Marine exercises are pretty well winding down, and the Army
exercise in Kuwait, they're still bringing the people in there.  Eager Mace,
the amphibious field training exercise that began on August 3rd, ended over the
past weekend.  The main forces have been reloaded or backloaded, as they say in
the Marine Corps, onto the amphibious ships of the Tarawa Amphibious Ready
Group.  About 1,900 people participated in that exercise.  So they're getting
back on their ship.

     Exercise Native Fury '92, the maritime prepositioned force exercise that
also began August 3rd, is almost over.  The equipment is now being backloaded
onto the ship, the prepositioned ship,  the Motor Vessel PFC James Anderson.
That process will continue through tomorrow.  Then when Exercise Native Fury
will conclude, that will be tomorrow as well, and about 900 people participated
in Native Fury.  When they have the equipment all loaded back up on the ships,
they will leave.

     Just to be clear, the Marines that took part in Eager Mace, they will get
back on the Tarawa and that's the amphibious ship, and where it will go we
don't know, but we don't announce future ship movements.

     Exercise Intrinsic Action, which is the field training exercise involving
the Army forces who will exercise with the land prepositioned equipment in
Kuwait, they began to come into Kuwait early in August.  They continue to
arrive.  There are about 1,400 there now.  The remainder of the forces will
arrive in Kuwait later this week.  They are being issued the prepositioned
equipment.  They are conducting maintenance checks and tests on that equipment.
That, as you know, includes the two mechanized infantry companies and two armor
companies along with their combat and combat service support units from the 1st
Cavalry Division and the 13th Corps Support Command of Fort Hood, Texas, and a
special forces element from the 5th Special Forces Group of Fort Campbell,
Kentucky.  That, in all, will involve about 2,400 soldiers.

     Moving on to the general question of U.S. forces in the region.  The total
of U.S. personnel in the Persian Gulf region, including the numbers that I just
gave you for Marines and Army people taking part in these exercises, is about
23,000, up just a little bit from what it usually is because of the exercises.
It's about 23,800.

     In terms of ships, in the Red Sea, six ships.  That would be one cruiser,
two destroyers, two frigates, and an auxiliary ship.  In the Persian Gulf, Gulf
of Oman, Northern Arabian Sea, 19 U.S. ships.  That would include the carrier
Independence, which is in the Persian Gulf right now, the command ship LaSalle,
three cruisers, two destroyers, three frigates, four amphibious ships, and four
auxiliary ships.  Included in the amphibious ship number is the ship -- that's
the Tarawa -- that's taking part in the exercise. 

     Going on to the Mediterranean, 18 ships in the Med.  That includes the
carrier Saratoga, three cruisers, one destroyer, two frigates, six auxiliary
ships, and five amphibious ships with the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit
embarked.  Of that total, of the 18, I'll give you subtotals now.  Four ships
are in the Adriatic -- the amphibious transport dock ship Trenton and the Aegis
class cruiser Gates continue to do the communication, command and control, and
standby search and rescue capability for the U.S. aircraft that are flying into
Sarajevo with humanitarian relief supplies.  On board the Trenton, about 250
Marines and four CH-46 or Sea Knight transport helicopters.  The aircraft
carrier Saratoga and the cruiser Biddle are in the central Adriatic, as well.
The Standing Naval Force Mediterranean unit, the USS Hall, which is a frigate,
is on its way to a port visit in Augusta Bay, Sicily, and on Sunday the USS
Hall relieved the Williams as the U.S. Standing Naval Force Mediterranean Unit.

     Wait a minute, that doesn't make sense.  How can it be conducting a port
visit, having relieved the other ship?  That doesn't sound right to me.  We'll
double check that.

     Q:  It's interesting that the two ships are the Williams and the Hall.
(Laughter)
     A:  Yes, it provided great amusement in the prebrief.

     Let me see if I have that somewhere else.  I think the Hall did relieve
the other ship.

     Voice:  The Hall relieved the Williams on Sunday.  The Hall is operating
in the South Adriatic.

     Just a couple of quick notes here.  Iraqi flights, about 30 flights a day,
includes both fixed wing aircraft and helicopters.  The number that I gave you
before, which we also said was 15 to 20 percent of the total flights in Iraq in
any given day.

     Q:  On the Independence, it's supposedly scheduled for a port visit this
weekend.  Is that still...
     A:  I'll have to check on that.  I don't know.

     Q:  Is the Kennedy still in Norfolk?
     A:  I don't know where it is.  The last I heard it was in the Caribbean.
I don't know where it is.  The Navy can tell you that.

     Q:  The United States is flying a fixed wing CAP over northern Iraq?
     A:  Reconnaissance, really.  Some combat airplane patrol, that's correct.

     Q:  Is any of that being done over southern Iraq?
     A:  Not now.  From time to time since the end of the war, we have flown
some reconnaissance aircraft over southern Iraq.  There haven't been any lately
that I know of, but we have done it from time to time.

     Q:  The United States feels free, though, to do that, and the coalition
feels free to do that at this time?  You don't feel any inhibitions from doing
that, despite the fact that there's no formal zone been declared?
     A:  I will double check the legality of it.  My recollection is that we
flew quite intensively at the end of the war because we still had U.S. troops
in southern Iraq.

     Q:  That was also when Iraqi aircraft were forbidden to fly.  That was
when the two Sukhois were shot down.  That was before the UN resolutions came
into effect.
     A:  Right.  My recollection is that we flew aircraft in southern Iraq at
the end of the war because of the presence of U.S. troops.  There was a
ceasefire resolution at the time.  Then we shifted into the regime of the UN
Security Council resolutions, which obviated the ceasefire agreement that
General Schwarzkopf negotiated at Safwan.  We have, from time to time, I
believe, after that flown a few reconnaissance aircraft in southern Iraq, but I
don't know when the last one was.

     Q:  Would you take that question?
     A:  Yes.  When was the last reconnaissance flight by the U.S. over
southern Iraq.

     Q:  Are such flights currently continuing, and do you feel free to fly...
     A:  How often do we do them, and do we feel free to do them.

     Q:  Can we get that in a rather timely fashion, rather than waiting
until...
     A:  We'll do our best.

     Q:  Like maybe by 2:00 o'clock.
     A:  Muttering from the front desk!

     Q:  Pete, I know you don't discuss options and contingency plans, but has
Turkey's recent decision not to allow flights out of Incirlik for contingency
purposes had any impact on our ability to mount any operation in southern Iraq?
     A:  The flights we've based out of Incirlik are unrelated to southern
Iraq.  They're for Operation Provide Comfort in the north, with which the Turks
have been cooperating splendidly.  I'm just going to, again, follow my basic
rule here and not speculate on what additional steps the coalition might take
to force Iraq to comply with UN Security Council resolutions.

     Q:  Can you tell us whether any air assets are being moved from Europe or
CONUS to the region?
     A:  Not that I'm aware of.  There's some rotation that goes on all the
time, but I don't believe in any way the U.S. force in the Middle East is being
augmented.

     Q:  As I remember late last year, or last year, the engineers began work
on two air bases, I believe, in Kuwait, major work.  Is it possible now to
launch strikes, would it be possible to launch strikes from those bases?  Are
the bases ready, in other words, in Kuwait?  Everybody talks about Turkey and
Saudi Arabia.  Would you take the question on preparedness?  There is now a
defense pact between the United States and Kuwait which would allow the United
States to use those bases.
     A:  It allows us to use them, I don't know for what purpose.  But I will
take the question of what's the readiness...

     Q:  The readiness of bases in Kuwait.
     A:  Right.

     Q:  Isn't part of the ceasefire between Iraq and Kuwait, doesn't that bar
any combat from the territory of Kuwait?
     A:  I don't know.  I'll have to check.

     Q:  That would be what kind of operations out of these air bases are
permitted...
     A:  Sure, I'll take the question:  if the air bases, once they get done,
what do various agreements allow us to do out of them?

     Q:  Could you give us an approximate timetable:  When do you think the
allies will be in the position to say something about how they intend to compel
Saddam Hussein to comply...
     A:  I have no way to gauge that.  There's no way to guess when the
coalition will come to agreement on any...

     Q:  Do you think it's a matter of days, weeks, months?
     A:  There's just no way to know.

     Q:  Would you say that discussions on this matter are stalled?
     A:  No, I would not.

     Q:  What would you say?
     A:  I would say they're continuing.

     Q:  Would you say they're successful?
     A:  I predict that they will be successful.

     Q:  When do you think...
     A:  I can't say when.  I don't know.  There's no way for me to know when.

     Q:  How do you define success in that case?
     A:  We'll know it when we see it.  (Laughter)

     Q:  Do you believe that, in order to compel Iraq to comply with the
resolutions, any additional authorization or action on the part of the UN
Security Council is required?
     A:  That's a pretty broad question.  I think the Secretary and the
President have said over the last several months that should the President
direct the Department of Defense to undertake military action to force Iraq to
comply with Security Council resolutions, that no additional UN Security
Council resolutions would be necessary, that there is sufficient authorization
for the United States in existing UN Security Council resolutions and in the
resolution that was passed by the Congress before Operation Desert Storm.  That
has been the position that the U.S. Government has held for the past several
months.  I don't believe anything has changed to indicate otherwise.

     Q:  Are the U.S. military forces in the Gulf region receiving hazardous
duty pay?  And why?
     A:  I think we've never stopped hazardous duty pay for...  We were just
talking about hazardous duty pay before we came out here, looking at various
parts of the region.  I think there's a whole bunch of areas like Angola, for
example, in which U.S. military personnel receive hazardous duty pay.  

     The areas right now designated for...  Let me run through this.  First of
all, military personnel receive hostile fire/eminent danger pay after an area
is designated as an area of hostile fire or eminent danger by the Secretary of
Defense.  There's no minimum time requirement.  Members of the military at all
ranks receive $150 a month.  There are no tax benefits directly linked to this
eminent danger or hostile fire pay.  It's an additional pay to service members
who are subject to hostile fire, who engage in hostile action, or who are
subject to the threat of physical harm or eminent danger because of civil
insurrections, civil war, terrorism, or wartime conditions.  Most recently, on
June 22, 1992, areas designated for service members to qualify for hostile fire
and eminent danger pay included Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Hercegovina, and the
remaining land area within the former Yugoslavia.  I should stop right there
and say that doesn't necessarily mean there are service members in those areas.
Although, as you know, we just sent a unit of I think 12 Air Force personnel
into Zagreb to assist with the transshipment of material ultimately bound for
Sarajevo.  Also included, Angola, Chad, and Mozambique.  Other areas designated
already are the Arabian Peninsula, Turkey, Liberia, Lebanon, Iran, Laos,
Afghanistan, Peru, El Salvador, Cambodia, and Vietnam.

     Q:  How about Somalia?
     A:  Somalia is not yet on the list, but we suspect that it probably will
be added, although we're not sure.

     Q:  There are some reports out of Israel that the U.S. had planned to
station U.S. troops as the peace process unfolded on the Golan Heights.  Do you
have anything on that?
     A:  I haven't heard anything about it.

     Q:  Do you have anything on the reports that the U.S. thought that the UN
inspectors would pay a visit at the end of their most recent tour to a
government ministry, but that after the New York Times story came out on
Sunday, that kind of inspection was canceled?
     A:  I'd say a couple of things about it.  Number one, it would be
inappropriate for me as a spokesman for the U.S. Government to discuss or
describe in any way what the UN inspection teams were going to do.  The
schedule of inspections, the facilities to be inspected, what's to be looked
for, what's to be taken out, all those decisions are entirely up to the UN
Special Commission.  That is entirely a UN decision and, as you know, Rolf
Ekeus is a very accomplished and able man and he's in charge of that operation.
He and his associates make those decisions, so it would be inappropriate for me
then to discuss them.

     Secondly, I would say that throughout the operation of inspections,
clearly over the last year and half since they began in a routine way, many
members of the coalition, including the United States and several of its
allies, have from time to time provided information to the UN Special
Commission, suggestions on where the UN Special Commission might go to find
evidence related to Iraq's program to design, build and deploy weapons of mass
destruction.  We have, clearly, the kind of intelligence assets that can help
identify where those materials might be, and we pass that information on as
sort of a tip, if you will, to the UN Special Commission.  But the UN makes the
decisions on where they go, so I don't think it would be appropriate for me to
comment on where they intended to go.

     Q:  Is the United States, i.e, the Pentagon, the White House. . .or has
the United States been informed in advance where any of these inspections were
going to take place?
     A:  From time to time we are, but not necessarily always.

     Q:  Were you in this case?  Were you informed ahead of time where the
inspectors intended to go?
     A:  My recollection is that the UN Special Commission provided to
coalition members a list of facilities that were to be inspected on this
current trip, but I could not in any way characterize what was or was not on
that list.

     Q:  Can you tell us whether or not there were any changes to that original
list during the course of the inspection?
     A:  I think that gets, again, into me as a spokesman for the U.S.
Government getting into the UN's business, so you ought to ask the UN.

     Q:  How about. . .without getting into the UN's business, was the U.S. or
was the Department of Defense disappointed that no effort was made, apparently,
to visit a government ministry during this most recent inspection tour?
     A:  I think we are generally satisfied with what the UN inspections have
done.  They've made great strides in uncovering the full extent of Iraq's
program to develop weapons of mass destruction.  As a general comment, I would
leave it there.

     Q:  The airport at Sarajevo closed again today, I believe...
     A:  I just got this in.  Let me read to you what I have here.  It says
that the United Nations High Commission for Refugees announced today that the
Sarajevo airlift was suspended at 10:37 local time -- it doesn't say a.m. or
p.m. -- 10:37 local time, due to confirmed hostile fire against one of the
aircraft participating in the airlift.  Other aircraft already on their way to
Sarajevo were diverted to Zagreb or Split after the incident.  We are checking
on the nationality of the aircraft.

     I can tell you what our plan was for flights into Sarajevo today.  The
U.S. had planned two flights, two missions, rather, involving four sorties were
scheduled for today.  There were to be C-130 aircraft leaving from Rhein-Main,
flying directly to Sarajevo.  One was going to have a Land Rover for the
British.  The other aircraft would carry foodstuffs.  Both aircraft would then
fly to Zagreb and go back to Sarajevo with additional food, and then go on back
to Rhein-Main.

     The last I'd heard, which was about 50 minutes ago, both those planes were
on their way.  They hadn't come back to Rhein-Main yet.  So I don't know which
plane was fired at.  We'll have to get more information for you.

     Q:  One report seemed to indicate that this was a lock-on type.  Was this
a more serious incident than in the past?
     A:  All I have is what I just said to you here.  I don't have any further
information on whether it was antiaircraft fire or a surface-to-air missile or
what it was.

     Q:  When you just said on the inspections that you were generally
satisfied with this most recent inspection, should we read that to mean that
you weren't completely satisfied?
     A:  You should read that as a way of saying something without really
answering your question, because I think that would be inappropriate for me to
sit here and critique each of the UN inspections.  It's a very difficult
mission for them.  They've operated under extremely trying circumstances.  I
think we think they're doing a great job and we have full faith and confidence
in Rolf Ekeus, and we think the UN inspection teams have done an excellent job,
and we are generally very satisfied with the work that they've done.  But I'm
not going to get into the process of sitting here and reviewing each team as it
comes back.  That's just an inappropriate thing for a spokesman for the U.S.
Government to do.

     Q:  When you say from time to time we're provided a list ahead of time of
the facilities to be inspected, do you mean you've not received a list in every
case of inspection?
     A:  That's right.

     Q:  But you were in this most recent...
     A:  My recollection is in this last one we were, yes.

     Press:  Thank you.

                                     (END)


-- 
         
      // \\
    //     \\                    Air Force News Agency 
   |         |               Kelly Air Force Base, Texas, USA
   \\  {*}  //                   bergman@afpan.pa.af.mil  
   \  CMSgt  /      ___________________ /____________________________________
   \  Mike   /   
   \ Bergman /
     \     / 
Newsgroups: soc.veterans