ICBL Daily Update #3 from the 4MSP

(Thursday 19 September 2002 ) Mine Clearance, Mine Awareness and Related Technologies and Stockpile Destruction

Mine Clearance, Mine Awareness and Related Technologies

The Session on Mine Clearance, Mine Awareness and Related Technologies co-chaired by Yemen and Germany was held on Thursday 19 September 2002. Germany started by underlining the important studies and presentation made by ICBL and Mine Action Working Group in the Intersessional meetings in January and May 2002 looking at where we stand today and what progress we have made in relation to mine clearance and the obligation in Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty. He continued by noting the fact that we are on the right track in spite of much more work to be done. One concern is the situation of funding and he welcomed the initiative made by Norway earlier this day on developing an informal group focusing on enhanced resource mobilization and new ways for funding.

Bob Eaton, on behalf of the Mine Action Working Group of ICBL gave a presentation where he looked further into the work from January and May on where we stand in relation to the 10-year deadline for mine clearance. (Read presentation)

The session continued with two presentation from UN: ­ UNMAS and UNDP. UNMAS welcomed the initiative from the MAWG regarding the need for more Landmine Impact Surveys to get a better picture of the actual mine problem and the need for national plans and priorities. UNMAS and GICHD are working on a reporting template that will help getting more information on mined areas, cleared areas and about unit clearance costs. Furthermore, UNMAS talked about the translation process of the IMAS and ended by mentioning the Rapid Response Plan that emerged as a response to concerns for returning refugees in various countries after conflict where there is an emergent need for both Mine Risk Education and clearance. UNDP gave a presentation of the existing programs and focused on the importance of capacity building.

HI France gave a presentation on Mine Risk Education and focused on the need to improve this by using all resources and information available, to be able to act rapid in emergency situation and to look at data on incidents in order to achieve better targeting of Mine Risk Education. The Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) noted the fact that there is a lack of new and groundbreaking initiatives in relation to mine clearance technology, but continued by presenting some of the existing technology in mine clearance that is actually working and that is being used in the field.

After the presentations there were some interventions and statement from the floor basically focusing on the situation in their own countries. Chad started by giving a picture of the situation in the country after the completion of the Landmine Impact Survey. Angola focused on the humanitarian crises in the country and asked for international support in order to resolve this. Other statements were made by the Netherlands, Thailand, Japan and Tunisia.

The ICBL Mine Risk Education (MRE) Sub-Working Group gave a short statement underlining the fact that we are not here in order to create new institutions but we are here to respond to the needs of human beings affected by landmines. (Read presentation)

Stockpile Destruction - Informal Consultations

The Co-Chairs of the Standing Committee on Stockpile Destruction, Vice Skracic and Peter Truswell of Croatia and Australia respectively, gave a brief summary of the work of the Standing Committee over the past year and recent developments reported by States Parties. Particular emphasis was given to the importance of all States Parties meeting the 4 year stockpile destruction obligation with the first deadlines approaching for many States Parties starting in March, 2003. This was also stressed by Steve Goose, chair of the ICBL Treaty Working Group, who, as is the practice at each Standing Committee on Stockpile Destruction, gave a global overview of the status of stockpile destruction based on Landmine Monitor 2002 findings.

Following the overview, interventions were made by 16 states and others, as follows: Chile, Jordan, Italy, Canada, Mozambique, Senegal, New Zealand, Switzerland, Macedonia, Croatia, Congo, GICHD, Tunisia, Thailand, Belarus, UNDP, OAS, Algeria and Argentina.

The establishment of an informal Stockpile Destruction Contact Group was welcomed. States Parties gave updates on the status of stockpile destruction in their respective countries, including Croatia which reported they would be completing their stockpile destruction on 23 October 2002 and invited interested states and other partners to participate. All states which spoke who still are in the process of destroying their stockpiles stated they intended to meet the deadline for their respective countries. Several states appealed for technical and/or financial assistance and offers of assistance were made by the GICHD, UNDP and OAS, while Switzerland continues to offer the stockpile destruction course for mine-affected countries. Canada stated that their reasons for provision of assistance to Ukraine and other countries were twofold: to help states parties meet their stockpile destruction deadlines; and to encourage universalization.

The remaining interventions will be made by the following states the following morning: Guatemala, Peru, Uganda, Japan and Nicaragua, Ecuador, DR Congo and Romania. The Co-Rapporteurs for the Stockpile Destruction Standing Committee are Mr. Radu Horumba and Mr. Rene Haug of Romania and Switzerland respectively. They will take over as Co-Chairs next year along with Italy and Guatemala.