这一宣传是不正确的。
This claim is false.
11月23日与卢旺达政府举行的会议不足两小时，主要是讨论程序问题。
The one meeting held on 23 November with the Government of Rwanda was less than two hours long, dealing mainly with procedural issues.
双方协议将实质性讨论推迟，直至有调查表可用。
Substantive discussions were deferred, by mutual agreement, to whenever the questionnaire became available.
尽管专家组在卢旺达逗留一段时候，但没有再举行任何会议。
No further meetings were held, although the Group spent some time in Rwanda.
调查表于2005年1月10日提交，当时报告草稿和最后报告都已提交。
The questionnaire was submitted on 10 January 2005, by which time both the draft report and the final report had been submitted.
我们应提到，专家组自己确认在2004年10月23日之前向乌干达共和国寄发该国政府要求的调查表。
The Republic of South Africa, going by the Group's report, also seems to have received its questionnaire in good time.
南非共和国似乎也在适当时候收到其调查表，卢旺达还希望提醒安理会说，要求提供关注问题清单并非新的现象，而是与专家组在其编印第一次报告过程中于2004年6月18日举行的会议上所决定的工作方法。
Rwanda further wishes to remind the Council that the request for a list of concerns was not a new phenomenon but had been a modus operandi decided on during the meeting held with the Group on 18 June 2004 during the course of the production of the Group's first report.
因此卢旺达认为，专家组没有与卢旺达共和国政府合作，违反了安全理事会第1533（2004）号决议的规定。
Rwanda therefore considers that, contrary to the provisions of Security Council resolution 1533 (2004), the Group did not cooperate with the Government of the Republic of Rwanda.
3. 报告中卢旺达一节处处前后矛盾、含糊不清而且含沙射影。
To some degree this is inevitable given the fact the Group has never considered clarification of key terms and concepts a priority as requested by many, including the Government of the Republic of Rwanda.
这在某种程度上是不可避免的，因为事实上专家组从来就没有考虑要根据许多方面，包括卢旺达共和国政府的要求，优先澄清主要条件和概念，而是把要求澄清理解为企图阻挠。
Instead, requests for clarification have been construed as attempts at obstruction.
卢旺达喜见事实上专家组现在认为，重要的是，除其他外应重提安全理事会第1493（2003）号决议所确定的禁运目标以澄清禁运的条件和危险。
Rwanda welcomes the fact that the Group now considers it important that, inter alia, the target of the embargo as defined in Security Council resolution 1493 (2003) be revisited with a view to clarifying the terms and exemption of the embargo.
专家组最后了解到，第1493（2003）号决议的条件可以有各种不同的解释。
The Group has finally realized that the terms of resolution 1493 (2003) are subject to a variety of interpretations.
这正是卢旺达政府在专家组编印其第一次报告之前于2004年7月18日向专家组提出的观点。
This is the point that the Government of Rwanda made to the Group on 18 July 2004, before production of its first report.
除非明确澄清各种用语、概念和工作方法，否则专家组的报告基本上可能仍然是谬误无效的。
Unless terms, concepts and methods of work are clarified in a transparent manner, the reports of the Group are likely to continue to be fundamentally flawed.
卢旺达政府认为，专家组本身必须避免创造“政治和军事权宜联盟”，“无管制的武装某国”，“安全安排”等用语，这些用语虽然可用来便于作为针对个人、政府和组织的宣传工具，但不利于完成其根据第1493（2003）号决议所承担的任务。
The Government of Rwanda believes that the Group itself needs to refrain from inventing terms and concepts such as “political and military alliances of convenience”, “uncontrolled armed groups”, “security arrangements” and so forth, which while they may serve as convenient propaganda tools against individuals, Governments and organizations, are counterproductive to the fulfilment of its mandate under resolution 1493 (2003).
4. 专家组宣称没有收到要求卢旺达政府提供的资料，包括民航记录和海关文件。
The Group makes the claim that information requested of the Government of Rwanda, including civil aviation records and customs documentation, has not been provided.
政府愿正式指出，专家组直到2005年1月10日才要求提供这些资料。
The Government wishes to record that the Group's request for such information was made only on 10 January 2005.
而当时专家组已提交其最后报告。
By then, the Group's final report had been submitted.
政府愿意提供资料但不能理解其目的何在，因为事实上专家组在没有尝试收集完整资料就已作出结论并发表其报告。
The Government is willing to provide the information, but is at a loss as to what purposes it will be put to, given the fact that the Group has already drawn its conclusions and published its report without attempting to gather complete information.
关于要求提出军事预算一事，政府愿通知说，卢旺达军事预算是公开文件。
As for the request for military budgets, the Government wishes to inform that Rwanda's military budget is a public document.
2005年军事预算作为2004年12月30日第41/2004号法载于公报2004年12月31日特刊上供大众取阅。
The 2005 military budget is found in the official journal, special edition of 31 December 2004, as law No. 41/2004 of 30 December 2004, and is available to the public.
卢旺达没有注意到专家组“一再要求”提供这些资料。
Rwanda is unaware of “repeated requests” for this information by the Group.
二. 民航
Civil aviation
5. 卢旺达设立了一个认证委员会方便向所有空运机、飞机和人员签发证件。
Rwanda has put in place a Certification Committee, which facilitates the issuance of documents to all air carriers, aircraft and personnel.