|
| |
FAIR-L
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
Media
analysis, critiques and news reports
ACTIVISM UPDATE:
New York Times Reports on Embassy Bombing Investigation
April 28, 2000
On April 17, the New York Times published the results of its investigation
into the May 1999 bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. The article,
which reveals many new details about the bombing, should be viewed by media
activists as a welcome development in the effort to shed journalistic light
on the incident.
Last October, and again in February, FAIR issued action alerts asking
readers to urge U.S. newspapers-- the New York Times in particular-- to
follow up on reporting by the London Observer and the Danish newspaper
Politiken. (See http://www.fair.org/activism/embassy-bombing.html
,
http://www.fair.org/activism/china-response2.html
.) NATO military sources
quoted in those papers had alleged that the U.S. deliberately bombed the
Chinese embassy after learning that it was transmitting Yugoslav army radio
signals. Dozens of readers contacted the Times, calling for an investigation
into the bombing.
The Times' new article appears to be the product of a serious investigative
effort; reporter Steven Lee Myers spent over a month in Europe conducting
interviews with NATO and other officials. The piece recounts what Myers'
sources characterize as a series of mistakes that ultimately led to the
embassy strike. The investigation, Myers writes, "produced no evidence that
the bombing of the embassy had been a deliberate act."
At the same time, Myers acknowledges that the story his U.S. sources tell is
an unlikely one, characterizing their chronology as a "bizarre chain of
missteps" leading to what they call a mistaken attack. Myers ends his report
on a note of skepticism, citing a Republican member of Congress who had been
briefed by Pentagon and CIA officials: "In the end, he said he was confident
in their assurances it had not been a deliberate strike. He paused, then
added, 'unless some people are lying to me.'"
In an interview with FAIR, Times foreign editor Andrew Rosenthal said it was
understandable that the Chinese would think the bombing was deliberate,
since the CIA's explanation is, in his words, "bizarre."
According to the Times' account, although the CIA has its own targeting
unit, it was instead the agency's Counter-Proliferation Division (CPD), "a
small office whose focus [is] the spread of missiles and nuclear, chemical,
and biological weapons," that proposed the embassy target. The CPD has no
experience or expertise in targeting or in the Balkans. It nominated the
target on its own initiative, apparently without being solicited by NATO or
the Pentagon.
Although the Times does not mention it, the CPD is a covert operations unit,
located within the CIA's Directorate of Operations rather than its
Directorate of Intelligence. In a 1997 report to Congress, CIA
counter-proliferation analysts singled out China as "the most significant
supplier of weapons of mass destruction-related goods and technology to
foreign countries." Counter-proliferation officials have been embroiled for
years in a fight with the Clinton administration over its policy of
"engagement" with China.
The Times' sources say that the CPD's intended target, located near the
Chinese embassy in Belgrade, was the Yugoslav Federal Directorate of Supply
and Procurement (FDSP). The targeting was done by a CPD analyst using an
unclassified 1997 map of Belgrade provided by the National Imagery and
Mapping Agency (NIMA). The map, which was not intended to be used for aerial
targeting, did not identify street address numbers.
The Times' sources claim that the analyst misidentified the embassy as the
FDSP when he attempted to pinpoint the FDSP's address on the map by
extrapolating from addresses on parallel streets. "To target based on that
is incomprehensible," an official told the Times.
While the Times' sources say the aerial photographs of the site provided by
a NIMA official-- which showed the Chinese embassy-- raised no questions at
the CIA, a senior intelligence official told the Times that "it should have
been apparent to any imagery expert that the building shown did not look
remotely like a warehouse or any Serbian government building."
On his own initiative, the analyst then downloaded a targeting form from a
secure Pentagon computer, filled it out and sent it to the Joint Chiefs of
Staff "appearing to be a more advanced proposal than it was," according to
Myers. The Joint Chiefs never conducted a thorough review of the target;
"the reasons are not clear," Myers writes. All of the Joint Chiefs refused
interviews with Myers, who is the Times' Pentagon correspondent.
Eight days before the embassy was struck, another CIA analyst tried to
prevent the bombing from taking place. He had no authority to review
targets-- "or even to know what they were"-- but he called the NIMA
official, telling him he had "heard informally" that the FDSP's actual
location was 1,000 yards south of the targeted embassy building. The NIMA
official tried unsuccessfully to arrange a meeting between the two officers.
A few days later, NIMA provided the skeptical CIA officer with six
additional images of the building, which confirmed to him that the building
was not the FDSP. At that point, The CIA officer raised his concerns with
military officials in Naples. According to those officers, he "did not make
his questions...sound grave enough to remove the target from the list."
In the end, despite its supposed value as a target, the FDSP was never
bombed.
As FAIR reported in a previous action alert, the Observer and Politiken
investigation alleging that the strike had been deliberate was based on the
testimony of several unnamed-- mostly European-- NATO military officers.
Last November, FAIR criticized a Washington Post investigation that
concluded the strike was accidental, because the reporter, William Arkin,
had interviewed only U.S. air staff-- ignoring the fact that the
Observer/Politiken story was based on European officials pointing accusing
fingers at the U.S. military. (See
http://www.fair.org/activism/embassy-follow-up.html
.)
According to the Times, "more than 30 officials in Washington and in Europe"
were interviewed for Myers' article. Interviews in Europe were conducted "at
NATO offices in Brussels, Mons, Vincenza, Italy and Paris." Times foreign
editor Andrew Rosenthal declined to provide FAIR with an estimate of how
many of those NATO officers were Americans and how many came from European
countries.
None of the unnamed officials quoted by the Times was identified in the
article as being European, although Gen. Jean-Pierre Kelche, France's chief
of defense staff, was quoted by name saying he had not objected to the
bombing because he had been told the target was an arms storage facility.
According to the Observer and Politken, all their European sources insisted
on anonymity since they would have been "instantly" fired if named.
Letters to the New York Times can be sent to:
mailto:letters@nytimes.com
As always, please remember that letter are taken more seriously if they
maintain a polite tone. Please cc your correspondence to
mailto:fair@fair.org
----------
Feel free to respond to FAIR ( fair@fair.org ). We can't reply to
everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate
documented example of media bias or censorship. All messages to the
'FAIR-L' list will be forwarded to the editor of the list.
Also, please send copies of email correspondence, including any
responses, to us at: fair@fair.org .
Feel free to spread this message around. Put it on conferences
where it is appropriate. We depend on word of mouth to get our message
out, so please let others know about FAIR and this mailing list.
Don't miss a single e-mail from FAIR-L.
You can subscribe to FAIR-L at our web site:
http://www.fair.org/emaillist.html
Or, you can send a "subscribe FAIR-L enter your full name"
command to LISTSERV@AMERICAN.EDU.
The subscriber list is kept confidential, so no need to worry about
spammers.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF FAIR-L"
command to LISTSERV@AMERICAN.EDU.
Please support FAIR by becoming a member.
You will receive FAIR's magazine, EXTRA! and its newsletter, EXTRA!
Update. You can become a member by calling 1-800-847-3993 from 9 to
5 Eastern Time (be sure to tell them you got the information
on-line) or by sending $19 with your name and address to:
FAIR/EXTRA! Subscription Service
P.O. Box 170
Congers, NY 10920-9930
FAIR
(212) 633-6700
http://www.fair.org/
E-mail: fair@fair.org
list administrators: FAIR-L-request@american.edu
|