National Defence committee  The principle here behind the decision whether or not to engage ground targets that are not air-oriented is one of, as you note, the protection of the population. The UN resolution calls for a ceasefire on the part of the Libyan pro-regime forces. When they are visibly refusing to abide by that ceasefire, when they are going and rearming themselves, and we can observe that they are doing this and they are then firing on the population, or firing on other forces--in other words, violating a ceasefire--then we have a fairly clear understanding of whether that particular location is one that is--

National Defence committee  It says that acting under chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations “Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians”.

National Defence committee  No, what I said is our objective is to protect the population. When we can see that they're not abiding by the ceasefire and firing on civilians--

National Defence committee  Right. If through our observations and surveillance we are seeing that they're firing on civilians, then they become a valid target. Jill Sinclair, do you...?

National Defence committee  There are a number of nations that are still participating in the mission. Let me address the comment about whether the skies are completely safe. What you have is an evolving situation. During the first couple of nights there were, as you know, a number of Tomahawk land attack missiles fired by other countries to take out some of the ground anti-air equipment.

National Defence committee  Maybe General Cathcart could start on the issue of rules of engagement first.

National Defence committee  It depends on the target.

National Defence committee  If there is an effect... We cannot launch attacks indiscriminately. We therefore have a process to verify if a given target is appropriate, if we have all of the necessary information in order to be certain that there is not... I will switch to English, in order to be very clear.

National Defence committee  Yes, it is quite rapid, as it takes just a few hours.

National Defence committee  Excuse me?

National Defence committee  That is normal. It is now a coalition. The American generals are ready to undertake an operation as complex as this one is. Eventually, we could have command with a general from another NATO country.

National Defence committee  Yes, the rules are always under...

National Defence committee  I believe there are about seven or eight nations, but I am not sure.

National Defence committee  There is no doubt that it would be preferable to have a single command. It would be best if all the forces were under NATO command. I also believe that that is the Canadian position. Furthermore, the situation of HMCS Charlottetown is not a problem. The frigate command is being provided by a different authority than that for our planes, but in the end, all of these forces have been assigned to the command of the expeditionary force and of the Chief of Defence Staff.

National Defence committee  We have a process to follow for strategic targeting. It is based upon this process that we are able to determine if a target is reachable or not. The idea is to avoid civilian deaths. With a view to this, there is a process that must be followed, and it is the commanders who decide.