Annex 2:

FSD NON-TECHNICAL MINE ACTION SURVEY

REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

NOVEMBER 2012 – MAY 2013

Certified by the Armenian Center for Humanitarian Demining and Expertise (CHDE) Approved by the Government of the Republic of Armenia

Implemented by the Swiss Foundation for Mine Action (FSD)

2

PROJECT ABSTRACT

The N o n - T e c h n i c a l S u r v e y in Armenia summarizes the results of a nationwide socio-

economic survey of the impact of landmines and UXO on communities in Armenia. This survey

was conducted over a 7-month period, ending in May 2013 by the Swiss Foundation for Mine Action (FSD).

This initiative aims to catalog the impacts caused by landmines and UXO and to store this data in a manner that supports strategic national planning and resource allocation decisions.

The report on Armenia is designed to be read in conjunction with a document entitled, The

Global Landmine Survey Initiative, which describes the global project as well as the general methodologies used to conduct landmine impact surveys.

The following governments and organizations provided contributions to the

survey:

US Office for Weapons Removal

And Abatement (PM/WRA)

Funding for the implementation of this Survey was provided by PM/WRA. Support to

the project was rendered by the Government of Armenia. Technical expertise was

provided by the Swiss Foundation for Mine Action (FSD).

Quality assurance monitoring has been independently provided by the Armenian CHDE.

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED IN THIS REPORT...................................................................................................... 4

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 7

CHAPTER 1: SURVEY RESULTS AND FINDINGS......................................................................................11

SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM......................................................................................................................................11

SUMMARY OF PAST MINE ACTION ...................................................................................................................12

FACTORS INFLUENCING MINE AND UXO CLEARANCE ..................................................................................14

CONSEQUENCES FOR MINE ACTION.................................................................................................................17

CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY...................................................................21

PROGRAM MANAGER REPORT.…........................................................................................................................21

PROGRAM TIMELINE...........................................................................................................................................23

KEY PARTICIPANTS .............................................................................................................................................23

FINANCES.............................................................................................................................................................23

SURVEY METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................24

Tables: Table 1: Affected Communities by Population and Regions…………………………………….............................11

Table 2: Affected Communities, Contaminated Areas and Surface by Munition Type…………………………………………….........................................................................................................15

Table 3: NTS Results: Ararat Marz………………………….....................................................................................26

Table 4: NTS Results: Gegharkunik Marz………………………………………………………………………………27

Table 5: NTS Results: Syunik Marz……………………………………………………………………………………..29

Table 6: NTS Results: Tavoush Marz……………………………………………………………………..…………….34

Table 7: NTS Results: Vayots Dzor Marz……………………………………………………………………………….37

Google Earth maps......................................................................................................................... .....................................39

4

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED IN THIS REPORT

CHDE Armenian Centre for Humanitarian Demining and Expertise

AP Anti-personnel

AT Anti-tank CHA Confirmed Hazardous Area DA Dangerous Area

DC Data Collector

EOD Explosive Ordnance Disposal

FSD Swiss Foundation for Mine Action GICHD Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian De-Mining GIS Geographic Information System GPS Global Positioning System

HMA Humanitarian Mine Action HQ Headquarters ICRC International Committee of Red Cross

IMSMA Information Management System for Mine Action

IMAS International Mine Action Standards

LIS Landmine Impact Survey MA Mine Action

MoD Ministry of Defense MoU Memorandum of Understanding MRE Mine Risk Education

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation QA Quality Assurance QC Quality Control

SHA Suspected Hazardous Area SOP Standard Operating Procedure UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UXO Unexploded Ordnance

5

INTRODUCTION

Growing out of the world wide collaborative efforts of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines

and its Ottawa Treaty, UNDP launched a Landmine Impact Surveys (LIS) in Armenia that was

executed in 2004-2005. Results found during this survey were comprehensive, but the final report

was not accepted by the Government of Armenia. Since 2005 no formal humanitarian mine action

activities were executed in Armenia, until FSD have entered the country in September 2012.

Taking into consideration that Survey techniques have developed to a higher level than 2005 and with the

financial support of US PM/WRA, FSD conducted a Non-Technical Survey (NTS) of landmine- and UXO

impacted communities within Armenia. The aim of the NTS was not to replace results of the 2005

Landmine Impact Survey, but to collect more technical data to be made available to the three main

stakeholders of the process: national authorities, donors and implementing agencies and provides for the

utilization of the same dataset. It must also be clear that FSD has been mandated by the CHDE to

conduct surveys in all impacted communities outside of the ‘military restricted zone’ in accordance

with their Task Orders; therefore no physical surveys took place inside of the zone. The data collected

during the NTS project provides clear improvements on past efforts in that it:

• Defines the entire problem in terms of scale, type of location, hazards, and socio-economic

impacts on communities;

• Improves national planning efforts by allowing for better prioritization of resources;

• Fosters development of national plans with well-defined immediate, intermediate and long

term objectives;

• Establishes baseline data from which performance can be measured.

Although Impact surveys were considered to be the first and most vital step in the transformation of

overall humanitarian mine action, the NTS have dramatically improve the quality of information

available for decision makers at all levels.

After discussion with Government of Armenia authorities and other actors, FSD further refined this

vision into a number of subordinate objectives focused upon these three key constituencies:

• Allow donors to rationalize their allocation of funds to the areas of greatest human need as

defined by the impact of landmines and UXO upon communities;

• Permit national authorities to develop national plans focusing on regions and areas of greatest

impact;

• Give implementers baseline impact data that will provide success indicators for mine action

programs.

The findings and information presented in this report are available a t t h e A r m e n i an C H DE .

6

Al t h o u g h a l l d a t a wa s l og g e d on t h e Information Management System for Mine Action

(IMSMA) reports, no IMSMA database currently exists in Armenia. This information is descriptive in

nature, and provides the best and most comprehensive picture of the nature of the landmine and

UXO threat impacting communities in Armenia outside of the military restricted zone.

It should be clearly mentioned at this early stage that although this report is the most useful tool for

subsequent planning at the national level, it is not a substitute for a national plan. This report should

encourage Armenian national authorities, decision-makers and planners to become familiar with the

current state of landmine/UXO contamination in their country, and to use the report in support of

future activities related to allocation of funding, prioritization of efforts and identification of areas for

intervention. This survey has transformed the vague or unknown into functional knowledge. The

challenge now is to ensure that others will use this knowledge to bring about positive, constructive

action.

This document should be used as a supplement with the UNDP “Landmine Impact Survey 2005”

document.

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS

The Landmine Impact Survey in Armenia was conducted in Armenia by the UNDP Armenia De-

Mining Project with Technical Assistance provided by the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation

(VVAF) during the period of February – August 2005. The LIS identified 60 impacted communities in

five regions of Armenia, 102 Suspected Hazardous Areas and 14 recent victims. The total area of

suspected contamination in Armenia was identified at a size of 321,677,110 sq. km., while 68,737 people

were identified as impacted by the landmines and / or UXOs.

There is an effective difference in data collected by FSD during the NTS project in relation to the UNDP

LIS, due to the fact that FSD was not mandated to work inside the military restricted zone and that the

FSD NTS Teams was physically on the ground visiting each of the CHAs/SHAs recorded, except where

circumstances like weather, security and terrain prevented them to do this. The difference in results

between the UNDP LIS in 2005 and the FSD NTS in 2012-2013 will be clearly indicated in the findings

below.

The collected data provides extensive opportunities for research, analyses and further planning. These

findings shaped several key conclusions:

• Four out of eleven regions of Armenia have landmine and / or UXO contamination, and

contamination occurs only in the regions where Armenia borders Azerbaijan;

• Contamination occurs in the border areas, particularly in areas where military actions were

conducted or in the areas which are located in close proximity to battle fields;

• The Syunik and Tavoush M a rze s appear to be the most contaminated compared to the other

regions of Armenia;

• 50 SHAs in the restricted military zone were not surveyed, but this will represent a challenge in

the future. Should the restricted military zone be accessible, renewed NTS will be needed. The

Armenian Ministry of Defense has indicated a willingness to grant access into the restricted

zone, should political agreements be reached. FSD have surveyed a total area of approximately

4 287 sq.km, with suspected and confirmed hazardous areas (SHA’s/CHA’s) totaling a size of

47 sq.km;

• FSD NTS conducted the survey only within the internationally recognized boundaries of

Armenia. No activities were conducted in the disputed (occupied) territories or on Azeri soil,

nor were they conducted in Nagorno Karabagh;

• The Armenian community of Artsvashen was not surveyed due to restrictions.

8

BACKGROUND AND PROJECT OVERVIEW

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Southern Caucasus has become a scene of ethnic conflicts in

which the civilian population has suffered the most. Among the major problems that those conflicts

resulted in are the presence of a large number of refugees and Internally Displaced People (IDP) and

landmines affecting agricultural lands and roads. According to the Landmine Monitor Report, about 17

percent of landmine victims in countries of the Former Soviet Union are in the Caucasus.

After the 1994 cease-fire following the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, according to the

Landmine Monitor, army engineers surveyed approximately 1,000 square kilometers of border

territories in Armenia, where warfare was waged, to identify minefields and dangerous sites. The

military used all of the available documentation at that time and information provided by local

residents. Most of the minefields are located in the regions of Tavoush, Syunik, Vayots Dzor and

Gegharkunik, along the border with Azerbaijan. The Government of Armenia has estimated 50,000 to

80,000 emplaced landmines.1

Armenia has not signed either of the two International Conventions on Land Mines. Although

supporting the Ottawa Convention (on use, production and transfer of Anti-personnel Landmines),

Armenian authorities believes that its adoption would put the country in a disadvantaged position for as

long as the Government of Azerbaijan refuses to sign the Convention. For similar reasons the Protocol

II on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and other devices has not been

signed by Armenia. Despite that, Armenian authorities decided to submit to the UN Secretary General,

on a voluntary basis, the annual report required under Articles 11 and 13 contributing to global mine

action.

The goal of the FSD NTS project is to strengthen the national capacity for coordination and

implementation of a Humanitarian Mine Action Program in Armenia. In order to achieve this goal,

the following was envisaged for the project:

• Training of Armenian staff in the most recent Non-Technical Survey techniques in accordance

with the International Mine Action Standards and the conduct of a countrywide Non-Technical

Survey [NTS] outside the military restricted zone, conducted to improve available data and

update the existing database; (completed)

• Submit all data accurately to the Armenian CHDE as a baseline for future humanitarian mine

action projects (completed). The Government of Armenia also will use the NTS data in the

development of an Armenian Mine Action Strategy (on-going).

• increase public awareness in mine affected regions; (on-going) and

• develop an assistance scheme for land-mine victims – the Armenian CHDE as coordination body

and support from the International Community of the Red Cross (ICRC) and future humanitarian

implementing partners. (2013-ongoing)

1 This estimation was made based on the numbers of landmines at Soviet Military storages on the territory of Armenia

available before the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the intensity of their usage.

9

One of the comparative advantages FSD had in the implementation of the NTS project was the support

and assistance it has received from CHDE during the NTS operations. It must also be mentioned that FSD

had successful networking with the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Territorial Administration,

Ministry of E m e r g e n c y S i t u a t i o n s , and the Ministry of Justice.

SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM

The survey identified that contamination with landmines and / or UXO exists in four out of eleven

regions of Armenia. The contaminated regions are as follows: Tavoush, Gegharkunik, Vayots Dzor,

and Syunik. Ararat Marz was also surveyed as there was an indication of landmine- and UXO impact,

but no evidence was found to support this. A total number of 42 impacted communities were

identified with a to tal of 131 Suspected and Confirmed Hazardous Areas and 34 , 723 people being

impacted. The breakdown among the regions is provided below:

Tavoush - 8 impacted communities, 22 SHAs/CHA’s, 14, 170 impacted people;

Gegharkunik - 13 impacted communities, 24 SHAs/CHA’s, 8, 229 impacted people;

Vayots Dzor - 1 impacted community, 3 C HAs, 460 impacted people;

Syunik - 20 impacted communities, 82 SHAs/CHAs, 11, 864 impacted people.

IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES

The international community have not been involved in humanitarian mine action projects in

Armenia since 2005 to 2012. FSD, the CHDE and Armenia have to express its appreciation to the

US State Department, in particular PM/WRA and the US Embassy in Yerevan for the financial

support to conduct the NTS project.

During the 2005 LIS, it was established that the landmine– and UXO impact on communities is relatively

low in Armenia. This was mostly due to the fact that mine- and UXO incidents reduced in recent years.

FSD has found with the NTS that communities in Syunik and Tavuosh Marzes found the impact of

landmines medium to high, especially due to the fact that further development of agricultural land is

impossible due to the amount of contamination. These communities are clearly indicated in Chapter 1:

Non-Technical Survey Results and Findings.

Most of the impacted communities represent border regions of Armenia with Azerbaijan. In all of these

contaminated areas military hostility was conducted or war was waged within close proximity. Visual

verification was conducted in all the areas that was accessible and which are located outside of the

restricted military buffer zone on the border.

MINE INCIDENTS

The most recent mine incident took place on 09 April 2013, when 2 kids were involved in an AP

mine accident. The incident took place in Shirak Marz. Both children unfortunately passed away

due to their injuries. The number of recent victims is relatively small due to the fact that the last

hostilities in these areas were conducted in 1994 and the last landmines or UXOs were emplaced in 1994

10

(19 years ago), therefore the local population has come to know the contaminated areas very well.

There are in total 271 non-recent victims identified in the NTS. FSD have to make it clear that mine

victims in Armenia is not static and it was impossible to log all victims during the NTS. The Armenian

ICRC is in a continuous process of registering mine victims and this will continue in the future. The

CHDE will remain the coordination body and all information will be submitted to their database for

inclusion into the IMSMA system when it is finally installed.

CONCLUSION

The results of the FSD NTS in the Republic of Armenia clearly indicate that the country still suffers

many adverse consequences from landmine and UXO contamination, even though the last military

activities were conducted and last landmines and UXOs were emplaced 19 years ago (1994). The

collected data and produced information, as a result of data analyses, will allow for the creation of a

well-planned and targeted set of mine action initiatives. The results can also contribute to the

development and refinement of planning for Mine Risk Education and Victim Assistance in a manner

that will produce positive and immediate results.

Provided that sustainable funding is available to address the landmine problem in Armenia, the

initiatives based on the results of this FSD NTS project will allow Armenia to become a high impact

free country in a relatively short period of time. By using this information provided it is possible to

concentrate resources in a strategic manor where they will be the most beneficial. By creating a

national Armenian Mine Action Strategy and viable National Mine Action Standards the greatest negative

impacts can be removed and Armenia can become a landmine/UXO impact free country in a

sustainable time period, providing applicable donor funding is available. The FSD NTS also provide

information needed as a baseline necessary to continue using resources in an efficient way during the

longer-term efforts of mine action in Armenia.

11

Province Communities Population

Ararat 0 -

Gegharkunik 13 8, 229

Syunik 20 11, 864

Tavoush 8 14, 170

Vayots Dzor 1 460

Total 42 34, 723

CHAPTER 1. SURVEY RESULTS AND FINDINGS

SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM

NUMBER OF COMMUNITIES AFFECTED

The FSD NTS identified contamination with landmines and / or UXO in four out of eleven regions of

Armenia. In Tavoush, Gegharkunik, Vayots Dzor as well as Syunik, a total of 42 affected communities

were surveyed together with 131 Suspected and Confirmed Hazardous Areas (SHAs/CHA’s). An

estimated 34,723 people are living in the affected communities. These figures do not include two

communities known to be contaminated, which, at the time of the survey, were not accessible for

security reasons.

Table 1: Affected Communities and Populations by Regions

The breakdown among the regions is presented in table 1. The region of Tavoush claims the most

people impacted by landmines (11,864), while the region of Syunik has the highest number of

CHAs/SHAs (82 out of 1 3 1 countrywide), but affecting a relatively small population. Among the

affected regions, Vayots Dzor reported the smallest number of people impacted.

SETTLEMENT TYPE AND POPULATION

Most of the contaminated areas are on the Armenian – Azeri border or within close proximity to it.

The typical distance from the community center to the border is 2.4 kilometers, and none of the

communities are any farther than 12 km inland. All but two affected communities are villages, with a

typical (median) population of 800 residents. The two exceptions are the town of Chambarak, in

Gegharkunik Region (population 7,400) and the town of Agarak in Syunik (5,007).

12

SUMMARY OF PAST MINE ACTION

THE MINE ACTION COMMUNITY

The Armenian Ce n t e r f o r Humanitarian De-Mining and Expertise Center (CHDE) was created as an

entire civilian entity in 2011, functioning as a Ministry of Defense office, with financial and equipment

support by the US Department of State2.

The Swiss Foundation for Mine Action (FSD) entered Armenia in September 2012 to execute the

Armenian Non-Technical Survey (NTS) project. With assistance from the CHDE, FSD recruited national

staff members and conducted NTS Training from October to November in accordance with IMAS and

FSD NTS Standard Operational Procedure. The training included theory lectures and examinations as

well as practical training in the field. Physical NTS operations started in November 2012 in Syunik Marz

and concluded on 15 May 2013. (www.fsd.ch)

Within the framework of the US State Department-funded and RONCO-implemented initiative, the

center conducted a pilot survey in the region of Tavoush in 2002. As well, mine clearance activities

were conducted in 2003, 2004 and 20053 in the Syunik Region. During this time the US Marshall

Legacy Institute, in cooperation with the US Humanitarian De-mining Program established the Mine

Detecting Dog Partnership program in Armenia. FSD must however mention that very little

information and data is available to monitor the exact results of these projects, due to the time that

elapsed.

ICBL Armenia carried out a landmine victim survey aimed at compiling and verifying a database on

landmine victims in Armenia. As of April 2002, the database contained records of 343 survivors,

including both soldiers and civilians injured in landmine incidents in all 11 provinces. The results of

this survey have not been made public and have not been made accessible to this LIS. Another survey,

completed in January 2002, tested the level of public awareness of landmine risks in Yerevan and in

affected regions. Results indicate that while there is an overall understanding of the hazard among the

population, the capacity to deal with the problem is very low.

Landmine victim assistance: The reality is that currently victim assistance is a relatively low priority.

ICRC is continues to record mine victims and share information with the CHDE. Victim assistance

remains part of the landmine pillars and should the final Armenian Mine Action Strategy be approved

by Government, a national plan could be formulated. The CHDE will remain the Armenian

coordination body for victim assistance. It is worth mentioning that different schemes for landmine

victim assistance apply to civilian and military victims. It is a common understanding that the

victim assistance scheme for military personnel is better developed and better financially supported.

It is also important to note that emergency mine clearance takes place by the military, should requests

be approved by the Ministry of Defense. No history of humanitarian mine clearance operations in

2 Between 1993 and 2003 the US contribution amounted to about US$10 million. Additional $1.8 million was provided by the

US Embassy in 2002 from its Freedom Support Act funds to augment the de-mining program and to establish the de-mining

centre. 3 Mine Clearance in 2005 was conducted in the village of Shurnukh in the Syunik region of Armenia, which was identified by

the LIS as one of four high impact communities. Decision to conduct mine clearance in this village was based on the preliminary

results of the LIS.

13

Armenia exist, since the conclusion of the Landmine Impact Survey in 2005.

14

FACTORS INFLUENCING MINE AND UXO CLEARANCE

SIZE AND DEFINITION OF CONTAMINATED AREAS

There are many factors to be considered when planning for mine clearance or UXO demolition in a

given country. The physical characteristics and the types of the explosive ordnance are among the

most influential ones. The size of the CHAs/SHAs, the type of the terrain and vegetation in this area

are also of crucial importance.

The size and the definition of the boundaries of the CHAs/SHA are fundamental issues when reviewing

approaches to mine clearance. T h e N T S p ro v i d e f o r an ap p ro x i m at e si ze o f t h e C H A s/ S H A s,

h owever, during the operation, certain areas were inaccessible due to weather conditions. FSD has

tried to the best of its ability to provide an polygon survey boundary for these areas with the

information collected from the community. It must be mentioned that although most of the CHA’s

have relatively accurate boundaries, for future humanitarian mine action activities, the SHAs and

some of the CHA’s areas can be reduced significantly with Technical Survey.

With 60 impacted communities and 102 SHAs that were identified during the 2005 LIS, FSD has

found 131 SHAs/CHAs impacting 42 communities directly. The total area identified by the 2005 LIS

believed to be contaminated in Armenia, measures 321.68 sq. km. FSD have reduced this significantly

during the NTS, with a total contaminated area of just over 47 sq. km. The exact technical data is

available from the CHDE.

The Mountainous terrain of Armenia makes the

Clearance a real Challenge.

CONTAMINATED LAND BY VEGETATION AND

TERRAIN

The 131 hazardous areas identified in Armenia have

different ground profiles ‘and are covered by different

types of vegetation, which are critical factors to be

considered when planning clearance operations. While

the size and definition of a suspected area can suggest

particular clearance techniques, the physical

characteristics of the vegetation and topography,

especially at larger sites, have the most influence on the

final approach selected.

15

Tall grass on hillsides and ridges a n d th i c k v e g e ta ti o n account for more than 67% percent of all

contaminated land. This element of information agrees with the finding that blocked pasture is the

most prevalent blockage type. In terms of clearance difficulty, gullies, ridges and hillsides are more

arduous than flat land. The degree of difficulty that vegetation presents increases from “None” to

“Bushes and trees”. It can be seen that more than half of the suspected surface is in difficult terrain,

but is not covered with bushes or trees. Due to these restrictions and the fact that a lot of contaminated

areas are situated high above sea level, weather conditions that deteriorate in the winter months

(November to February), manual mine clearance will be the preferred clearance method for future

humanitarian activities. Mechanical and MDD operations should be carefully planned and supervised if

to be implemented in the future.

CONTAMINATED LAND BY ORDNANCE CLASS

Most of the contamination is due to landmines. UXO do contaminate certain areas, but in a manageable

scope. Minefields that include AT and AP mines is the biggest obstacle, as this will also hamper future

mechanical clearance. AP only is the second largest obstacle and it must also be considered that these

areas are located in mostly difficult terrain. UXO only are limited, but a limited of Battle Area Clearance

will be needed and must be taken into consideration for future training activities. GRAD Rockets,

100mm Artillery shells, RPG and small arms were the most common found UXO.

Table 2: Affected Communities, Contaminated Areas and Surface by Munition Type

Communities/Areas SHA’s/CHA’s

Ararat Gegharkunik Syunik Tavoush Vayots

Dzor

TOTAL Total Area m2

UXO

Only

- 6 6 1 - 13 1817194

AT Only - 4 25 10 3 42 1715420

AT and

UXO

- - - - - - -

AP Only - 5 34 7 - 45 4172686

AP and

UXO

- - 3 - - 3 13530

AP and

AT

- 9 13 4 - 26 39417494

AP, AT

and

UXO

- - 1 - - 1 4800

Total - 24 82 22 3 131 47141124

For each of these combinations, the total surface area over all CHAs/SHAs in point is given. AP and AT

is the combination with the largest combined surface, by far.

The average SHAs/CHAs surface area is also of interest. However, arithmetic means are heavily

influenced by the largest SHAs/CHAs.

16

IMPORTANCE OF DEVELOPMENT ISSUES

Some of these wider concerns transpire also from the importance that landmine-affected and non-

affected communities are attached to a variety of development issues, from agriculture to tourism

development, as well as priority projects that are impacted by the landmine and UXO impact. It must be

noted that FSD has coordinated, liaised and collaborated with the Provincial Governors (Marzpets) in

all of the surveyed Marzes. All of the national authorities has implied the importance of humanitarian

mine clearance operations in their regions. Some exceptions, however, are significant:

¢ Mine-affected communities are more isolated. They emphasize social exclusion, poor roads

and less access to markets as important issues more often than other communities. It is

noteworthy that the greater importance placed on social exclusion and road access persist even

when population size, distance from the border and extreme poverty are controlled for.

¢ Mine-affected communities complain significantly about the lack of agricultural land. In many

cases, however, agricultural land to which landmines and UXO are hampering access forms

part of the restricted military zones. The local communities may not normally think of these

areas as accessible to their economic pursuits and, therefore future political decisions and

education will form part of any humanitarian mine action project.

The greater emphasis must be on the clearance of agricultural land, but given limited development

budgets, for many of the landmine-affected communities, clearance can be incorporated as community

projects and capacity development. FSD have also identified proper Mine Risk Education lacking in most of

the impacted communities.

FSD conducting interviews in Syunik Marz school

17

CONSEQUENCES FOR MINE ACTION

GENERAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The Syunik and Tavoush Marzes in Armenia merit the highest priority for humanitarian mine action

programs. Syunik Marz presents no security hazard towards any mine action actor and work can be

conducted safely. Tavoush Marz has contaminated areas where a security risks will hamper certain mine

action operations. This might be eliminated depending on political decisions in the future. The rest of

Armenia is relatively safe and impacted areas are accessible depending on weather conditions.

Second, there may be communities within a heavily mined region and near other communities

classified as medium or high risk. Therefore, when technical survey teams move to communities

classified as high impact, it may be appropriate for them to visit neighboring affected communities as

well, and they will give appropriate Task Orders from the CHDE to do so.

Compared to other countries with landmine and UXO problems, Armenia shows a high level of

development of local institutional and infrastructural capacities. Almost all communities have

electricity, piped water supply, telephone connection, health care facilities, and secondary schools.

This is an important advantage which confirms the assumption in the previous chapter about a

very significant learning process among the population at risk as communities with schools, markets, and

local community organizations are better equipped to successfully adapt to the presence of mines and

UXO than communities that lack these items.

The mine action planning shall consider the factor of restricted military zones: the areas that fall into

this category shall be distinguished from those without restricted status. The CHAs/SHAs that fall

within the military restricted zones along the border with Azerbaijan are currently not accessible for

mine clearance largely due to security issues. Should future humanitarian mine action activities be

launched into the restricted zone, coordination with the CHDE and Armenian MOD will be crucial.

18

MINE CLEARANCE

Currently, 131 CHAs/SHAs are located outside of the restricted military zone and are accessible for

mine clearance. However, all 42 impacted communities, including communities with SHAs within the

restricted military zone need to have other components of mine action beyond mine clearance.

Taking into consideration: the population affected, the number of recent and old victims, and the level

of social-economic impacts, the non-restricted areas of the Syunik province offer the best opportunity

for efficient mine action. Relatively small areas in Syunik have higher impacts than large areas in

Gegharkunik, therefore more benefit can be obtained from the clearance of these smaller areas.

Technical Survey including mine clearance will be the next phase of Armenian humanitarian mine

action. FSD NTS has provided a good baseline for impacted areas and some of the hazardous areas can

be further reduced by Technical Survey. It is foreseen that in most minefields a Technical Survey

operations will result in a Clearance operation, due to the random distribution of the mines and the fact

that no ‘pattern’ exist.

Future manual clearance seems like the best option in most of the CHAs/SHAs due to vegetation and

terrain restrictions. Manual demining will be a viable option as most of the local communities know the

hazardous areas and manual operations can be incorporated into future development projects.

The use of MDD and mechanical clearance operations will have to be carefully planned, as there is

limited CHAs/SHAs where these operations will be successful. Due to restrictions on areas regarding

weather conditions, MDD operations might be limited.

The Armenian CHDE sees staff capacity development and training as a vital priority. Currently no

IMSMA exist and the FSD NTS provide baseline information, future humanitarian demining activities

will have to be properly documented, logged and mapped.

The US Embassy in Yerevan has a continuous program with the Armenian Ministry of Defense in the

training of deminers. This is executed with a signed agreement by the US Kansas Guard. For future

humanitarian demining activities to be executed safely in Armenia, it will be important for actors to

include Demining, Battle Area Clearance and EOD Level II training in accordance with IMAS

Standards, with support from the Armenian CHDE.

Vegetation and Ground Profile

The most common terrain in these communities is composed of ravines, hillsides and ridges covered by

bushes or trees. This will limit the use of mechanical clearance methods and force a reliance on slower,

more expensive manual clearance techniques. FSD teams working in the field support this finding

and also report the added difficulties of the high rock content of the soil in Armenia, high

temperatures in summer and, in a number of areas, snow and ice in winter. All of these factors further

slow and, at times, completely halt clearance activities. Syunik Marz does have sufficient hazardous

areas where clearance activities can be performed during one calendar year.

19

MARKING

F S D h av e m ark e d R e f e r e n c e P o i n t s , B e n c h m ar k s an d S t art P o i n t s i n a c c o rd an c e

w it h t h e I M S M A N TS a t a l l t h e r ec o r d ed S H A s/ CH A s , b u t u s i n g sp ray p ai n t a n d

n at u ral l a n d m ark s . A l l o f t h e se ar e as h a v e b e e n ac c u rat e l y m ap p e d a n d d e t a i l is

av ai l ab l e f r o m t h e A rm e n i a n C H D E . F S D h as e m p l ac e d p e rm a n e n t B e n c h m ark s

at c e rt a i n h azard o u s ar e as , b u t d u e t o t i m e , f u n d i n g a n d w e at h e r c o n st ra i n t s

c o u l d n o t c o m p l e t e t h e m ark i n g o f a l l t h e a re a s . T h e b e n c h m ark s ar e av ai l ab l e

a n d h a n d e d o v e r to t h e C H DE w h o w i l l c o n t i n u e m ark i n g a l l su r v e y e d are a s .

Some of the dangerous areas in the Marzes have been marked, especially the road segment

between Goris and Kapan in Syunik Marz. Marking is however not clear due to age. The forest

minefield in Syunik Marz close to Shurnugh is fenced off by Armforest and only people from

the forestry can enter the area.

Future marking should be a priority for mine action actors by conducting Technical Survey.

Fencing of smaller dangerous areas can be a future project, but this is expensive and would

highly depend on donor funding.

MINE AWARENESS

¢ Seasonal constraints must be considered when scheduling the delivery of mine awareness

education. In almost all regions, the local population is not available during periods of

harvest and sowing (March-October).

¢ Mine Awareness and MRE are needed in all impacted communities in spite of location of

the CHAs/SHAs affecting these communities. The data shows that explosive ordnances

equally affect the populations of communities with CHAs/SHAs in restricted and non-

restricted areas.

¢ Age and sex of victims affect both the message and method of delivery. Taking into

consideration that the most recent victims were 2 children, community awareness programs

need to focus on the whole population.

20

VICTIM ASSISTANCE

Based on the data received, survivors are confirmed to have received emergency care shortly after their

injury. None of the victims remained without care. The emergency medical facilities in Armenia are

good by most standards with a well-structured health system administered down to district and

community level. The ICRC in cooperation with the CHDE wants to rejuvenate the victim assistance

effort in Armenia.

The following conclusions for future victim assistance can be derived from the survey.

¢ The restricted and non-restricted status of communities, important for mine

clearance activities, is not relevant for Victim Assistance. The data shows

that explosive ordnances equally affect the populations of communities with

SHAs in restricted and not-restricted areas.

¢ The low number of victim assistance projects is disappointing.

During recent years no project has been implemented in Armenia. There was

no special program for victims of mine and UXO accidents.

¢ The survey shows that it is necessary to broaden the range of

rehabilitation services and expand access to these services. This capacity

needs to be reinforced and reorganized to provide an accessible network of

services nationwide.

21

CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY

FSD PROGRAM MANAGER REPORT

BACKGROUND ON ARMENIA

Armenia is a country that covers 29,8 thousand sq. km in the Southern Caucuses and has a population

of slightly over 3.5 million people. It is divided into ten Marzes (provinces) – administrative

territorial divisions, plus the administrative district of the city of Yerevan (the capital). It is a highly

educated and urbanized society. Armenia is bordering Azerbaijan, Turkey, Iran and Georgia; it is

landlocked but contains Lake Sevan, which is 1,360 sq km, at an elevation of almost 1,905 meters

above the sea level.

Armenia was hit by a devastating earthquake in 1988. The earthquake damaged 40% of the country’s

industrial capacity and was followed by economic collapse caused by transition period. This led to a

considerable migration of the population. Most of the landmines on Armenian soil are the result of

military activities conducted in the region from 1988 to 1994 between Azerbaijan and the Armenian

enclave within Azerbaijan – Nagorno Karabagh. Some minefields from the Soviet era remain on

Armenian soil.

BACKGROUND TO FSD IN ARMENIA

Since 2005, no humanitarian mine action took place in Armenia, except the recording of mine

victims by ICRC. FSD was invited by the Government of Armenia to conduct a NTS as the last

results of the 2005 LIS were questioned.

Armenian Center for Humanitarian Demining and Expertise (CHDE) was formed in 2011 and FSD had

continuous support from them during the duration of the NTS operation. The NTS Training took place

at Edjmiadzin at the Peacekeeping Engineering Regiment of MoD of Armenia with support from the

CHDE. FSD brought a NTS specialist from the FSD Sri Lanka program and training was

completed successfully by 16 November 2012 and the NTS operations commenced directly afterwards

in Syunik Marz.

FSD completed the NTS operation on 15 May 2013 and this report includes the results. FSD employed

11 Armenian staff members and staffing is set out below:

22

No First Name Last Name Position

1 Johannes Odendaal Program Manager

2 Lusine Poghosyan Financial and Admin Officer

3 Varsine Miskaryan Data Entry Officer

4 Karen Martirosyan Team Leader

5 Henrik Abajyan Team Leader

6 Ashot Arakelyan Operator

7 Narek Vardanyan Operator

8 Hayk Hunusyan Operator

9 Eduard Goroyan Operator

10 Eduard Manukyan Office Driver

11 Sergey Blbulyan Driver

12 Artush Ginosyan Driver

23

PROGRAM TIMELINE

Following consultations with the Government of Armenia, the CHDE, US PM/WRA and the US

Embassy in Armenia, FSD undertook this project to assess the impact of landmines and UXO in Armenia.

The goal of the project is to present the real situation regarding mine and UXO contamination within

Armenia, outside of the military restricted zone and to supply the CHDE with accurate results. FSD also

assisted in strengthening the national capacity for coordination and implementation of a de-mining

program in Armenia that will be coordinated by the CHDE.

FSD entered Armenia in September 2012 and according to the Statement of Work to project would have

been completed by end of April 2013. By managing funds appropriately, managed to get a one month no

cost extension approved to end the project by 31 May 2013.

KEY PARTICIPANTS

FSD conducted the NTS Project from a technical perspective and all results are available from the CHDE.

The Armenian Ministry of Defense was actively involved and for the duration of the project lended

immense support. The Armenian CHDE Board was continuously informed of the FSD progress and

activities during the operation. The MOD also informed all Marzpets and Regional Authorities of FSD

presence in impacted communities and no restrictions was experienced.

The Armenian Center for Humanitarian Demining and Expertise (CHDE) was actively involved in

assisting and tasking FSD during the duration of the project. The CHDE made positive inputs for the

project to be successful and this is indicated clearly in the results of the NTS project. FSD also have to

thank Mr. Ruben Arakelyan (Director of the CHDE) for his continuous support and assistance to the

project.

FINANCES

The overall budget that FSD have received from PM/WRA was USD $391, 000.00. These funds were

spend on NTS Training, procuring NTS equipment, renting and maintenance of vehicles, office rent

and operational running cost. The total budget was managed and supported by the FSD support office

in Manila, Philippines.

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

24

• NTS is a thorough investigation of new or previously recorded hazardous areas.

• Non-technical methods like the consolidation of previous recorded material, interviews with

different authorities, community interviews, map reading and survey tools are being used,

making it relatively low cost procedure in relation to technical survey and clearance operations.

• NTS result that technical survey and clearance can be cost effectively focused on to accurately

defined areas.

• NTS procedures are the initial gathering of information and only confirmed and accurate

information is recorded in the FSD/CHDE database.

• The CHDE should investigate the relevance of these criteria and collected data to develop the

Armenian Mine Action Strategy and National Policies based on IMAS.

ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE OF ARMENIA

Armenia has a three level administrative system – national, regional (province = Marz) and

community. Administratively, Armenia consists of 10 Marzes (Provinces) and the city Yerevan, the

capital of the country, which has a Marz status. There is no intermediate administrative structure

between Marz and Community, such as districts, which used to exist in Soviet times. The names of

Provinces are as follows: Ararat, Armavir, Aragatsotn, Tavoush, Vayots Dzor, Kotayk, Gegarkounik,

Lori, Shirak, Syunik, and the city of Yerevan.

COMMUNITY SELF-IDENTIFICATION

Armenia has a well-developed territorial-administrative system. There are no nomadic communities in

Armenia and no seasonal settlements were included in both the original and updated Gazetteers. All

suspected communities had: a fixed location, cadastral area, official and elected self-governing body

composed of a village leader and council of elderly, Each village had an official stamp. All

communities were indicated on the official maps and even road maps so they could be easily identified

and found.

Communities were then visited and the survey teams interviewed the local population, including

authorities responsible for each community. A community meeting was held in those communities

reported as being affected by mines or UXO. The community members and the leadership were then

asked to define their community in spatial and social terms. The FSD Survey teams will then do a

physical visual visit of each area and log, map and report each area. GPS readings were taken at all areas

that could be physically visited.

All communities had their administrative cadastral maps and in none of the cases was the community

self-definition different from that of the government gazetteer. In a few cases, the community

members reported about using the lands administratively belonging to other communities or belonging

to the state reserve (central government). In such cases, a separate survey in the community was

25

conducted and suspected area(s) were documented as to document the impact on the community and

ascribe it with an impact score. A special comment on the shared status of the area was entered onto

NTS IMSMA Forms.

REPORTING FORMS

The Armenia NTS have reported this project on 3 different forms, including:

¢ NTS IMSMA Forms - th e s e fo r m s c o n ta i n a l l t h e pr o o f a sso c i a t e d w i t h al l re c o rd e d

C H A s/ S H A s , i n c l u d i n g i n t e rv i e w s , p i c t u re s a n d m ap s ;

¢ Google Earth – With the lack of an IMSMA Database, the FSD Teams recorded and mapped each

CHA/SHA on Google Earth and this is also available from the CHDE;

¢ IMSMA Victim Reports – All victims interviewed during the NTS project was recorded onto

these forms and the forms are available from the CHDE.

RESTRICTED MILITARY ZONE (BORDER BUFFER ZONE)

Restricted military zones or border buffer zones are territory on Armenian soil, which is within the

proximity of 500 meters from the state border and is not accessible for civilians. As back in Soviet

times, there was not actual border between Armenia and Azerbaijan, the international state border was

established once the Soviet Union collapsed. No matter if the military activities would or would not

start between Armenia and Azerbaijan, the new state border had to be established, like the state border

of Armenia with Turkey. Usually the buffer zone is identified as 500 meters inside the country

counted from the actual border; however, it does very much depend on the landscape and in some

places varies between 200 and 2000 meters.

Once the new international state borders were established between Armenia and Azerbaijan after the

collapse of the USSR, the buffer zone was drawn and civilian access to these areas was discontinued.

This issue does not have strong links with the landmine and / or UXO contamination of the area, as the

restricted military zone would have to be established no matter if there were military activities

between Armenia and Azerbaijan (respectively if there was landmine and / or UXO contamination) or

not.

THE TOTAL VISIT AND SURVEY EFFORT

Please see attached table to indicate communities visited and the total survey effort.

Table 3: ARARAT MARZ

No

Community/Area

Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/sq.m

Number

of

CHAs

CHAs

area

/sq.

m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

area

/sq.

m./

Total

Number

of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

Ararat

1 Yeraskh - 18712000 0 0 0 0 0 0

2

Paruyr Sevak

-

81320000

0

0

0

0

0

0

one BMP

PG-9 type

fire,

two ՛՛Shilka՛՛ 23

mm fires

3 Zangakatun - 103870000 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total

0

203902000

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

Table 4: GEGHARKUNIK MARZ

No

Community/Area

name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total Area/sq.m.

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

area /sq.

m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

area /sq.

m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found Mines/UXO

Vardenis

1 Pambak 631 40980000 2 229000 0 0 2 229000

2 Tretuk 237 17131200 1 766000 0 0 1 766000

3 Sotk 940 75840000 3 658500 1 136000 4 794500

4

Norabak

267

51600000

2

68000

3

4713114

5

4781114

Aerial Bomb

5 Azat 160 14380600 1 449021 1 2826000 2 3275021

6 Nerkin Shorja 130 23210000 0 0 2 900000 2 900000

7 Verin Shorja 60 22100000 0 0 2 104500 2 104500

8 Kut 232 29500000 1 998000 0 0 1 998000

9 Tsapatagh 393 30510000 1 2504 0 0 1 2504 1 GRAD shell

10 Daranak - 11000000

11 Areguni - 10000000

12 Geghamasar - 23520000

13 Avazan - 17745000

14 Arpunk - 17210000

15 Kakhakn - 39726000

16 Mets Masrik - 38400000

17 Geghamabak - 49040000

18 Jaghatsadzor - 11600000

19 Akunk - 94480000

No

Community/Area

name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/sq.m.

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

area /sq.

m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

area /sq.

m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

20

Khachaghbyur

-

47460000

21

Geghakar

-

11480000

22

Kutakan

-

26000000

23

Akhpradzor

-

46596000

Total

3050

749508800

11

3171025

9

8679614

20

11850639

Chambarak

24

Martuni village, Getik

1149

28200500

0

0

1

530000

1

530000

25

Ttujur

2800

19130400

0

0

1

631500

1

631500

26

Vahan

1230

28500000

2

66000

0

0

2

66000

1 GRAD shell

27

Chambarak

-

90000000

28

Aghberk

-

39500000

29

Shorja

-

37160000

30

Artanish

-

56240700

31

Jil

-

52400000

Total

5179

351131600

2

66000

2

1161500

4

1227500 Total 8229 1100640400 13 3237025 11 9841114 24 13078139 27

Table 5: SYUNIK MARZ

No

Community/Area

Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/sq.m./

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

Area /sq.

m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs Area

/sq. m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

1

Davit Bek

865

20020000

3

20000

0

0

3

20000

one AP

OZM-72

2

Chakaten

118

55320000

3

23700

0

0

3

23700

five 100 mm shells

/AXO/

1 OZM-72 AP mine

3

Srashen

115

21220000

6

58350

0

0

6

58350

one PG-7 fire/AXO/;

one

“PTURS” device missile

/UXO/; four

imporvised

AP mines

4

Nerkin Hand

82

60790000

5

170000

0

0

5

170000

five BM21 (GRAD)

rockets

/UXO/;

one AP PMN-2 mine

No

Community/Area

Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/sq.m./

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

Area /sq.

m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

Area

/sq. m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

5

Geghanush

378

22234000

1

957000

0

0

1

957000

parts of

granade lancher

shells /not explosive/

6

Khdrants

38

5600000

1

40000

0

0

1

40000

BM21 (GRAD)

rocket (UXO)

7

Yegheg

-

10121000

-

-

-

-

-

-

8

Sevakar

-

15600000

-

-

-

-

-

-

9

Syunik

community

-

45060000

-

-

-

-

-

-

10

Agarak village

195

16660000

6

416740

0

0

6

416740

AT granade (AXO); Bodies of GRAD type

shell;

one part of

GRAD type shell

11

Yeghvard village

300

12700000

12

611575

0

0

12

611575

12

Kaghnut

58

5400000

7

266257

0

0

7

266257

OZM-72 mine

body

No

Community/Area

Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/sq.m./

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

Area /sq.

m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

Area

/sq. m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

13

Uzhanis

92

10490000

3

23152

0

0

3

23152

BM21 (GRAD)

rocket

(UXO);

OZM-72 mine charge

14

Shikahogh

180

15800000

7

147480

0

0

7

147480

15 mortar

mines

Berdik church

area

-

16320450

0

0

2

1872957

2

1872957

total 2421 333335450 54 2734254 2 1872957 56 4607211 28

Sisian

15 Angeghakot - 45790000 - - - - - - 16 Shaghat - 111800000 - - - - - - 17 Mutsk - 20000000 - - - - - - 18 Salvard - 51810000 - - - - - - 19 Arevis - 58560000 - - - - - - 20 Dastakert - 19320000 - - - - - - 21 Nzhdeh - 25472900 - - - - - - 22 Brnakot - 73000000 - - - - - -

total 405752900 - - - - - - 1

Meghri 23 Kuris - 14310000 - - - - - - 24 Gudemnis - 8020000 - - - - - -

No

Community/Area

Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/sq.m./

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

Area /sq.

m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

Area

/sq. m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

25 Agarak city - 3650000 - - - - - - 26 Karchevan - 32000000 - - - - - - 27 Shvanidzor - 42220000 - - - - - - 28 Vahravar - 8020000 - - - - - -

Bartas Mountain

area

-

11500000

0

0

2

842500

2

842500

29 Nrnadzor 174 117830000 2 56200 0 0 2 56200

total

174

237550000

2

56200

2

842500

4

898700

8

Goris

30 Vorotan - 1430000 - - - - - - 31 Aravus - 4650000 - - - - - - 32 Vaghatur - 16920000 - - - - - - 33

Kornidzor

1260

28000000

1

39000

0

0

1

39000

BM21 (GRAD)

rocket

(UXO)

34 Shurnukh 200 23440000 2 3300 0 0 2 3300 35 Khnatsakh 1400 36860000 2 710 0 0 2 710 36 Khoznavar 418 25760000 4 23270 0 0 4 23270

37

Khndzoresk

2300

67127000

3

5250

0

0

3

5250

one OZM-

72 AP mine;

one TM-62 mine MVP- 62 fuse;

nine 100 mm shells (AXO)

No

Community/Area

Name

Number

of

Impacted

Populatio

n

Total

Area/sq.m./

Numbe

r of

CHAs

CHAs

Area /sq.

m./

Numbe

r of

SHAs

SHAs

Area

/sq. m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number

of

Complete

d Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

38

Nerkin Khndzoresk

317

5680000

3

487000

0

0

3

487000

14 TM-62- M MVCh-

62 fuse parts;

one armoured

vehicle shell

/without fuse/ (UXO)

39 Hartashen 749 31670000 3 193600 0 0 3 193600 40 Tegh 2625 38660000 1 3000 0 0 1 3000

Syunik forestry

/Shurnukh,

Artsvanik sub-

branches/

-

14000000

1

14000000

0

0

1

14000000

Goris-Kapan M-

2 highway

272+000 --

276+300 km

segment

-

115000

2

52700

0

0

2

52700

total 9269 294312000 22 14807830 0 0 22 14807830 52 TOTAL 11864 1270950350 78 17598284 4 2715457 82 20313741 89

Table 6: TAVOUSH MARZ

No

Community/Area Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total Area/Sq.m./

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

Area /sq. m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

Area /sq.

m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total Area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found Mines/UXO

Shamshadin

1

Chinari

-

9815000

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

Aygedzor

2453

29180000

1

65400

0

0

1

65400

3

Artsvaberd

-

126640000

0

0

0

0

0

0

Kolagir +Mehrab

/toponym/

-

32000000

3

44100

0

0

3

44100

4

Nerkin Karmir Aghbyur

1130

19708600

1

1800

0

0

1

1800

one unexploded BM21/GRAD/ /UXO/

5

Paravakar

1728

38575000

5

79950

0

0

5

79950

6

Aygepar

-

270000

0

0

0

0

0

0

7

Choratan

-

19774400

0

0

0

0

0

0

8

Movses

-

27680000

0

0

0

0

0

0

9

Verin Tsaghkavan

-

15000000

0

0

0

0

0

0

No

Community/Area

Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/Sq.m./

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

Area

/sq. m./

Number

of SHAs

SHAs

Area

/sq. m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total Area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number

of

Complete

d Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

10

Varagavan

-

12000000

0

0

0

0

0

0

Total

5311

330643000

10

191250

0

0

10

191250

56

Noyemberyan

11

Berdavan

3256

39655000

2

2000

0

0

2

2000

12

Voskevan

1530

19540000

1

4300

0

0

1

4300

13

Baghanis

955

12470000

2

8100

0

0

2

8100

14

Barekamavan

611

19770000

2

4200

0

0

2

4200

15

Koti

2507

50115000

3

2600

0

0

3

2600

16

Koghb

-

37020000

0

0

0

0

0

0

17

Dovegh

-

11270000

0

0

0

0

0

0

Dovegh forestry

8680000

0

0

1

8680000

1

8680000

18

Jujevan

-

65000000

0

0

0

0

0

0

19

Voskepar

-

63950000

0

0

0

0

0

0 Total

8859

327470000

10

21200

1

8680000

11

8701200 45

Ijevan

20

Kirants

-

65551000

21

N.Tsaghkavan

-

54020000

22

Berkaber

-

11840000

No

Community/Area

Name

Number of

Impacted

Population

Total

Area/Sq.m./

Number

of CHAs

CHAs

Area

/sq. m./

Numbe

r of

SHAs

SHAs

Area /sq.

m./

Total

Number of

Hazardous

Areas

Total Area

of

Hazardous

Areas /sq.

m./

Number of

Completed

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UXO

23

Sarigyugh

-

13180000

1 KS artillery shell without fuse and 2 shells with fuses /AXO/

24

Sevqar

81800000

25

Achajur

53580000

26

Ditavan

9077000

27

Aygehovit /Kayan/

18750000

Aygehovit forestry

4790000

0

0

1

4790000

1

4790000

28

Vazashen

16500000

one F-1 grenade

29

Azatamut

438000

Total

0

329526000

0

0

1

4790000

1

4790000

43 TOTAL

14170

987639000

20

212450

2

13470000

22

13682450

144

Table 7: VAYOTS DZOR MARZ

N

Community/Ar ea

Name

Number of

Impacted

Populatio n

Total

Area/sq.m.

/

Numbe r

of CHAs

CHA s

Area

/sq.

m./

Numbe r

of SHAs

SHA s

Area

/sq.

m./

Total

Number of

Hazardou s

Areas

Total area of

Hazardou s

Areas

/sq. m./

Number of

Complete d

Victim

Reports

Found

Mines/UX O

Yeghegnadzor

1 Khachik - 73030000 - - - - - -

2 Gnishik - 67140000 - - - - - -

3 Areni - 43360000 - - - - - -

4 Chiva - 30872000 - - - - - -

5 Yelpin - 44800000 - - - - - -

6 Agarakadzor - 57607000 - - - - - -

Total 316809000

-

-

-

-

-

-

Vayk

7 Khndzorut - 73000000 - - - - - -

8 Nor Aznaberd - 17000000 - - - - - -

9 Bardzruni 460 30060000 3 66794 0 3 66794

10 Zaritap

-

37400000

-

-

-

-

-

-

11 Jermuk

-

53359000

-

-

-

-

-

-

12 Gomk

-

38000000

-

-

-

-

-

-

13

3

Artavan

-

72770000

-

-

-

-

-

-

14 Sers - 28710000

15 Martiros - 57078600

Total 460 407377600 3 66794 3 66794

TOTAL 460 724186600 3 66794 - - 3 66794 9

Findings of this report can only be changed by the CHDE and the results within will be endorsed by

them. For the Google Earth data, the CHDE must be contacted person.

RUBEN ARAKELYAN JOHANNES ODENDAAL

Director Program Manager

Center for Humanitarian Demining and Expertise FSD Armenia