Pages:
<<
|
1
| 2
| 3
| 4
| 5
| 6
| 7
| 8
|
>>
| Sort by:
Date / Country
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
Deputy Permanent Representative Permanent Mission of Turkey to the UN Office at Geneva
Country:
Turkey
Date Received: 29 Jan 2003
The views of the relevant Turkish authorities on the ICBL's 2002 Report are provided here below:
a) On page 757, 3rd paragraph, for the first time since 1999 (the first publication of ICBL's annual report), the PKK terrorist organization is accurately referred to as a "terrorist organization". However, one month prior to the inclusion of the PKK terrorist organization in the EU's list of terrorist persons or groups (the date of the decision of the Council of the EU is 2 May 2002 No: 2002/334/EC), this terrorist organization conveniently changed its name to KADEK (Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress) with the aim of sustaining its relationship with the international organizations and NGO's by disguising itself as a legitimate group. The U.S. government has taken notice of this duplicity and declared KADEK as a terrorist organization in the same year. We hope that this nominal change which is only in the name but not in tactiques nor objectives would also be recognized by the ICBL.
b) ICBL report has been providing information on the number of landmine casualties in Turkey based on monthly publications or annual reports of the Turkish Human Rights Association and the Turkish Human Rights Foundation as well as the report issued by the US Department of State.
Mainly, the figures on landmine accidents included in the 2001 and 2002 reports of the Turkish Human Rights Organization do not correspond to the numbers that the Turkish authorities have. It has been noticed that the aforementioned sources only provided number of civilian casualties (Page 755, 1st paragraph). It would be fair to say that the figures on landmine casualties should reflect the actual state by incorporating the number of soldiers along with the civilians, who were maimed or killed by the landmines, in an accurate and indiscriminate manner.
In this respect, the accurate statistics on landmine related accidents for the year 2001 are as follows:
|
Death:
|
Injured:
|
|
5 soldiers
|
37 soldiers
|
|
6 civilians
|
10 civilians
|
For the year 2002:
|
Death:
|
Injured:
|
|
1 soldiers
|
9 soldiers
|
|
3 civilians
|
6 civilians
|
c) In the report (page 758, 1st paragraph) it is stated that "mine contamination is concentrated on Turkey's borders" with Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Iran, Iraq and Syria.
First of all, all the landmines on the Turkish side of the border with Bulgaria have been cleared. This particular situation has been communicated to the Bulgarian authorities on 1st August 2002 in compliance with the bilateral agreement signed between the two countries on 22 March 1999 and ratified on 1st May 2002.
Secondly, at certain sections along the common borders with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Iraq and Syria, landmines exist to deter illegal passages. However, the removal of these mines from the aforementioned border areas is in some cases at a planning stage, and in others actual work is underway.
d) In the report (page 758, 3rd paragraph) it is argued that there were also mines in the South Eastern provinces of Turkey, away from the borders, and that the extent of such mines as well as the degree to which such areas were adequately marked and fenced was unknown. Furthermore, it is stated that ( page 759, 2nd paragraph), no demining activity was taking place in Sirnak, Hakkari, Diyarbakir, Siirt, Mardin, Bingol, Van and Tunceli provinces of Turkey and that such activity was expected to commence in mid 2000's.
In the Southeastern part of Turkey, within the framework of fight against terrorism and solely for security reasons, land mines are used around security installations. However, since 1998 those mines are being cleared according to a plan. These mines are in clearly marked areas. In addition mine clearance around the security installations is expected to be completed by 2008 after the collection of roughly 40,000 mines.
The ICBL is reminded that the unmarked areas which are polluted with landmines are the doings of the terrorist organization PKK-KADEK to inflict losses to the security forces and intimidate the civilian population. These mines are laid by PKK-KADEK terrorists around the areas which are of strategic importance for them. The mines which are laid by this terrorist group and the booby traps that are set by them cause death and injury in the region.
e) In the report (page 759, 1stparagraph) it is argued that along the 877 km Syrian border of Turkey, 300-700 meters wide strip of land was mined. It is also suggested that the mined land mass is equal to 3, 5 million "dnms" (a land measure of 1,000 square meters) or twice as big as the island of Cyprus. On this subject, the report also argues that the whole operation is expected to take five years and that it could cost as much as 36 million US Dollars in total.
Along the 877 km long Turkish Syrian border 300-450 meter wide strip of land contains landmines. The mined area is equivalent to 360,000,000 square meters. In order to clear these mines 5 years and 50 million US Dollars would be needed.
f) In the report (page 760, 1st, 2nd and 3rd paragraphs) it is argued that mine casualties would be treated at hospitals in towns or small sized provinces. Those who would have the financial means would be given necessary care at private hospitals. The report presents the Dicle University Prosthesis and Rehabilitations Center as the only establishment which has the capacity to perform amputations and that it was set up with assistance of the US based NGO named Physician for Peace Foundation. It is also stated that military survivors were often treated at the Glhane Military Medical Academy in Istanbul.
No distinction is made with regards to the status of a mine casualty. The landmine casualties either civilian or member of the military are given the proper care also at the Turkish Armed Forces Rehabilitation and Care Center free of charge. Many hospitals in Turkey have fully functional prosthesis and rehabilitation centers.
g) In the report (Page 756, 4th paragraph) it is stated that Turkey attended neither the Third Annual Conference of States Parties to Amended Protocol II nor the Second CCW Review Conference in December 2001.
Turkish delegations have attended both meetings. This may be attested by referring to the lists of participants of the said meetings.
Murat S. Esenli
Deputy Permanent Representative
Permanent Mission of Turkey to the United Nations
Geneva
Country:
Turkey
Date Received: 15 Dec 2005
Geneva, 15 December 2005
Dear Mr. Doucet,
I have carefully read various sections of the “Landmine Monitor Report 2005” which has been recently released. Since you are a member of the Editorial Board and have provided the final editing of this report from July to September 2005, I would like to share with you some observations about the report.
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
Ambassador
Permanent Representative
Download:
Turkey Comments LM2005.pdf (331.53 kB)
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:
UNDP
Date Received: 14 Nov 2000
United Nations Development Programme
Sustainable human development
14 November 2000
Mr S. Goose
Executive Director
Human Rights Watch
1630 Connecticut Ave., Suite 500
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Dear Steve,
I am writing to congratulate you, Mary Wareham and the rest of your team on another excellent effort in producing Land Mine Monitor (LMM) Report for 2000. It is a most comprehensive and reliable reference work, and it is very useful to us in our day to day work. UNDP was pleased to assist and contribute to the report, and we are grateful for the opportunity to have the section detailing UNDP's work in mine action included in the Appendixes.
I notice in the introduction of the Report that you encourage comments about the LMM, so I would like to pass on a few thoughts. The first is a simple one; I would suggest that some visible change be made to each year's addition, so that it is easier to distinguish each year's report - maybe just a sticker with the year shown clearly. Secondly, in the Executive Summary report, I was disappointed that there was very little mention of the work of the UN, and UNDP in particular, in the chapter on Humanitarian Mine Action. This information was provided in the various UN inputs to the main report. For example, on page 20 you list 19 coordination structures around the world. The UN is providing the principal support to 15 national mine action programmes (see countries receiving UNDP support in the table on page 1016 of the Report, plus Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo). However, the following two sections of the report do not mention the UN role at all.
Finally, I am concerned that the chapter on mine awareness in the Executive Summary was not up to the standard of the rest of the report. All other chapters were factual, well researched and reach impassive conclusions. The mine awareness chapter seems highly opinionated, emotive and appears to follow a personal opinion. The UNICEF guidelines on mine awareness are quite comprehensive, and were the result of a very inclusive process, yet they only receive scant attention in the second last paragraph. Why should the ICBL be challenging UNMAS to "act speedily" in one matter - the LMM does not seem the place for this type of language. Also, there are a number of factual errors in this section. For example: a) on page 29 (Country Coverage) a number of countries, including Vietnam, are identified as possibly needing their awareness education. On page 30, there is reference to the "school based focus of the programmes in Croatia, and similarly Lao and Vietnam". b) On page 31, with regard mapping and input to prioritization, MAG was conducting community mapping within several of their integrated mine action projects as far back as 1996. c) On page 31, reference is made to the use of the US Army Psychological Operations personnel involvement in training of mine awareness teams. This was one element of the training; with the mine awareness programme coordinated by UXO LAO, and with technical support/on-the-job training, also provided by UNICEF, MAG and Norwegian People's Aid. It should also be noted that while the US Army personnel did play a role in training (and as a result also provided valuable resources for the programme), the National staff recruited were non-military, and selection criteria stressed issues such as communication skills and knowledge of ethnic languages.
Once again, I would like to congratulate you on the LMM 2000 Report, and to assure you that UNDP remains ready to contribute and assist in the future.
Yours sincerely,
Ian Mansfield
Team Leader Mine Action
Emergency Response Division
Country:
United Kingdom
Date Received: 11 May 2001
United Kingdom
Permanent Representation
to the Conference on Disarmament
37-39 rue de Vermont
1211 Geneve 20
Tel (Direct): (00-41) 22-918-2312
Tel (Switchboard): (00-41) 22-918-2300
Fax: (00-41) 22-918-2344
E-mail: John.Wattam@fco.gov.uk
11 May 2001
Landmine Monitor Representative
Intersessional Standing Committee on
Stockpile Destruction
APL MINE STOCKPILES & THEIR DESTRUCTION: A PROGRESS REPORT: LANDMINE MONITOR FACT SHEET
We wish to draw your attention to the reference made to the UK in the table on Stockpile Destruction Deadlines on page 8 of your fact sheet.
We wish to affirm that US stocks do not fall under out national jurisdiction or control and we do not therefore have any obligations under Article 4 of the Convention on Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction in respect of them. We have fully complied with our obligations in respect of stocks that were under our jurisdiction and control. Any reference to outstanding obligations is inappropriate and should be removed in an amended version of the fact sheet and any subsequent documentation that may go forward to the Landmine Monitor Report for 2001.
(Signed)
Representative of the UK
Letter from John S Duncan (pdf)
Country:
United States
Date Received: 30 Nov 2001
United States Department of State
Assistant Secretary of State
for Political-Military Affairs
Washington, D.C. 20520
Ms. Mary Wareham
Coordinator, Landmine Monitor
c/o Human Rights Watch
1630 Connecticut Ave NW #500
Washington, DC 20009
Dear Ms. Wareham:
Thank you for sending the Landmine Monitor Report 2001: Toward a Mine-Free World. As the previous two reports, this report represents a tremendous research effort and brings together in one place relevant information on landmines from almost every country in the world. My staff and I frequently consult the Landmine Monitor Reports. You and your colleagues are to be congratulated on your hard work.
As you know, the U.S. Government, and the State Department in particular, is committed to addressing the humanitarian threat posed by landmines worldwide. The magnitude of our humanitarian action program is evidence of our concern for the thousands of innocent men, women and children who lose their lives and limbs to landmines each year. Indeed, the United States is a world leader in humanitarian mine action eforts. U.S. Government assistance has supported mine action programs in over 40 countries with eduation, training, equipment, and support to landmine survivors. Since 1993, the United States has contributed more than $500 million to humanitarian mine action efforts. We are determined to maintain both our leadership role and financial support for global humanitarian demining in the years to come.
Sincerely,
Lincoln P. Bloomfield. Jr
Country:
Uzbekistan
Date Received: 31 Jul 2001
Ambassador of the Republic of Uzbekistan
Ms. Mary Wareham
Coordinator, An Initiative
of the International
Campaign to Ban Landmines
July 31, 2001
Dear Ms. Wareham,
Thank you for the letter of July 17, 2001 advising on upcoming publication of the third annual Landmine Monitor Report. Having attentively studied a draft regarding Uzbekistan policy your good offices kindly provided for comments and possible alterations, my authorities noted that along with reference to statements of Uzbek officials on the subject, there are quotations from the both local and international media. Since those cross-references contradict on several occasions, I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate an official stance of Uzbekistan on this issue.
Although Uzbekistan has not acceded to the Ottawa Convention of 1997 on banning the use, stockpiling, production, distribution and transfer of landmines, the country at the same time de facto implements a number of its provisions, specifically:
- Uzbekistan neither produces nor does it intend to produce landmines;
- Uzbekistan does not stockpile landmines;
- Uzbekistan neither spreads nor does it transfer landmines
The mining of certain areas of the state border by the Armed Forces of Uzbekistan is necessitated by the considerations of national security threatened by the incursions of armed international terrorist groups from outside. The landmining is not aimed against civilians, who according to the norms of international law are due to cross borders at specially assigned places. In this regard, at some border areas passage checkpoints have been established to ensure safe border-passage in accordance with international regulations and to avoid peaceful civilians being injured.
I would also like to attract your attention to discrepancy of rather technical nature, specifically in naming Uzbek Minister of Defense once Kadyr Guliamov, then Qodir Pulatov in the draft, while correct one is Kodyr Gulomov.
I appreciate your eagerness to prepare report as objectively as possible and hope that afore-mentioned comments and remarks are to be considered for further inclusion into the final text.
Please accept Ms. Wareham, my assurances of high considerations.
Sincerely,
Shavkat Khamrakulov, Ambassador E&P
Country:
Venezuela
Date Received: 20 Oct 1999
Misión Permanente de Venezuela
ante la Organización de los Estados Americanos
Washington, 20 de octubre de 1999
Señor Steve Goose:
Tengo el agrado de dirigirme a usted en la oportunidad de agradecer el envío del material sobre El Monitor de Minas Terrestres de 1999: Hacia un mundo sin minas.
Valga la ocasión para reiterar a usted las seguridades de mi más alta y distinguida consideración.
Virginia Contreras
Embajadora
Al Señor
Steve Goose
Director de Programa
Landmine Monitor
Washington, DC
Country:
Zimbabwe
Date Received: 12 Sep 2000
STATEMENT OF THE ZIMBABWE DELEGATION TO THE SECOND MEETING OF STATE PARTIES TO THE 1997 MINE BAN TREATY, DELIVERED ON WEDNESDAY, 13 SEPTEMBER 2000, GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
Mr President
Mr Secretary-General
Distinguished Delegates
Ladies and Gentlemen I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Ambassador Kongstad for being elected President of this Second Meeting of State Parties. We believe that his vast experience in diplomacy will guide us to realise the noble ideals enshrined in the Ottawa Convention.
Mr President, we strongly feel that this forum is not meant for making wild and unsubstantiated allegations against states Parties to the Convention, as was the case yesterday by the ICBL Representative, Mr Stephen Goose. Such a falsehood only serves to destroy the spirit of the Convention. ICBL's failure to provide evidence or concrete facts for the past two years to show that Zimbabwe is using anti-personnel mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo does not only invalidate these accusations but also smacks of a hidden agenda against my country on its part.
Mr President, let me categorically state that Zimbabwe will never be diverted or deterred from implementing the provisions of the Ottawa Convention because we have victims of landmines and we know the dangers of using landmines. In fact, Zimbabwe has assumed a leadership role in championing the ban on the use of landmines and their ultimate destruction. We signed and ratified the Mine Ban Treaty in 1997 and 1998 respectively. And on 18 August 2000 my Government presented to Parliament the Anti-Personnel Mines (Prohibition) Bill 2000. The Bill incorporates the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and their Destruction into our domestic law.
Mr. President, Clause 5 of the Bill makes it an offence for any person to produce, acquire, use, transfer or stockpile anti-personnel mines. The penalty for contravening this provision is a fine of Z$100 000 or ten years imprisonment or both the fine and imprisonment. We are hoping that Parliament will pass the bill into law before the end of this year.
Mr President, although the enabling legislation has not yet been promulgated, my country stopped using anti-personnel mines upon ratification in 1998. We have actually complied with the various articles of the Convention.
Zimbabwe submitted its first report to the United Nations Secretary-General in January 2000 in compliance with Article 7 of the Convention. My country remains committed to the Convention and will destroy its small stock of antipersonnel mines as soon as the above-mentioned Anti-Personnel Mines Bill becomes law.
Zimbabwe is already involved in several mine action programmes. Currently 2 major demining programmes are underway along our borders with Mozambique and Zambia. The programmes are being funded by the European Union and the United States government. Mine awareness programmes to educate our people about the dangers of this deadly and cruel weapon area continuous process and have been part of our life since our independence 20 years ago, in 1980.
Zimbabwe has a total of 6 minefields stretching for over 700 km. These area legacy of our war of independence. We continue to appeal to the international community to assist us in funding various mine action programmes including the removal of these minefields, victims assistance and their rehabilitation, mine awareness and training for the various projects.
My country would like to acknowledge and appreciate the assistance it received over the years from the governments of the United Kingdom USA, Germany and the EU and hope other countries and organisations will join them in assisting us to deal once and for all with this problem in Zimbabwe.
Mr President, my government hopes that the clarification on the alleged use of anti-personnel mines by the Zimbabwean army in the DRC should put to rest this issue.
Mr President, it is my firm belief that this Second meeting of State Parties to the Ottawa Convention will chart and adopt practical and concrete measures that will alleviate the suffering of millions of people in affected areas. Let me conclude by reminding this august assembly that it is now time to act, for every minute counts.
I thank you!
About Us
Our Research Products