I have an important question, and it has to do obviously with the limits of the mission itself. You're telling us that the rules of engagement are not to be made public. I don't know if that's the rule in all other air forces. My understanding was that when the Americans sign off on rules of engagement, they're a part of in fact ensuring that the public has a means to ensure that the activities are in keeping with international law and the understanding of the mission. Can anyone confirm that it is or isn't the case with other nations?
We are a little bit in the dark here. I understand the argument about it, the ammunition dump, but I'm also sensitive to the notion that article 4 doesn't authorize Canada playing a role or any nation playing a role in attempting to determine the outcome of the situation in terms of helping one side or the other. As the Prime Minister has said, at one point the Libyan people themselves have to decide the outcome of all of this.
It sounds to me like a very delicate operation. How do you get to the point of saying that this particular ammunition dump is going to be used to re-supply a force that's then going to do something that's contrary to article 4? There seem to be several leaps of logic here. How do you do that without avoiding the accusation that you're actually playing a role in deciding the outcome of what's essentially a civil war?