States Parties 156 States Not Party 39
Signatories 108 Non-Signatories 87
The Convention on Cluster Munitions is the international agreement that bans cluster munitions. When they join the Convention on Cluster Munitions, states commit to:
Ninety-four countries signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions at its Signing Ceremony held in Oslo, Norway, on 3 December 2008. The convention entered into force on 1 August 2010. See the current lists of signatories and non signatories.
No, the convention completely bans the use of cluster munitions and does not allow for reservations. A State Party cannot join and then reserve the right to use cluster munitions in the future or in special circumstances.
The convention also forbids State Parties to "assist, encourage or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Convention" (Article 1). States Parties are required to promote universalization of the Convention, to notify states not party of their treaty obligations, and to discourage states not party from using cluster munitions. States Parties may engage in military cooperation and operations with states not party that might engage in prohibited activities.
As part of its advocacy on universalization of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, the ICBL urges all countries to join the convention.
To become formally bound by its provisions, a government that has signed the convention needs to ratify it by taking the required steps at the national level and submitting an instrument of ratification to the UN. Once a country signs the convention, it has a legal obligation to refrain from activities that would defeat the object and purpose of the convention – even if it has not yet ratified it.
Since the convention entered into force on 1 August 2010, states that have not signed it must accede to it. This implies firstly following national procedures for joining an international treaty e.g. submitting it for the approval of the national parliament or assembly; and secondly, depositing an instrument of accession at the office of the United Nations Secretary-General in New York. An instrument of accession is a document in which a government declares its acceptance of the convention and commitment to its implementation.
See the ratification toolkit prepared by the International Committee of the Red Cross.
It is regrettable that any country would stay outside the convention, especially major users and producers of the weapon. However, this does not take away from the importance of the convention, nor weaken its achievements as one of the few current success stories in international humanitarian law and multilateral diplomacy.
Many countries that are actually affected by cluster munitions or that have produced or stockpiled cluster munitions have joined the convention.
Based on the experience of the Mine Ban Treaty, we can expect that the convention will stigmatize the use of these weapons and contribute to the establishment of a norm that considers them unacceptable. As a consequence, use of cluster munitions is likely to decline even among countries that do not formally adhere to the convention.
Nevertheless, the ICBL urges all countries to embrace a ban on cluster munitions and take a step towards the convention.
Non-state armed groups may not become States Parties since only recognized governments may join. However, these groups may make use of mechanisms, like Deeds of Commitment or Codes of Conduct, where they declare their commitment to stop the use, production, transfer and stockpile of cluster munitions, destroy stockpiles and cooperate in victim assistance and clearance activities. So far, only a limited number of non-state armed groups have used cluster munitions, including Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006.
The convention aims to promote transparency and trust amongst States Parties. Non-governmental organizations therefore have an important role in monitoring and encouraging compliance. The ICBL's Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor reports on the universalization and implementation of the convention.
States Parties are required to take "national implementation measures", such as passing domestic legislation banning cluster munitions.
States Parties will have to submit detailed annual transparency reports to the UN Secretary-General about the type and quantity of cluster munitions in stock and destroyed, progress on identifying and clearing contaminated areas, measures taken to assist victims, and national and international contributions to convention implementation (among other issues).
The convention envisages regular Meetings of States Parties, which represent an important occasion for reviewing and monitoring implementation.
Article 8 of the convention outlines a procedure to address possible cases of non-compliance: States Parties can submit requests for clarification via the UN Secretary-General. If no satisfactory clarification is obtained, a Meeting of States Parties may suggest to the States Parties concerned ways and means further to clarify or resolve the matter under consideration, including the initiation of appropriate procedures in conformity with international law.
As with the Mine Ban Treaty, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) play a crucial role in encouraging compliance with and universalization of the convention. This is done by making public statements condemning and stigmatizing any breach of the convention and seeking clarification about the interpretation or application of certain elements of the convention.
The ICBL’s Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor also plays an important role in monitoring implementation of and compliance with the convention, and more generally in assessing the efforts of the international community to resolve the problem posed by cluster munitions and other explosive remnants of war. While it is not a technical verification system or formal inspection regime, in the case of the Mine Ban Treaty, the Monitor report has proven to be another important mechanism for holding governments accountable.
NGOs, through their monitoring and advocacy activities, can help strengthen the international norm against any use or possession of cluster munitions by anyone, which is essential for the successful implementation of the convention.
The process that led to the signing of the Convention on Cluster Munitions was closely modeled on the so-called Ottawa process which had brought about the Mine Ban Treaty one decade earlier.
As in the case of the Mine Ban Treaty, the Convention on Cluster Munitions was the product of a cohesive and strategic partnership between governments, international organizations, UN agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and civil society represented by the Cluster Munition Coalition, of which the ICBL is a leading member.
Once again, small and medium sized countries (including leaders in the process such as Norway, Austria, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru and others) came together and decided on a course of action. They took the lead and were not held back by some of the superpowers that had not yet agreed to ban cluster munitions (such as China, Russia and the USA).
The Oslo Process was a fast-track initiative outside traditional diplomacy fora, which led to the negotiation and signature of the convention in just under two years (between February 2007 and December 2008). Civil society played a major role in the actual drafting of the convention, from its earliest stages.
For more information: Ban History
