|
|
|
 |
HOME RESEARCH NEWS ORDER CONTACTS COMMENTS FACTSHEETS |
|
REPORTS: 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 |
|
Comments Received by Landmine MonitorPages: << | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | >> | Sort by: Date / Country Country: Turkey Date Received: 15 Dec 2005
Geneva, 15 December 2005
I notice that in the introduction to the report, the terrorist organization PKK is referred to as “non-state armed groups” (page 8) or “PKK rebels” (page 9). The same reference appears also in other sections of the report. As I am sure you are well aware, the PKK is neither a “rebel group” nor simply an “armed non-state actor” as allegedly presented in the introduction to the report. Footnote number 25 on page 585 of the report specifies that “the PKK, KADEK and Kongra-Gel were declared terrorist groups by the European Union in May 2002 and April 2004”. Furthermore on page 588 of the report, our letter dated 31 August 2005 sent in reply to the Landmine Questionnaire is quoted and PKK/KONGRA-GEL is mentioned as a terrorist organization. On the same page of the report there is also a quotation from a statement made by our representative to the Ottawa Treaty Intersessional meeting where PKK/KONGRA-GEL is referred to as a terrorist organization. This being the case, the reader needs to wait until page 585 and 588 of the report before getting to know that the PKK is a terrorist organization either from a footnote or a quotation. However, the report does not contain a qualification by the Editorial Board of the PKK as a terrorist organization. The recurrent denial of referring directly to the PKK as a terrorist organization raises some questions about the accuracy and consistency of the report. The use of terms such as “rebels” or “armed non-state actors” gives the reader a wrong indication about the real nature of a terrorist organization.
./.. Our Permanent Mission has duly responded to the various questionnaires sent by members of your staff. Our replies clearly make reference to the PKK as a terrorist organization.
Presently, the PKK is included in the foreign terrorist organizations list in Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Japan, Kazakhstan, USA, NATO and the European Union. The PKK and its aliases KADEK (Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress) and KONGRA-GEL (Kurdistan Peoples Congress) have been declared as terrorist groups according to the European Union Council Decision No: 2004/306/EC and Council Common Position No. 2004/309/CFSP both dated 2 April 2004. Please find enclosed a copy of the Council Common Position No. 2004/309/CFSP and of the EU press release dated 30 April 2004 containing the list of countries which also share the objectives of this Common Position. The "Landmine Report 2005" makes reference to this EU decision taken in 2004 (footnote number 25, page 588) which has been the object of a review in 2005. Copies of Common Position 2005/427/CFSP dated 6 June 2005 and the related EU press release dated 29 July 2005 are enclosed herewith.
I hope that the Editorial Board will adopt a constructive approach to address this issue with due consideration and will be able to call spade a spade. In this regard, I expect that the above-mentioned references to the right characterization of the PKK as labeled by various states and organizations will be taken into consideration by the Editorial Board in future editions of the "Landmine Monitor Report" and at least a corrigendum be issued on the ICBL website from where the report can be downloaded. Please accept, Mr. Doucet, the assurances of my highest consideration.
Türkekul KURTTEK?N Country: Turkey Date Received: 30 Nov 2004 Dear Ms. Wareham, Thank you very much for your letter dated 11 November 2004, attached to which was an advance copy of the Landmine Monitor Report 2004. The report is a valuable contribution to the disarmament literature and an indispensable source of reference for the international community in its endeavours to prevent the use of anti-personnel landmines, and rid the world from this scourge which causes widespread and indiscriminate human suffering. There is, however, an issue that I believe must be raised not only for the purpose of accuracy but also for the sake of fairness and objectivity. In the section on Turkey, namely line 30 on page 826 of the 2004 Report, a reference is made to a "...occupation of Northern Cyprus..." Furthermore, there are three references of similar nature made under the section entitled "Cyprus." These references neither accurately reflect the events of 1974 nor do they do justice to the sufferings of Turkish Cypriots between 1963 and 1974 that prompted Turkey to intervene as a "guarantor power", acting within its treaty obligations and responsibilities under the 1959 and 1960 London and Zurich Agreements. Moreover, there is no resolution of the United Nations Security Council that describes the legitimate and justified intervention of Turkey in 1974 either as "aggression", "invasion" or "occupation" Most recently, in the Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Operation in Cyprus (No: S/2004/756) dated 24 September 2004, reference is made to the "events of 1974." A recent paper entitled Cyprus: Myths, Objective Realities and the Way Forward by Mr. Ergn OLGUN, Undersecretary to the President of the Turkish Cypriot Republic of Northern Cyprus is enclosed herewith. I feel that you may find it of interest. I sincerely hope that, in general, the views expressed in the enclosed paper and, in particular, the point underlined above is taken on board in the next Landmine Monitor Report. In any case, since the ICBL solicits contributions, as well as any clarifications and comments, I request that this letter be included in the next Landmine Update on the ICBL website for the sake of fairness, objectivity and accuracy, all of which I am confident are upheld by the ICBL. I thank you in advance for your sensitivity to the matter. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely,
Murat S. ESENLI Country: Turkmenistan Date Received: 13 Feb 2004 Letter from the Embassy of Turkmenistan to the Kingdom of Belgium to the Secretariat of the European Commission regarding their stockpile destruction. Download: turkmenistan2004.pdf (352.06 kB)Country: Moldova Date Received: 05 Feb 2004 Letter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Moldova to the International Campaign to Ban Landmines regarding the Moldova chapter of the Landmine Monitor Report 2003 Download: moldova2004.pdf (61.86 kB)Country: India Date Received: 05 Nov 2003
PERMANENT MISSION OF INDIA
T.P.Seetharam No.GEN/PMI/254/41/2003 July 19, 2003 Dear Ms. Wareham Thank you for the fax dated 14 July 2003 addressed to Ambassador Rakesh Sood attaching the draft India country update from your forthcoming report: Landmine Monitor Report 2003: Toward a Mine Free World. In particular you had sought to know whether he has been quoted correctly from his meeting with ICBL on 14 May 2003. I have consulted my notes and would indicate the following: a) Ambassador Sood did not state that "several million mines" were laid by Indian forces. What he did say was that "given the length of the international boundary, a large number of mines were indeed laid by the Indian forces". The references to the attributed quote: "several million" in the introductory paragraph and in the paragraph subtitled 'Use' need therefore, to be corrected. b) Ambassador Sood also said that the "mine-laying by Indian forces was undertaken in full compliance with the obligations under the Amended Protocol II of the CCW". This was indeed corroborated by Mr. Om Prakash Bhadrecha, the landmine survivor, who had accompanied Ms. Jody Williams to the meeting, when he indicated that the Indian Army had taken all precautions for mapping, fencing and informing the local people through mine awareness programmes. The inclusion of these points made by Ambassador Sood and by the landmine survivors who were brought to that meeting by ICBL, would ensure a balanced picture from emerging in the Landmine Monitor Report, which is a respected and widely cited publication. Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi will be separately sending detailed comments on other aspects of the report directly to you. Meanwhile, I will appreciate your confirmation that the draft will be corrected to reflect Ambassador Sood's comments accurately. Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi will be separately sending detailed comments on other aspects of the report directly to you. Meanwhile, I will appreciate your confirmation that the draft will be corrected to reflect Ambassador Sood's comments accurately. Yours Sincerely, (T.P. Seetharam)
Ms. Mary Wareham Country: India Date Received: 05 Nov 2003
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Dr. Sheel Kant Sharma 28 July 2003 106/5/2003 Dear Ms. Wareham Thank you for your communications addressed to the External Affairs Minister of India regarding the forthcoming edition of the Landmine Monitor Report 2003: Toward a Mine-Free World and seeking Government of India's views on the draft India country update enclosed therewith. 2. As you are aware, India remains committed to the pursuit of the ultimate objective of a non-discriminatory, universal and global ban on anti-personnel mines in a manner that addresses the legitimate defense requirement of States. India is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) and is fully committed to the Amended Protocol-II of the Convention which deals with anti- personnel landmines. 3. The recent laying of mines by the Indian forces along the Western border was done as part of our operational plans. Minefields were laid, recorded and marked in consonance with well-established Standard Operating Procedures, and in conformity with Amended Protocol-II. In addition, all village headmen were personally informed about the location of the minefields in order to ensure that local inhabitants were adequately sensitized. Mine awareness programmes were also conducted at the sub-district/village level. All efforts were made to ensure that the markings remained visible, legible, durable and resistant to environmental effects. 4. Recovery of the mines emplaced as part of the military operations continues to be under way, with 85% of the mines having been retrieved so far. The objective is 100% retrieval. Mine clearance operations were halted only once during February 2003 and not on two separate occasions as indicated in the draft under the section sub-titled 'Mine Clearance'. This was done to provide rest and relief to the parties involved in the de-mining process, and not for want of proper equipment and safety gear as also indicated in the draft. 5. You would have also received a communication from our Mission in Geneva requesting that the reference to "several million" mines in the introductory paragraph and in the paragraph subtitled 'Use' be corrected to accurately reflect Ambassador Rakish Sod�s comments made during a meeting with Nobel Peace Laureate Ms. Jody Williams. 6. During the mine-laying operations, land was temporarily expropriated to prevent untoward casualties to civilians. This will be returned once 100% recovery is achieved. Compensation is being paid for the period of expropriation and for any adverse impact on both the winter and the summer crops. There is no standard figure for acreage-wise compensation as indicated in your draft under the section subtitled 'The Landmine Problem'. Instead, the compensation rates are based on various factors including the crop pattern of the area and the cultivable land that has been utilized by the Armed forces. A Board of officials, including representatives from the respective State Governments, has been specially instituted to look into these matters. 7. All efforts are made by the Government to provide free, expeditious and quality medical and other assistance to landmine victims. The figures for monetary compensation indicated in the draft under section 'Disability Policy and Practice' are incorrect. Depending upon the nature of the injury and than extent of disability, compensation in the range of Rupees one lakh to ten lakhs is being provided to the victims. In addition, facilities such as assistance in securing employment and provision of artificial limbs are also extended by the Government. With reference to the section on 'Mine Risk Education', it may be noted that formal mine risk education is also being provided. at the field level by field force commanders. 8. As also indicated in your draft update, India has been a victim for decades of the indiscriminate use of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) by non-state actors and terrorist groups which continue to cause considerable harm to the life and property of innocent civilians. Despite this grave provocation, Indian armed forces continue to exercise restraint and desist from using landmines except as part of military operations. It is in this context that I would like to clarify that the reference in the section subtitled 'Use' to an Army Officer having reportedly stated that "the mines had been planted mainly as a deterrent for infiltrators" is incorrect. No mines have been laid as a deterrent for infiltrators. However, it is indeed time that we paid more attention to issues related to transfers and employment of IEDs. 9. I would appreciate if the above comments are incorporated and the necessary corrections are made in the section on India in the forthcoming edition of the Landmine Monitor Report to ensure that the Government of India�s position is accurately reflected in your widely respected publication. We would be grateful for a line in confirmation.
Yours sincerely,
Ms. Mary Wareham Copy to:
(i) Ambassador Rakesh Sood,
(ii) Shri Alok Prasad, Country: Pakistan Date Received: 04 Nov 2003
EMBASSY OF PAKISTAN No. Pol-1/12/2003
July 7, 2003 Kindly refer to your letter of June 6, 2003, addressed to Mian Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri, Foreign Minister of Pakistan, regarding the forthcoming Landmine Monitor Report 2003. I am enclosing herewith a copy of letter No. Dsmt- 1/9/03, dated 15 July 2003 addressed to you by Mr. Arif Ayub, Director General (UN & Disarmament), Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Islamabad which is in response to your letter. Regards, (Syed Zulfiqar Gardezi) First Secretary (111)
Ms. Mary Wareham, Country: Pakistan Date Received: 04 Nov 2003
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN 15 July 2003 No.Dsmt- 1/9/03 Dear Ms. Wareham Thank you for your letter of 6 June 2003 addressed to the Foreign Minister regarding the forthcoming Landmines Monitor Report. The massive military escalation and troops deployment by India along our borders last year obliged Pakistan to take measures for self-defence. All defensive minefields have either been cleared or in the process of being completely demined. Please note that all measures were taken strictly in accordance with our commitments and in line with our national legal obligations precluding any problems for civilian population. Our record of mine clearance, therefore, remains unblemished, Yours sincerely,
(Arif Ayub)
Ms. Mary Wareham, Country: Georgia Date Received: 22 Sep 2003
Letter to: #1-05/2.05.2003 In newspaper “Akhali Taoba” (New Generation) of 17 March 2003 (N74, p.7) was published the interview with Mr.Emzar Kvitciani, representative of President in Kodori gorge, in which he announced that “Georgian side, for the avoidance of unexpectedness, is permanently mining the main direction of Kodori gorge”. The fact of mining contrarys to the moratorium on the use of antipersonnel mines of the president of Georgia, Mr.Eduard Shevardnadze, announced in 1996. We are interested in verity of this fact, and if it is truth – what are the means conducted by Georgian Armed Forces to implement the moratorium announced by the president of Georgia. Sincerely,
Narine Berikashvili *****************************************************************************
Letter to: #3-11/814 30.05.2003 Answering on your letter of 2 May 2003 (#1-05), we would like to inform you that Georgian Armed Forces always completely carries out orders of president of Georgia. Hence the elements of armed Forces of Ministry of Defense of Georgia have never used forbidden military weapon. Concerning the interview of Mr. Emzar Kvitciani, in our conversation was revealed that the correspondent of the newspaper, maybe, understood in wrong way, the information of Mr. Kvitciani, what caused the mistaken enlightening of materials on “permanent mining”.
Mr. Loria *****************************************************************************
Letter to: #1-05/2.05.2003 In newspaper “Akhali Taoba” (New Generation) of 17 March 2003 (N74, p.7) was published the interview with Mr.Emzar Kvitciani, representative of President in Kodori gorge, in which he announced that “Georgian side, for the avoidance of unexpectedness, is permanently mining the main direction of Kodori gorge”. The fact of mining contrarys to the moratorium on the use of antipersonnel mines of the president of Georgia, Mr.Eduard Shevardnadze, announced in 1996. We are interested in verity of this fact, and if it is truth – what are the means conducted by Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia to implement the moratorium announced by the president of Georgia. Sincerely,
Narine Berikashvili *****************************************************************************
Letter to: #8-14/621 23.05.2003 Answering on your letter of 2 May 2003, concerning the information disseminated by the means of mass media on the fact of antipersonnel mines usage on the controlled territory in Kodori gorge by the Georgian central authorities, we want to inform you that there was conducted the meeting in Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia with Mr.Emzar Kvitciani, representative of President in Kodori gorge. During this meeting, Mr.Kvitciani categorically denied the disseminated information on antipersonnel mines usage in Kodori gorge by Georgian governmental foundations. Due to the explanation of representative of President, the correspondent of “Akhali Taoba” (New Generation) made the wrong interpretation of his announcement on the implemented activities on liquidation of territories mined in the result of conflict. In accordance with the information of Mr.Kvitciani, in Kodori gorge, both on controlled by Abkhaz separatists as well as on territories controlled by Georgian central authorities really exists the territory mined by Georgian side left since active military operations’ period. At the same time, Abkhaz separatists still continue to mine the territory controlled by them. The Georgian central authorities are interested in neutralization of the mentioned territories, though, from this turn, there are problems of political, financial, technical and expert character. On the assumption of above written, we inform you, that, in Kodori gorge, there was not the fact of violation of the moratorium of president of Georgian, announced in 1996, and ask you to take into consideration the checked by us information in your materials for “Landmine Monitor”. Sincerely,
Mr.Shota Dogonadze Country: Sudan Date Received: 22 Sep 2003
The Republic of Sudan This is an update and the reply to the landmine update of 2003. There are bullet points that discuss the updates. 2) This is in response to the questions asked by those who wanted information about mines. a) The corps of engineers of Sudan is obliged to comply by what they signed in Ottawa in December 1997, which was an agreement to ensure that no landmines of any type have been put to place. Since this agreement, Sudan has not exported mines and it has very few mines in storage, and the ones in storage are used for practice only. b) All the mines planted around oil fields were planted by rebel factions. c) The agreement was signed, and despite the Geneva agreements in 2001 which banned the use of landmines, it didn�t stop rebel factions from planting the mines in rural areas and along main roads. These mines hurt the shepherds, farmers and impaired humanitarian aid efforts. 3) After the cease fire agreement in the Nuba Mountains with the UN and the JMC, a program was point into place to clear the main roads. 4) They have also started a program (with the cooperation of civil groups) to educate people about the mines. 5) Sudan has also started a joint program to teach in the area of Um Suwaidah with the help of Jismar ( a government organization) , Awsal from the movement to ban mines and the DCA under the surviellence of the UN and the humanitarian aid sector. This program lasted for three months and had 40 people involved and this program was very successful. 6) There have also been arrangements with the center to take care of mine and with the UN to plan a strategic plan completely for mines in Sudan. 7) In Sudan, there is a Sudani group that works on removing the mines and it is inclusive of national efforts by arranging programs and exchanges of programs. Summary of the Report on Landmines for the year 2003 in Sudan
|
|