WRITTEN QUESTION E-3678/01 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Protection of Hellenistic cultural treasures in Afghanistan.
Date: 2002-01-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Afghanistan, EU aid, archaeology, civil war, cultural heritage, sale, use of aid

26.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 229 E/45

Referring to the Maya Archaelogical Site Development Programme funded by the sixth European
Development Fund (EDF), two maya sites in Lubantuum and Nim Li Punit mainly benefited. Both sites are
located in the Southern part of the country in an area that is not downstream of the Macal River Valley.
The proposed dam would therefore not specifically undermine the value of the investment made with the
contribution of the Community. The projects funded from the environmental budget line and focusing on
the management of the Crooked Tree and Cockscomb Basin reserves are implemented by the Belize
Audubon Society which is a member of the NEAC. According to Commission’s information the Belze
Audubon Society is not advocating against the construction of the dam. The Society is fully aware of the
EIA documents and is known to insist on a strict implementation of the environmental management and
mitigation plan.

The proposed dam will only have a capacity of seven megawatts of power. Belize Electricity Ltd. would
most certainly have to consider alternative sources of energy to meet an increasing electricity demand in
the country. The Belize sugar industry had the intention to approach the EIB to seek a financial
contribution for the implementation of a bagasse co-generation plant, according to the Commission’s
knowledge.

The focal area of the ninth EDF will be poverty alleviation with emphasis on rural development and
agricultural production. Given the limited amounts available for Belize under the programmable ninth EDF
resources (€ 7,8 million) it is not possible to consider funding for activities outside the above-mentioned
focal sector of intervention. Subject to availability of funds and high quality project proposals it is however
possible to approve NGO-projects in the field of environmental protection under the available budget lines
on the basis of the annual Call for Proposals.

On the basis of the above information, the Commission does not intend to raise this matter with the
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Moreover, under the CBD, the Secretariat has
no regulatory role in controlling the implementation of the Convention, nor is there any Compliance or
Implementation Body. As far as the Commission is aware, Belize has not yet submitted its second National
Report on the implementation of the Convention, which is supposed to be available before the next
Conference of the Parties (The Hague, 8/19 April 2002). The report might provide a basis for informed
‘peer review’ of Belize’s approach on this case if the authorities so desired. When available, such reports are
posted on the Website of the Convention (http://www.biodiv.org/world/reports.asp?t=s).

(2002/C 229 E/046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3678/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Protection of Hellenistic cultural treasures in Afghanistan

(17 January 2002)

Before the civil war broke out in Afghanistan, Greek archaeologists had discovered priceless articles from
the Hellenistic period dating back over 2500 years. Many of these finds, whose fate is unknown at the
present time, were stored in the vaults of the Bank of Afghanistan and the Kabul museum.

Now that hostilities are coming to an end and rumour has it that many of the finds have already been
taken out of the country to be sold, will the Commission support an investigation to find, save and protect
these antiquities wherever they may be?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2002)

As suggested by the Honourable Member in his question, it does appear, sadly, that many of the historical
artefacts which were stored either in the Bank of Afghanistan or the Kabul museum have been looted or
destroyed during the extended period of civil war in Afghanistan.

C 229 E/46

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

The Commission, in collaboration with Member States and the international community, pledged funds at
the Tokyo conference of the Afghan Reconstruction Steering Group (January 21-22, 2002) for the
reconstruction of the country. The Commission’s contribution for 2002, announced at this conference, was
€ 200 million.

These funds will be directed at priorities such as support for the Interim Authority, rural redevelopment,
urban regeneration, demining, efforts to halt poppy cultivation, and support
to the media. The
Commission will propose to the Budgetary Authority that funding at a comparable level should be
approved annually for a further four years.

As indicated in response to the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-0878/01 (1), the budget of the
Community does not contain provision for the funding of measures destined to protect the Afghan
cultural heritage.

(1) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001.

(2002/C 229 E/047)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3699/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(17 January 2002)

Subject: Interpretation into Swedish at Council meetings

In 1999, the Swedish government wrote to the Council protesting at discrimination against the Swedish
language. In early 2000, it was found that the situation had still not improved. Interpretation to and/or
from Swedish was provided at only 20 % of Council meetings.

There are perhaps 250 Council working parties. The basic idea is that members from the 15 Member
States should be able to use their mother tongue, irrespective of whether the meetings are about tax rules
or hazardous chemicals or whatever.

This naturally requires large numbers of interpreters. The problem is, however, that investigations in 1999
and 2000 placed Swedish at the bottom of the list as far as interpretation for the various languages was
concerned.

Can the Council provide a list showing the coverage of the various languages by interpreters at the various
meetings at the Council? What has been done to boost the Council’s Swedish interpretation service?

Reply

(26 June 2002)

In 1981 the Council and the Commission set up a Joint Interpreting and Conference Service (JICS) which
organises the work of nearly a thousand interpreters each day to meet the interpretation needs of both
institutions in all the Community languages. The Permanent Representations of the countries concerned
notify the JICS of the meetings at which they require interpretation into their languages. Requests are met
insofar as the budget and availability of interpreters allow, given that there is no binding legal rule
requiring that interpretation is provided into all languages at working party level.

In 2000, aware of the increased need for interpretation into and out of Swedish with the Swedish
Presidency in prospect, the GSC expanded the number of interpreters’ booths for Swedish. The Council
invites the Honourable Member to look at the statistical tables provided by the JICS attached to this reply,
which show active and passive coverage of the various languages. They show that the percentage of active
cover of the Swedish language rose from 21 % in 1998 to 31 % in 2002, with passive cover rising from
23,9 % to 42,2 %, which calls for further improvement. The Council invites the Honourable Member to
approach the JICS directly for more detailed information.

This increase means that interpretation for Swedish can be provided at all ministerial-level meetings as for
all the other languages and at an increased number of working party meetings.