MEDIA MISINTERPRET BELGIUM'S AIR CHIEF ON NEW

C O N F I D E N T I A L BRUSSELS 001308

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/24/2018
TAGS: PREL MOPS AF NATO BE
SUBJECT: MEDIA MISINTERPRET BELGIUM'S AIR CHIEF ON NEW
GROUND TROOPS FOR ISAF, CAUSING A WEEKEND TEACUP STORM

Classified By: CDA Wayne Bush for reasons 4 b/d.


1. (C) SUMMARY: A (possibly innocent) misinterpretation of
Belgian Air Force Chief's comments about the F16 forthcoming
deployment to Kandahar by a big Belgian paper has been
corrected firmly by DefMin De Crem, but not without cost, the
cost being future GoB maneuverability on maybe someday having
JTAC or other ground troops in the south. END SUMMARY


2. (SBU) First: the media misreporting:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sat-Sun Aug 23-24 Le Soir (Belgium's widely-read left of
center francophone paper) devoted half its front page and two
full inside pages to a story headlined: "Belgians Under Fire
On the Ground in Afghanistan," and quoting Belgium's top Air
Force general, Lt. Gen. Gerard Van Caelenberge, as telling Le
Soir that "NATO has formulated a request for Belgium to
engage on the ground in Southern Afghanistan." The paper
then went on to claim that the Army was considering its
response to this request for what it described on page ten as
a reference to "joint terminal (sic) attack controllers
(JTAC)."


3. (SBU) Second: the MinDef's correction:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Monday morning Aug 25, many Belgian papers carried a formal
denial of this report by Minister of Defense De Crem, who
said that no such formal request had been made by NATO to the
Ministry of Defense and, if it had been made, "the answer
would have been in the negative." Le Soir on Monday Aug 25
issued a prominent box in which (after also citing De Crem's
explicit denial of the existence of a NATO formal request for
more ground troops in the south) it quoted Gen Van
Caelenberge as having told Belgian radio and television
reporters that there is a general permanent request, renewed
every January from NATO to all its member states, and not
specifically to Belgium, and that JTAC is on that list, but
that it had not been studied in detail. (Comment: A fuzzy
apology but better than none. End Comment)


4. (C) Third: the unintended consequences:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - -

COMMENT: Our sources at USNATO and elsewhere are agreed that
this alleged formal request from NATO to the Belgian
government never happened. But the dustup this misreporting
caused makes it more unlikely than ever that the Belgians
will agree -- when/if they are asked -- to having a JTAC in
the south. Although it would be helpful to Belgian F16
operations to have their own men on the ground designating
targets, etc., in the Belgian political parlance such men,
being outside the Kandahar wires and engaged in targeting,
would be categorized not as part of the F16 package but as
new ground troops in the south, which the Minister of Defense
is now on record as placing outside the realm of possibility.
END COMMENT.

BUSH

.