Manama: Spiritual leader set for visit

Gulf Daily News, Bahrain
Dec 10 2004

Spiritual leader set for visit

THE spiritual leader of the Armenian community for Kuwait and the GCC
countries will be in Bahrain to officiate mass at the Awali Chapel at
7.30pm tonight. This will be followed by a dinner at the Majestic
Hotel in Juffair at around 10pm. Archbishop Dr Goriun Babyan will be
arriving from Kuwait and will be accompanied by a priest from the
parish in Sharjah, Father Aram Deylrmandjian. There are 52 Armenians
arriving from Saudi Arabia, who will join the small Armenian
community in Bahrain, which numbers around 25 people.

This Year Production Of Aluminium Foil Reduced,Rolled Aluminium Prod

THIS YEAR PRODUCTION OF ALUMINIUM FOIL REDUCED, ROLLED ALUMINIUM PRODUCTION
INCREASED

YEREVAN, December 6 (Noyan Tapan). During January-October 2004,
the production of lacquers in Armenia increased by 2.8% as compared
to the same period of 2003, of chemical and pharmaceutical goods –
by 22.3% and of caustic soda – by 56.5%. According to the RA National
Statistical Service, the production volumes of woollen cloth declined
by about 50%, of hosiery – by 30% and of knitted garments – by 60%. The
production of carpets increased by 70% in the indicated period. The
rolled aluminium production increased by 53.6% in comparison with
the same period of last year, the production of zinc concentrate –
by 7.4% and that of molybdenum concentrate – by 4%. The volumes
of copper produced as a concentrate decreased by 2.3%, while the
production of aliminuim foil declined by 97.9%.

Turkish prime minister attends opening of Armenian museum in Istanbu

Turkish prime minister attends opening of Armenian museum in Istanbul

The Associated Press
December 6, 2004, Monday

DATELINE: ISTANBUL, Turkey

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan officially opened an
Armenian museum in Istanbul on Sunday and said he was committed to
protecting the rights of minority Armenians.

Erdogan joined Mesrob II, the Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul, and
other leaders of Turkey’s Armenian Christian minority of 65,000 for the
opening of the museum at the Yedikule Surp Pirgic Armenian Hospital.

“Armenian citizens are an indispensable part of (Turkey). Every
artifact in this museum shows a past that was lived together,”
Erdogan said. “We are now protecting each other’s rights, aware of
our citizenship, and it will be like this forever.”

Most Armenians in this predominantly Muslim but secular country live
in Istanbul.

Turkey, which recognizes Armenians as an official minority, is under
pressure to improve rights for minorities as part of efforts to join
the European Union. Turkey hopes that EU leaders will agree to open
membership talks with it at a Dec. 17 summit.

Ties between Armenians and Turks have often been strained over the
mass killing of Armenians during and after World War I.

Armenians say that a 1915-1923 campaign to force Armenians out of
eastern Turkey left 1.5 million people dead and amounted to genocide.

Turkey objects to the use of the word “genocide.” Turkey says the
figures are inflated and that deaths were the result of civil unrest
and not a planned campaign.

The museum includes religious artifacts, antique medical equipment
and an Ottoman decree that established the hospital in 1832.

BAKU: Azeri defence dismisses Russia concerns re US pres. in Caspian

Azeri defence official dismisses Russian concerns over US presence in Caspian

Zerkalo, Baku
2 Dec 04

Excerpt from C. Sumerinli and C. Bayramova report by Azerbaijani
newspaper Zerkalo on 2 December headlined “Russia will hold joint
exercises with Azerbaijan in the Caspian” and subheaded “The Russians
intend to strengthen their military positions in the Caspian in order
to annoy the Americans”

“It cannot be ruled out that Azerbaijan and Russia will hold joint
naval exercises soon,” the commander of Russia’s Caspian navy,
Vice-Admiral Yuriy Startsev, said in an interview with Krasnaya Zvezda
yesterday [30 November].

The military-political situation in the Caspian region is not stable
because of the protracted settlement of the legal status of the
Caspian, he said. “Theoretically, it allows the littoral states to
define their borders within the water basin.”

The vice-admiral also focused on the aggravation of relations between
the coastal states over the hydrocarbon deposits of the Caspian. He
said Russia is not happy at all with the efforts of the Caspian
nations to set up their own naval forces. The reason for concern is
the fact that these forces are being built with material and
military-technical support from the USA.

Meanwhile, Startsev said that the Russian side is continuing the
dialogue with Kazakhstan to provide its naval forces with two vessels
of the Russian navy. Besides, he said, within the framework of the
“Save the Caspian” programme, Russia intends to conduct joint naval
exercises with Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. The Russian military is
expected to visit Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan shortly to realize this
idea.

[Passage omitted: irrelevant details]

Our northern neighbour also has plans to test its state-of-the-art
vessels in the Caspian, the commander-in-chief of the Russian navy,
Vladimir Kuroyedov, said. The vessels that were manufactured in 2000
and meet the interests of the navy will be tested in 2006. Occupying a
special place among those vessels is the Korvet warship.

It is interesting that Russia’s military presence in the Caspian is
gradually increasing. Quite recently, official Moscow decided to
construct a military facility on the Russian-Azerbaijani border, while
[Russian President] Putin said yesterday that more than 70 border
checkpoints, several border headquarters and training centres would be
set up to ensure security in the North Caucasus.

[Passage omitted: irrelevant details]

In the meantime, experts believe that the establishment of checkpoints
on the Russian-Azerbaijani border is military pressure on
Azerbaijan. However, the head of the press service of the Azerbaijani
Defence Ministry, Ramiz Malikov, doesn’t agree with it, saying that
aggression against our country comes from nowhere but Armenia.

The ministry has no information on the forthcoming naval exercises, he
said. He added that this issue will be clarified shortly.

No agreement was reached at the latest meeting of the defence
ministers of the CIS member states to conduct joint
Russian-Azerbaijani exercises, he said. Nevertheless, he noted that
the exercises of this sort have long become a tradition in the two
countries’ navies.

Besides, Malikov stressed that Russia’s concern about the formation of
naval forces with the financial and technical assistance of the USA is
groundless. Azerbaijan is an independent state and has the right to
decide which country it should cooperate with, he said.

BAKU: Construction of Iran-Armenia gas pipeline starts

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Dec 1 2004

Construction of Iran-Armenia gas pipeline starts

Construction of the Armenian section of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline
started on Tuesday.
Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markarian and Iranian Energy
Minister Habibola Bitaraf met in Suyinik province of Armenia to
consider the issue. The Iranian delegation will hold meetings in
Yerevan on Wednesday to continue discussions on the project.
The 41km-long Armenian section of the 72mm-diameter gas pipe with a
total length of 141 kilometers, due to be commissioned by 2007, will
be constructed by Iran’s Sanir firm. The gas to be transported
through the pipeline is earmarked only to meet Armenia’s domestic
demand.
The construction of the Armenian section will be financed on a $30
million loan to be allocated by an Iranian bank under the agreement
reached during Iranian State Minister’s visit to Armenia this July.
Iran will spend $100 million to construct the 100-km section of the
pipeline in its territory.
The agreement to build the gas pipeline was signed by Iran and
Armenia in 1992 and a map-plan of the pipe route approved in 1995.
Under the agreement, Iran will annually supply 500 million cu m of
gas to Armenia starting in 2007. The figure will reach 1.2 billion cu
m in 2010. Armenia, in turn, will supply electricity to Iran in the
future.
Meanwhile, there were reports saying that Iran intends to transport
its gas to European markets through Armenia. The issue was discussed
during the last visit by Iranian President Mohammad Khatami to
Armenia as well.
The Iranian Ambassador to Azerbaijan Afshar Suleymani said that the
Iranian side has not forwarded any proposals to Armenia, which
imports Russian gas through Georgia, and wants to buy the Iranian gas
as well. It is still to be determined through which country the
Iranian gas will be transported and analysis is under way to choose
the economically viable route, Suleymani underlined.
`Europe is keen on importing Iran’s gas. Iranian gas may be taken to
Europe via two routes: either through Turkey and Greece or via
Armenia and Ukraine,’ the ambassador said.
Touching upon transportation of the Iranian gas through Azerbaijan,
Suleymani said that the Azerbaijani side has not made a proposal in
this regard.
`If Azerbaijan puts forth a relevant proposal, Iran will approve it,
as a pipeline exists which used to take Iranian gas to Georgia and
Russia through Azerbaijan in the Soviet times,’ he added.*

Armenian government, OTE settle ArmenTel battle

DMEurope
November 29, 2004

Armenian government, OTE settle ArmenTel battle

DMEUROPE-29 November 2004-Armenian government, OTE settle ArmenTel
battle ©2004 DMeurope.com () & DME Ltd. All
rights reserved.

Greek telco OTE and the Armenian government have settled their
year-long legal quarrel.

In the autumn of 2003, the Armenian government accused OTE of not
living up to its commitments that were part of the sale of mobile
operator ArmenTel to the telco, saying the company had not
sufficiently invested in the operator. The government then threatened
to revoke OTE’s mobile monopoly in Armenia. OTE responded with
international arbitration proceedings.

The settlement, reached this week, issues ArmenTel a new GSM licence
with fewer roll-out requirements, but the government will also issue
a second mobile operation licence in the country, to be offered to a
rival.

(Distributed for DMeurope.com via M2 Communications Ltd ()

http://www.dmeurope.com
www.m2.com

Former Armenian official slams FM for stance on Karabakh

Former Armenian official slams foreign minister for stance on Karabakh

Aravot web site, Yerevan
26 Nov 04

The OSCE supports the UN Parliamentary Assembly debate and vote on the
occupied Azerbaijani territories as a way of putting pressure on the
Armenian leadership, the press secretary of Armenia’s last president
has said. Levon Zurabyan described as a “feeble attempt” at blackmail
Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan’s comment that Armenia would withdraw
from the Karabakh negotiating process if the UN adopted Azerbaijan’s
resolution. He also noted a change in terminology in international
institutions’ documents about the Karabakh conflict with the use of
such terms as “annexation attempt” by Armenia and “ethnic cleansing”.
The only solution is “for Armenia to abandon its maximalist and
unrealistic policy”, Zurabyan said in conclusion. The following is the
text of Anna Israelyan’s interview with Levon Zurabyan, press
secretary of first Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosyan, on Armenian
newspaper Aravot’s web site on 26 November headlined “Why the Armenian
foreign minister’s mood isn’t getting worse” and subheaded “Levon
Zurabyan, press secretary of the first Armenian president, thinks that
Vardan Oskanyan has no reason to be in a good mood and
self-confident”; subheadings inserted editorially:

Prospect of UN vote sword of Damocles for Armenia

[Correspondent] The postponement of the vote on the occupied
Azerbaijani territories, which was to be held at the session of the UN
General Assembly, gave rise to contradictory
interpretations. According to one of the theories, Azerbaijan refused
to vote, because it was not certain that the results would be to its
advantage. According to another theory, the US representative called
for non-interference in the settlement of the Karabakh conflict. And
finally, the third theory: the OSCE Minsk Group has presented new
proposals and is now awaiting a reply. Which theory do you deem most
realistic?

[Zurabyan] The putting of this issue on the agenda of the UN General
Assembly was a punitive measure that the OSCE Minsk Group envisaged
for Armenia, which froze the talks under this format. However, the
issue has not been removed from the agenda, the vote has simply been
postponed pending concessions from the Armenian side. Essentially,
this is the sword of Damocles hanging over our country.

OSCE’s Minsk Group behind UN discussions

[Correspondent] Why are you so certain that this situation was
initiated by the Minsk Group if it is known that the issue was placed
on the agenda at Azerbaijan’s suggestion?

[Zurabyan] The last vote at the United Nations on this issue was taken
in 1993. Is it not surprising that Azerbaijan has not made one single
attempt of this type in 11 years? The explanation is very simple: the
co-chairmen of the Minsk Group dissuaded it [Azerbaijan] from coming
up with this kind of initiative. I affirm that if the co-chairmen were
against the development of this process, they could curb it because
they wield sufficient political influence in all structures: at the
OSCE, Security Council and UN General Assembly. And they did use their
influence – the US representative at the UN, who proposed to postpone
the vote, spoke on behalf of the Minsk Group too. Precisely this
proves that they govern this process from the beginning to the end. As
to the vote, they support it as a possible correctional measure for
the Armenian leadership. If our country demonstrates no desire to
hold talks under the Minsk Group framework, the punitive measure will
be carried out.

Armenia to achieve nothing by threatening to withdraw from talks

[Correspondent] The leadership of the Armenian Foreign Ministry has
issued a threat, though, that if the United Nations adopts this
resolution, Armenia will stop taking part in the talks sponsored by
the Minsk Group, and Azerbaijan will have to negotiate with
Karabakh. Can you not see danger in this? If our country bowls off,
the Karabakh problem will be resolved without the participation of the
Armenian side.

[Zurabyan] First, I am surprised by the behaviour and mood of the
leaders of the Armenian Foreign Ministry. I can understand [President]
Robert Kocharyan: that person regularly does physical exercise, so he
is in a good mood regardless of the political situation. But I cannot
understand why Vardan Oskanyan is in a good mood. He should not have
any reason for his genial mood and for self-confident statements. The
threat that Oskanyan voiced was a feeble attempt to blackmail the
international community and Azerbaijan. It is obvious, however, that
Armenia will not achieve anything this way.

[Correspondent] Let us try to understand the reasons for Vardan
Oskanyan’s good mood by quoting his own statement: “The decisions by
the UN General Assembly are not imperative and have no legal
force. They can only be of a non-binding nature and reflect the
opinion of the General Assembly.” So, if they do not have legal force,
there is no point in spoiling one’s mood.

[Zurabyan] I should not have to explain to the professional diplomat
that there is the notion of a “critical mass” of this type of
decision, which finally leads to the adoption of documents that are
legally binding.

Change in terminology to Azerbaijan’s advantage

[Correspondent] Another reason for the good mood of the foreign
minister is the following: Vardan Oskanyan claims that the “documents
that are adopted by international instances can pose a threat if the
issue of the further status of Nagornyy Karabakh will be raised in
them, but there have not been such reports yet.”

[Zurabyan] Azerbaijan has achieved its main goal of depriving the
Armenian side of its trump card in the talks – the occupied
territories. I want to remind you that the passage was struck from the
latest resolution by the UN Security Council, Resolution No 874, in
which the demand was made that the Armenian side should “immediately
and unconditionally withdraw its troops from the occupied
territories”. The diplomatic process which is under way at present
will lead to accusations against Armenia of occupation of Azerbaijani
territories and demands that it unconditionally withdraw its
troops. The change of terminology in descriptive documents on the
Karabakh conflict is also important. For example, in the resolution by
the Committee of Ministers of the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe [PACE], expressions such as “annexation attempt” by
Armenia, “ethnic cleansing”, “violation of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty”
and so on are used. These terms reflect the position of the
Azerbaijani side, according to which Armenia lays claims to
Azerbaijani territories. It was clearly pointed out in the 1993
resolution that the Azerbaijani territories were occupied by the
“local Armenian forces”. The report by the PACE rapporteur [David]
Atkinson includes the term “separatist forces”, which has never been
mentioned before.

It is with heartache that I have to agree with Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s
thought that sad consequences are brewing with respect to the Karabakh
issue. We will not be able any more to get what could have been
achieved in 1997. But this does not mean that we should despair. I
think that the only way out is for Armenia to abandon its maximalist
and unrealistic policy.

BAKU: OSCE finalizing report on Upper Garabagh conflict

AzerNews, Azerbaijan
Nov 25 2004

OSCE finalizing report on Upper Garabagh conflict

The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly special envoy on the
Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict Goran Lennmarker is scheduled to visit
Baku on Friday.

Lennmarker’s report on the Upper Garabagh conflict is almost ready,
says head of the Azerbaijani delegation at OSCE PA Sattar Safarov.
Baku has expressed discontent with some provisions indicated in the
report.

During Lennmarker’s visit, these disputed provisions will be
clarified and the final version of the report developed, Safarov
added.

Winning the War Against Antipersonnel Mines: Biggest Challenges Stil

Winning the War Against Antipersonnel Mines: Biggest Challenges Still Ahead

24 Nov 2004 07:48:00 GMT

Source: NGO latest
ICBL

Landmine Monitor Report 2004
Cover Photo: Fred Clarke, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) – USA
Website:
New Report Looks at 5-Year Trends

Since the international treaty prohibiting antipersonnel landmines
took effect five years ago, use of the weapon around the world has
fallen dramatically, global funding for mine action programs has
increased more than 80 percent, more than 1,100 square kilometers
of land has been cleared, and the number of new mine victims each
year has decreased markedly, according to a 1,300-page report by the
International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) released today.

â~@~The international norm established by the Mine Ban Treaty is
rapidly taking firm hold around the world, especially in the heavily
mine-contaminated countries where it matters the most,â~@~] said ICBL
Ambassador Jody Williams, who shared the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize with
the ICBL. â~@~Clearly we are succeeding in our struggle to eradicate
this weapon. But even bigger challenges remain, to convince hold-out
governments to come on board, to ensure effective implementation of
and compliance with the treaty, to get mines out of the ground within
the ten-year deadline, and to provide adequate assistance to landmine
victims,â~@~] said Ms. Williams.

There are 143 States Parties to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, which entered
into force with unprecedented speed on 1 March 1999. An additional nine
countries have signed but not yet ratified the treaty that prohibits
the use, production, trade and stockpiling of antipersonnel mines,
and requires clearance of mined areas within ten years. Since the last
Landmine Monitor report, nine countries joined the treaty including
Burundi and Sudan, which are both significantly mine-affected,
and Belarus, Greece, Serbia and Montenegro, and Turkey, which are
also mine-affected and combined have over ten million stockpiled
antipersonnel mines to destroy.

The ICBLâ~@~Ys Landmine Monitor Report 2004 cites compelling evidence
of use of antipersonnel mines by four governments since May 2003:
Georgia, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, and Russia. In contrast, the
first Landmine Monitor Report 1999 identified 15 governments using
antipersonnel mines in the 1998/1999 reporting period.

â~@~One of the greatest success stories of the Mine Ban Treaty is
that sixty-five States Parties have completed the destruction of their
stockpiles, collectively destroying more than 37 million antipersonnel
mines, including four million mines in the last year,â~@~] said Stephen
Goose of Human Rights Watch, the Chief Editor of the Landmine Monitor
initiative. Every State Party so far has met its treaty-mandated
four-year deadline for stockpile destruction, except for Guinea and
Turkmenistan, both of which have subsequently completed stockpile
destruction.

â~@~Compliance with the Mine Ban Treaty by States Parties has
been very impressive, but not absolute or uniform,â~@~] said
Mr. Goose. Since the Mine Ban Treaty entered into force, the ICBL
has consistently raised questions about how States Parties interpret
and implement certain aspects of Articles 1, 2, and 3. In particular,
the ICBL has expressed concerns regarding the issues of joint military
operations with non-States Parties, the prohibition on assisting banned
acts, foreign stockpiling and transit of antipersonnel mines, mines
with sensitive fuzes and antihandling devices, and the permissible
number of antipersonnel mines retained for training and development
purposes. The ICBL has pointed out that some States Parties have
diverged from the predominant legal interpretation and predominant
State practice on these matters.

Forty-two countries remain outside of the Mine Ban Treaty, including
China, Russia, and the United States, most of the Middle East, most
of the former Soviet republics, and many Asian states. In February
2004, the United States abandoned its long-held goal of eventually
eliminating all antipersonnel mines and joining the treaty.

Still, the power of the mine ban movement is reflected in the fact
that a de facto global ban on the trade of antipersonnel mines has
been in effect since the mid-1990s, with only a very low level of
illicit trafficking and unacknowledged trade taking place. Moreover,
of the more than 50 countries known to have produced antipersonnel
mines, all but 15 have formally renounced production.

>>From 1999 to 2003, more than 1,100 square kilometers of land were
cleared, resulting in the destruction of more than four million
antipersonnel mines, nearly one million antivehicle mines, and many
more millions of pieces of unexploded ordnance. â~@~There is now
consistent and reliable evidence to show that mine action is making
a measurable difference in the lives of millions of people living
in mine-affected countries,â~@~] said Ms. Sara Sekkenes of Norwegian
People’s Aid, co-chair of the ICBL Mine Action Working Group, while
cautioning that global mine action numbers should not be regarded as
precise. â~@~Clearly tremendous progress has been made in the field of
humanitarian mine action using the comprehensive framework provided
by the Mine Ban Treaty,â~@~] she added. The past five years have
witnessed the initiation and expansion of many mine action programs,
and ever-greater amounts of land being returned to communities for
productive use.

Some form of mine clearance was reported in 2003 and 2004 in a total
of 65 countries, including the first humanitarian mine clearance
operations in Armenia, Chile, Senegal, and Tajikistan. In 2003 alone,
a combined total of more than 149 million square meters (149 square
kilometers) of land was cleared, resulting in the destruction of at
least 174,167 antipersonnel mines, 9,330 antivehicle mines, and 2.6
million items of unexploded ordnance (UXO).

According to Landmine Monitor Report 2004, 83 countries are
mine-affected, including 52 States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty. The
Mine Ban Treaty requires States Parties to clear all mined areas
within ten years of joining the treaty. States Parties that have
declared completion of mine clearance since 1999 include Bulgaria
(October 1999), Moldova (August 2000), Costa Rica (December 2002),
Czech Republic (April 2003), Djibouti (January 2004), and, most
recently, Honduras (June 2004).

However, in 2003 and 2004, no mine clearance or mine risk education
activities were recorded in 13 States Parties. â~@~Without sufficient
and sustained resources, we fear that many States Parties will not meet
their treaty obligation to remove emplaced mines within ten years,â~@~]
said Mr. Stan Brabant of Handicap International and Landmine Monitor
Research Coordinator for mine risk education. â~@~This is a critical
time, and our goal of a mine-free world is within reach,â~@~]
he added.

Landmine Monitor has identified about US$2.07 billion in donor
mine action contributions from 1992-2003. Of that 12-year total,
65 percent ($1.35 billion) was provided in the past five years
(1999-2003), since the entry into force of the Mine Ban Treaty. For
2003, Landmine Monitor has identified $339 million in mine action
funding by more than 24 donors. This is an increase of $25 million, or
8 percent, from 2002, and an increase of $102 million, or 43 percent,
from 2001. Major increases were registered in 2003 for the European
Commission and the United States, as well as Canada and Sweden.

In 2003, Afghanistan ($75 million) and Iraq ($55 million) received
38 percent of global mine action funding. Meanwhile, an unusually
large number of mine- affected countries experienced a decline in
donor contributions to mine action in 2003. Mine action funding fell
most severely in 2003 for Vietnam and Cambodia, but decreases were
also experienced in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eritrea, Somaliland,
Laos, and Ethiopia. In 2003, several of the major donors provided
significantly less mine action funding, including Japan, Austria,
Italy, Australia, France, and the Netherlands.

The number of reported new mine casualties declined in the majority of
mine- affected countries in 2003, and dropped significantly in some
heavily mined countries such as Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Cambodia, Lebanon, and Sri Lanka. Landmine Monitor identified 8,065 new
casualties caused by landmines and unexploded ordnance (UXO) in 2003,
compared to 8,333 in 2002.However, many casualties go unreported and
Landmine Monitor estimates there are now between 15,000 and 20,000
new casualties annually around the world¡Xfar fewer than the 26,000
per year estimated in the 1990s.

â~@~The declining landmine casualty rate is heartening, but there
are still an appalling number of people, especially children, killed
and maimed by landmines every year in virtually every region of the
world,â~@~] said Ms. Sheree Bailey of Handicap International, Landmine
Monitorâ~@~Ys Victim Assistance Research Coordinator. â~@~The stark
reality is that there is an ever-growing number of mine survivors
in the world and in the vast majority of mine-affected countries,
neither the national governments nor international donors are doing
nearly enough to provide for their needs,â~@~] she added.

According to Landmine Monitor, in 2003, new landmine and UXO casualties
were recorded in 65 countries. A total of 86 percent of reported new
casualties were identified as civilians and 23 percent were children.

The major progress in the past five years in preventing antipersonnel
mines from being laid and in clearing existing minefields has not
been matched in the area of victim assistance. Landmine Monitor
reports that while global mine action funding has increased greatly
since 1999, identifiable resources for mine victim assistance have
actually declined (US$29.8 million in 1999 compared to US$28.2 million
in 2003). Resources for victim assistance as a percentage of total
mine action funding have decreased significantly and steadily from
14.9 percent in 1999 to 8.3 percent in 2003.

â~@~In many mine-affected countries the assistance available to
rehabilitate and reintegrate landmine survivors back into society
remains desperately inadequate,â~@~] said Ms. Bailey. â~@~If
governments are serious in their commitment to assist survivors,
funding for healthcare and the disability sector must be significantly
increased and sustained over the long-term,â~@~] she added.Landmine
Monitor identified only 35 countries receiving resources from other
States for mine victim assistance programs in 2003, with the majority
of resources being provided for physical rehabilitation programs.

Landmine Monitor estimates that there are somewhere between 300,000
and 400,000 mine survivors in at least 121 countries today. From 1999
to September 2004, Landmine Monitor recorded more than 42,500 new
landmine and UXO casualties from incidents in at least 75 countries.

Landmine Monitor Report 2004: Toward a Mine-Free World is the sixth
annual report by the ICBL. It contains information on landmine
use, production, trade, stockpiling, demining, casualties and
victim assistance in every country of the world. This year¡¦s
1,300-page report is a special edition covering the past five years,
in anticipation of the first five-year Review Conference for the Mine
Ban Treaty. On Monday, 29 November, the ICBL will present the report
to diplomats attending the review conference in Kenya, known as the
Nairobi Summit on a Mine-Free World.

The Landmine Monitor initiative is coordinated by a â~@~Core
Groupâ~@~] of five ICBL organizations. Human Rights Watch is the
lead organization and others include Handicap International, Kenya
Coalition Against Landmines, Mines Action Canada, and Norwegian
People¡¦s Aid. A total of 110 Landmine Monitor researchers in 93
countries systematically collected and analyzed information from a wide
variety of sources for this comprehensive report. This unique civil
society initiative constitutes the first time that non-governmental
organizations have come together in a sustained, coordinated and
systematic way to monitor and report on the implementation of an
international disarmament or humanitarian law treaty.

The full Landmine Monitor report and related documents are available
online in various languages at

For more information or to schedule an interview, contact:

BELGIUM: Ms. Annelies Vanoppen, Handicap International, +32 (2)
286-50-38, Email. annelies.vanoppen-replacewatsign-handicap.be

MOZAMBIQUE: Ms. Inger Sandberg, Norwegian People’s Aid, +47 97 97 75 91

CAMBODIA: Ms. Sheree Bailey, Landmine Monitor Victim Assistance
Research Coordinator, +855 12 693 823

NAIROBI: Ms. Sue Wixley, ICBL, Tel. + 254 (0735) 337-396, Email.
media-replacewatsign-icbl.org

–Boundary_(ID_nUtEVoECO9Dq8VBFHITn3g)–

http://www.icbl.org
www.icbl.org/lm/2004.

Support For Armenian Journalists

SUPPORT FOR ARMENIAN JOURNALISTS

A1 Plus | 20:23:41 | 23-11-2004 | Politics |

The US group For the Sake of Democratic Armenia issued a statement as
a reaction to the Monday’s incident, when a car belonging to Haykakan
Zhamanak newspaper was blown up right outside the newspaper office.

The group denounced the act as ongoing process of power seizure in
Armenia and an apparent attempt to silence people.

They warn Armenian authorities and the tycoons serving them that
Armenians living overseas are deeply concerned about the fact that
state terror is used as means to retain power.

–Boundary_(ID_Ii3iAxFEEWa8G/85orTn9A)–