With all of the countries on the continent, save for Somalia, being States Parties, the focus in Africa in regards to this issue lies in effective victim assistance and treaty implementation (specifically, clearance)
Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government (TFG) has expressed an intention to join the Treaty. Various factions within the country continue to purchase and use mines and at least 276 mine/UXO casualties were recorded in the last Landmine Monitor reporting period
Guinea-Bissau, Nigeria and the Republic of Congo reported the complete destruction of their stockpiles in 2005; Angola will reach its deadline on 1 January 2007, and Burundi and Sudan in 2008
Within the last year, landmine use in Africa was restricted to use by rebel groups and similar non-state actors in Burundi, Guinea-Bissau and Senegal
Rwanda, whose demining program had been inactive for years, began to operate again in early 2006 when a new team of 140 trained and equipped de-miners began to work in conjunction with three technical advisors from Mines Awareness Trust
Article 5 of the Treaty requires the destruction of all anti-personnel mines in mined areas within the jurisdiction or control of a State Party. Due to renewed conflict, insufficient funding for equipment and other factors, there are several African states that may be off course to meet their upcoming deadlines, most notably Mozambique, Niger, Senegal and Zimbabwe.
In 2005, a UN panel put forth allegations that Ethiopia had supplied unspecified types of landmines to factions in Somalia – the Ethiopian government has denied this

Suggested Angles

Anti-personnel Mines and Development

AP mines relate strongly to many aspects of development, as they hinder access to agriculture, education, and aid and can reduce or prevent production at community, regional and national levels. This relationship has been apparent from the start of the campaign for a mine-free world, but now, nearly ten years after the treaty, many donors are integrating mine action into development plans.

In Angola, mine action has been specifically identified in its Strategy to Combat Poverty 2004-2006. One of the Strategy’s goals is to “guarantee basic physical security through demining [and] disarmament”.
Mozambique’s second Poverty Reduction Strategy included mine action as a cross-cutting and sectoral issue, so as to encourage all development projects to include a demining component
At the 6MSP, Zambia announced that it had incorporated mine clearance strategies into its new 5 year national development plan – the goal is for development needs to drive humanitarian demining

From NGO Support to National Infrastructure: Addressing Sustainable Victim Assistance

Meeting the immediate needs of landmine victims is often a service provided by outside agencies such as NGOs or various UN bodies and with the financial support of foreign governments. The hope, of course, is that national governments will eventually be able to incorporate these services into their national health and economic policies as a measure of full implementation. This is easier said than done though, on a continent where poverty abounds and casualties run high.

Angolan nationalization of the physical rehabilitation sector continues to be hampered by a lack of government technical, managerial and financial capacity
Somalia has introduced a cost-sharing model in many hospitals and rehabilitation centres to reduce dependency on external funding

Africa’s Last Hold out – Somalia

Somalia is the last of all Sub-Saharan African states remaining outside of the Ottawa Convention, owing mostly to on-going domestic instability. New conflict broke out as recently as March 2006 but the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) seems to have regained control over the warlord led rebel groups, and they have given several signs favourable towards joining the Ban. At the same time however, some members of this government have taken actions to the contrary.

· In June 2005, the TFG’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Interior, reaffirmed his government’s resolve to accede to the treaty “as soon as practically possible,” and called for assistance, including for stockpile destruction” while in Geneva at the Intersessional Meetings.

Somalia has never been known to manufacture landmines, but they are widely available – for example, the Bakaraaha arms market in Mogadishu transacts $1.5 million a month in arms sales (including AP mines) to factional leaders according to a merchant interviewed in the market in April 2006
The UN Arms Embargo monitoring group reported that members of the TFG, including its president, and an opponent of the TFG had been involved in weapons transfers that included unspecified types of landmines.
The absence of a recognized central government in Somalia until mid-2005 prevented the creation of a national mine action authority. Instead, the UN focused on support for regional initiatives through its support for the SomalilandMineActionCenter and the Puntland Mine Action Center (PMAC) which has conducted some mine risk education activities

Potential Interviewees:

Dr. Robert Mtonga, Zambian Campaign to Ban Landmines

Mereso Agina, Kenya Coalition Against Landmines

Links to Side Events

“The International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: A Tool for Furthering Victim Assistance”

Tuesday, 19 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme Topics

Tuesday 19 September, Afternoon Session

-Clearing mined areas, victim assistance

Wednesday 20 September, Morning Session

-Assisting the victims

Wednesday 20 September, Afternoon Session

-Informal discussion on matters concerning the implementation of Article 5

AMERICAS (NORTH, CENTRAL AND SOUTH)

Regional Landmine Related Facts

Non States Parties – Cuba, United States of America

With the recent accession of Haiti to the Mine Ban Treaty, the Americas as a solid regional bloc of States Parties. Only Cuba and the USA remain as universalization challenges.
As such, the main issues faced by this region are treaty implementation – particularly clearance – and victim assistance
One particular implementation challenge is meeting the deadlines set out by Article V of the Treaty, which demands clearance of all mined areas within ten years of signing. Some states, such as Peru, Colombia, Ecuador and Chile will be reaching their deadlines within the next few years and do not appear to be on track, due to on-going domestic conflicts in which non-state actors continue to lay mines, and border issues in which the responsibility for de-mining is not always clear.
There are 7 mine affected states in this region, and four of the VA-24 (24 nations identified as having severe victim assistance needs) as well. These are El Salvador, Nicaragua, Colombia and Peru. The scale of the problem here is not on the same scale as other nations in other regions though, and consequently the funds needed for victim assistance programs are not readily available.

Suggested Angles

Looking the Other Way: Why The World Needs to Remember the Americas

The needs associated with being a mine affected country are valid throughout the world, but as with any issue, international attention tends to spotlight certain countries or regions at certain times, leaving others behind in the scramble for aid. This is what seems to be happening in South and Central America, an area with the highest Mine Ban Convention membership in the world. Aside from the financial ramifications, there is also a psychological consequence in that states feel overlooked and do not participate as Convention members.

The Falkland Islands

The United Kingdom is an original signatory of the Convention and while it has no mines on its mainland territories, the disputed Falkland Islands are very heavily mined from the UK-Argentina conflict over these islands and technically the UK is responsible for their clearance. Seven years after signing, a clearance program has not yet been initiated. Will the deadline be reached and if not feasible, what measures will the Convention take regarding extension?

The UK and the Falkland Islands government have stated on different occasions that there are between 101 and 120 minefields
No human casualties from mines or UXO have been reported in the Falklands since the 1982 conflict ended.
Clearance of mines in the Falklands is said to be hampered by the weather and ground conditions; high winds, soft ground and sand make detection and removal difficult
Following three and a half years of negotiations, on 11 October 2001, the UK and Argentina signed an Exchange of Notes Agreement on the establishment of a feasibility study on mine clearance in the Falklands.
The study established three phases: a) a preliminary study consisting of an initial assessment to determine objectives, methods, timetable and resources needed; b)a main study to conduct an analysis of the minefields, their locations, soil conditions, suitability of techniques, the priorities to be set and procedures to follow; and c) a final report, which would include recommendations to both governments regarding future action.

Clearance Complications: NSAGs and Border Issues

The vast majorities of American states have signed the Ottawa Convention but find their efforts at clearance complicated by two things: the actions of non-state armed groups (NSAGs) who continue to lay mines, and mined areas on disputed or unclear borders. For the first factor, Geneva Call has established a Deed of Commitment as a partner document to the Mine Ban Treaty, open to NSAGs only.

· For example, Peru estimates that there are more than 30,000 landmines on the Cordillera del Cóndor (Ecudorian border). The two nations have worked out a clearance strategy however.

Landmine Monitor has also reported on the possible existence of mines on the southern border with Chile, which were thought to have been displaced from the Chilean to the Peruvian side as a result of climatic conditions. However, Contraminas (the principal anti-mine body in Peru) maintains that there are none there.
Within Colombia, NSAGs are very active, particularly FARC. In July 2005, one soldier was killed and two others injured after an antipersonnel mine allegedly laid by FARC Front 47 exploded in San Franciso, Antioquia. In August 2005, four people including two priests were killed after walking into a minefield allegedly laid by FARC in the northeastern region of Norte de Santander department.

Potential Interviewees:

Stuart Maslen, Landmine Monitor Mine Action Thematic Coordinator (English)

Alvaro Jimenez Millan, Colombian Campaign to Ban Landmines (Spanish only)

Simona Beltrami, ICBL Advocacy Director (Spanish, Portuguese, English and Italian)

Links to Side Events:

“The Implementation of the Convention in Latin America”

Thursday, 21 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

“The International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: A Tool for Furthering Victim Assistance”

Tuesday, 19 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Tuesday 19 September, Afternoon Session

- Clearing mined areas

-Assisting the victims

EAST & SOUTH ASIA & THE PACIFIC

Regional Landmine Related Facts

States Parties – Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei, Cambodia, Cook Islands, Fiji,

Japan, Kiribati, Malaysia, Maldives, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Vanuatu.

Signatories - Indonesia, Marshall Islands

Non States Parties – Burma/Myanmar, China, India, Korea (North and South) Laos, Micronesia, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Palau, Sri Lanka, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vietnam

· Some positive steps in the name of universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty (MBT) occurred in 2005 when Laos confirmed its intention to accede to the MBT in the future, Vietnam indicated similar intentions and China voted in favour of the annual United Nations pro-ban resolution for the first time

· In June 2006 Taiwan entacted legislation that bans production and trade of anti-personnel mines and requires clearance within seven years

· Laos demined more territory than in any previous year – a 25% increase was made in 2005 leading to 15.7 square kilometers of cleared land. Thailand also exhibited high clearance rates

· Asia, as a region, is wracked by on-going Non-State Armed Group (NSAG) mine use. In 2005, there were instances of NSAGs laying mines in Nepal, Pakistan, Burma, India and Sri Lanka

· From January 2005-June 2006, new casualties were reported in sixteen countries or areas of the Asia Pacific, five of which are States Parties

· 39% of all 2005 casualties occurred in three states – two of which are in Asia. These are Afghanistan and Cambodia.

· Brunei ratified the Mine Ban Treaty on 24 April 2006

Suggested Angles

Why the Wait? Indonesia and the Marshall Islands

The Republic of Indonesia signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 4 December 1997. In October 2005, the President of Indonesia formally gave his approval to start the ratification process for the Mine Ban Treaty. A draft ratification law is under review.
The Republic of the Marshall Islands also signed the Mine Ban Treaty 4 December 1997
It is believed that close ties to the United States, a non-signatory, are part of the reason why the Marshall Islands have not moved to ratify. The islands are not mine-affected but there are considerable quantities of UXO left by WWII.

Building Bridges – India and Pakistan

Historic rivals India and Pakistan are both mine affected countries as well as producers of the weapon. Their shared border is heavily mined for the protection of each respectively. Getting one (or both) to sign the Treaty would not only be a confidence building measure in their relationship but a milestone in reaching universalization goals in that region.

· The Indian delegate to the Sixth Meeting of States Parties gave his country’s position on the issue as “…fully committed to the ultimate objective of a universal and global ban on anti-personnel landmines…we recognize the limitations of this Convention in not addressing national security concerns of States with long land borders…”

· Pakistan’s major objection to signing also has to do with its land-borders and insists that mines are crucial for self-defense

· A high-level Canadian delegation undertook a mission to both countries in 2005 to help foster communications on this subject – it was the first time Indian officials had met with a foreign delegation to discuss this issue specifically

· A governmental proposal for a join-moratorium with Pakistan on the use of anti-personnel mines on their border met with a positive response from the Indian Army, bilateral discussions between the two countries may address this further

· Additionally, after the massive earthquake in Pakistan in 2005, India conducted mine clearance to ensure that aid could be delivered to their neighbour

Potential Interviewees:

Satnam Jit Singh, ICBL Diplomatic Advisor

Mr. David Johnson, Australian CBL

Links to Side Events:

Panel Discussion on Implementation of Action #46 of the Nairobi Action Plan

“What practical steps can States and other actors take to promote mine action in areas where armed NSAs are active?”

Tuesday, 19 September 2006, 8:30-10:00

Room VIII, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme:

Tuesday 19 September, Afternoon Session

- Clearing mined areas

- Assisting the victims

Seventh Meeting of the States Parties

Thursday 21 September, Morning Session

-Destroying stockpiled mines

-Universalizing the Convention

COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES (CIS)

Regional Landmine Related Facts

States Parties – Belarus, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine

Non States Parties – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Uzbekistan

Post-Soviet regional and/or ethnic conflicts have accounted for a great amount of mines being deployed over the past 15 years. The most significant of these would be: Russian wars in Chechnya and Dagestan; the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict; the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict; border disputes between Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan; and the 1992 Transnistrian conflict in Moldova. Fallout from these conflicts or the possibility of resumption are stated most often as the reason that non states parties cannot accede to the treaty.
Almost all countries in the region were heir to stockpiles of Soviet AP landmines and other munitions. The biggest caches were in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. Signatories Moldova, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan have completed stockpile destruction as per article 4 of the treaty. Belarus and Ukraine are taking significant action on the destruction of their massive stockpiles.
Only Russia continues to produce antipersonnel (AP) landmines.
There were 459 known casualties in the region during 2005 (including 111 fatalities). Almost three quarters of these were in Russia with Azerbaijan and Georgia having the next highest amounts. Many of the casualties were from unexploded ordinance (UXO) or explosive remnants of war (ERW) other than AP landmines.
Reporting remains limited and/or inconsistent in many areas and transparency shortcomings are prevalent throughout the region.
Almost all countries have provisions and laws in place to provide for and protect the rights of disabled persons. Some countries differentiate between war disabled and others. However, in almost all instances, services are often inaccessible and inadequate in any case. Cases of discrimination against disabled persons are common.

Suggested Angles

15 Years later, the Soviet legacy lives on: Huge landmine and munitions stockpiles remain in Belarus, and Ukraine. Being states parties to the MBT helps with the overwhelming task of stockpile destruction

Soviet heritage left Ukraine with 6.7 million AP mines in its stockpiles and Belarus with 3.7 million.

Belarus signed in May 2006 a “statement of endorsement” to receive funds from the European Commission to start destruction of the PFM type mines by January 1, 2007. The EC has committed 3 million EUROS for this project.
Since 1999, Ukraine has destroyed over 500,000 AP mines. The EC and Ukraine are currently negotiating an agreement that would provide funds for the destruction of an additional 700,000 AP mines.

Who Will Blink First? Armenia and Azerbaijan

Both sides used landmines during the 1988-94 Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict and quite possibly in the years following the 1994 ceasefire which has often been violated.
Both countries continue to be affected, with 5 Armenians suffering injuries from landmines in 2005 and 64 Azeris, including 11 deaths.
Both countries have stated their unequivocal support for the Mine Ban Treaty in principal and have in some cases taken limited voluntary actions to support this stance.
Neither country appears willing to take decisive action and sign the Ottawa Convention until a final solution to the conflict is negotiated. Hence it has been proposed by civil society that both sides sign the Ottawa convention at a single time, perhaps proving to be the first step towards conflict resolution.

Will They Make The Deadline? Funding Cuts Undermine Tajikistan’s Efforts at Total Clearance

The mine problem in the country stems from the 1992-97 civil war and from the deployment of landmines by Russian and Uzbek forces along Tajik border locations.
Article 5 of the Ottawa Convention states that all parties must clear all mined territory within their juristiction within 10 years of signing the treaty.
The mine action authority in Tajikistan is the state run Commission on the Implementation of International Humanitarian Law (CIIHL) whose published plans include demining all high priority areas by the end of 2007 and all areas of the country by the end of 2009.
Of the $10.3 million the Tajikistan Mine Action Center (TMAC) envisaged they would receive in the three year period to 2006, only $5.3 million arrived. Only $100,000 of the $3 million sought for 2006 has arrived thusfar. TMAC estimates it will need $12 million in stable funding to complete its ariticle 5 obligations in time.

Links to MSP Programme Topics:

Thursday 21 September, Morning Session

- Destroying stockpiled mines

- Universalizing the Convention

MIDDLE EAST/NORTH AFRICA (MENA)

Regional Landmine Related Facts

States Parties –Algeria, Jordan, Qatar, Tunisia, Yemen

States not Parties – Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates

Universalization is a major challenge in the Middle East and North Africa, as only five countries out of 18 in the region are States Parties, yet many are mine affected
Egypt, Iran and Iraq are considered to be heavy stockpilers of the weapon
A massive clearance operation in Yemen eliminated mines and ERW from 12 out of 14 high-impact communities and released a record-setting 100 square kilometers of land in 2005
Libya started a national program for demining and land reclamation in April 2005
IraqiKurdistanMineActionCenter reported that as casualties in northern Iraq were falling, it planned to switch its clearance priorities to projects supporting economic growth rather than humanitarian tasks
The conflict between Israel and Lebanon in summer 2006 has left UXO littered throughout southern Lebanon, adding to existing landmine contamination, and raised new questions about how to conduct effective mines risk education in a post-war situation.

Links to Side Events:

Mines and ERW in Lebanon

Thursday, 21 September 2006, 8:30-10:00

Room XXIII, E Building, Palais des Nations

“The Humanitarian Crisis Caused by AP Mines and the Efforts of the Regional Government of Iraqi Kurdistan to resolve it “

Friday, 22 September 2006 , 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme Topics:

Thursday 21 September, Morning Session

-Destroying stockpiled mines

-Universalizing the Convention

BURMA / MYANMAR

Landmine Related Facts

The State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), which is the Union of Myanmar’s ruling military body, has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty.
Myanmar was one of 17 countries that abstained from voting on UN General Assembly Resolution (UNGA) 60/80 on 8 December 2005
Burmese borders with Thailand, Bangladesh and India are extensively mined, as are eastern parts of the country due to a decades-old struggles by ethnic minorities for autonomy
At least nine out of 14 states and divisions in Burma suffer from some mine contamination,
Landmine Monitor recorded 231 new landmine casualties in 2005, including 5 deaths
Humanitarian mine clearance, survivor assistance, mine risk education and the marking of mine affected areas occur on a basic and inadequate level throughout the country

Suggested Angles

No End in Sight - Burma/Myanmar’s Long Conflict

Myanmar has long history of conflict with its ethnic groups, leading to the creation of a military junta opposed by several non-state armed groups. The course of these conflicts has left this nation deeply mine-affected, with a high casualty rate and no capacity for mine action or much needed victim assistance. Moreover, there appears to be no change of course in sight for the near future.

The Myanmar Army has obtained, and is using an increasing number of antipersonnel mines of the United States M-14 design

The non-state armed group, United Wa State Army, is allegedly producing PMN-type antipersonnel mines at an arms factory formerly belonging to the Burma Communist Party
In October 2005 the junta made its first statement on anti-personnel mines: “[M]y delegation respects the position of the States parties to the Convention [Mine Ban Treaty]. At the same time, Myanmar believes that all states have the right to self-defence... But at the same time, we oppose the indiscriminate use of anti-personnel mines which causes death and injury to the innocent people all over the world... Based on the reality, a total ban would not lead to a practical or effective solution.”
November 2005, Military Heavy Industries reportedly began recruiting technicians for the production of the next generation of mines and other munitions
According to the Free Burma Rangers, an aid group, the Myanmar Army planted about 2,000 mines in the area east of Baw Ga Le Gyi (Kler Lah), Toungoo district, Karen state. Villagers had been told the Army would be conducting a sweep and placing landmines throughout the area, and were given a deadline of 16 January 2006 to vacate some cultivated areas.

Minefields and Military States Make the Delivery of Aid Nearly Impossible

NGOs and other aid groups are finding it increasingly hard to deliver very necessary aid and mine awareness programs to the citizens of Burma/Myanmar. With a casualty rate that reflects the continued use of anti-personnel mines within the state’s borders, simple access is often the biggest obstacle for aid workers, coupled with some strict state policies.

Copies of the Landmine Monitor sent to the National League for Democracy were seized by customs in Myanmar
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)-France closed its medical assistance program and withdrew from Burma, due to restrictions imposed by the authorities.
Marking and/or fencing of mined areas is rare.
In May 2006, Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported that civilians seeking refuge in Thailand have been placed at grave risk by landmines planted by the Myanmar Army along the border in Karen state. HRW also cited the figure of 2,000 mines laid, saying it was allegedly done to block escape routes and deny the civilian population access to food supplies, commodities and other humanitarian assistance.

The Problem of Non-State Armed Groups in Burma/Myanmar

Although the military state of Myanmar is an active producer and user of landmines, there are also a number of armed ethnic groups who use them as well, citing their need for a defence from the military authorities as their reason for doing so. These extra actors complicate efforts to achieve comprehensive mine action programs, not to mention having a similar effect on universalization efforts to persuade Burma/Myanmar to join the MBT.

Landmine Monitor has identified at least 17 non-state armed groups (NSAGs) that have used antipersonnel mines in Burma since 1999; some of these have ceased to exist or no longer use mines.
The Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA), the Karenni Army, the Shan State Army (South) (SSA-S), the Chin National Army (CNA), the United Wa State Army (UWSA), the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army and several other non-state armed groups continued to use antipersonnel mines in 2005 and 2006.
One positive development is that the CNA signed Geneva Call’s Deed of Commitment in summer 2006.
According to a reliable local source, the SSA-S laid mines in at least two locations that resulted in civilian casualties. Five people were killed in Jakooni village in February 2005; one Akha woman was killed and one injured in March 2005.
In December 2005, a SPDC-affiliated militia fought with the SSA-S over transit through their territory, and the SSA-S laid mines on a road, leading to the loss of two four-wheel drive vehicles belonging to the militia.
In November 2005, Indian rebels based in camps in Myothit, Saya San, Mintha and Minthamee Taung areas of Sagaing division in northwest Burma reportedly laid landmines along the border to prevent attacks by Indian soldiers which caused casualties among Kuki villagers and their cattle.
Some NSAGs expressed interest in a Geneva Call mission in March 2006 on the Thai-Burmese border

Potential Interviewees:

Mr. Yeshua Moser-Puangsuwan, Thematic Research Coordinator, Landmine Monitor

Links to MSP Side Events:

-The International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: A Tool for Furthering Victim Assistance

Tuesday, 19 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Thursday September 21, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Universalizing the Convention

CHINA

Landmine Related Facts

China is not a State Party
As one of the world’s largest producers of antipersonnel mines, China has two government-owned companies, China North Industries Corporation (NORINCO) and Chinese State Arsenals – together they have produced over 22 different types of mines
It is believed that China has the largest stockpile of mines in the world but exact figures are hard to come by, Based on interviews with non-Chinese government officials involved in Amended Protocol II discussions in 1995 and 1996, Landmine Monitor has estimated the Chinese antipersonnel mine stockpile at 110 million
The last reported mine casualty in China occurred in August 2005 when a 12 or 13 year old boy was injured
China has emplaced antipersonnel mines on its borders with Russia, India and Vietnam, in the 1990’s it was estimated by the USA that the Chinese had planted some 10 million mines along these borders

Suggested Angles

Chinese Cooperation with the Mine Ban Treaty on the Rise

Considered to be one of the ‘Big Five’ stumbling blocks to universalization, China has been taking actions – both diplomatic and material - that indicate to observers a potential attitude change regarding the Mine Ban Treaty.

In its September 2005 defense white paper, China stated, “Though China is not a party to the Ottawa Convention, it endorses the humanitarian purposes and objectives of the Convention and has been constantly strengthening exchanges and communication with State Parties.”
After having abstained from voting on the every annual UN General Assembly resolution calling for universalization and full implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty, China voted in favour of the resolution in December 2005
China has been modifying some antipersonnel mines and destroying others that do not meet CCW Amended Protocol II requirements for detectability or self-destruct mechanisms
In 2005, China sent a team of 10 trainers and equipment to Thailand to provide a three-month course for 30 Thai deminers
Statement from the 6MSP in 2005: “[China is] actively conducting research on humanitarian de-mining standard, technology, equipment and specific measures to prepare itself for more effective participation in the international humanitarian mine clearance efforts in the future.”

Potential Interviewees:

Mr. David Johnson, Australian Network to Ban Landmines

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Thursday September 21, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Universalizing the Convention

COLOMBIA

Landmine Related Facts

Colombia is a State Party to the MBT since 2001 and reported completing the destruction of stockpiled anti-personnel mines in 2004
Colombia is the most mine and ERW affected country in all of the Americas, owing to 40 years of internal conflict. Approximately 59 percent of the 1,092 municipalities of the country are mine affected. Only one of the 32 departments is not affected. Under the MBT it is due to complete clearance of affected areas by 1 March 2011
In 2005-2006 Colombia had the world’s highest number of reported new casualties (1110) – Under reporting is likely due to accidents happening in remote rural areas and security concerns
Non-state armed groups (NSAGs) continue to use and produce landmines in the context of the ongoing internal conflict

Suggested Angles

Words vs. Reality: The Impact of Government vs. NGO Action in Columbia

In a country with a disproportionately high casualty rate from mine and UXO accidents, the need for adequate victim assistance also grows exponentially.

1,110 casualties recorded in the reporting period (576 in the first five months of 2006) – the highest number in the world
Colombia is one of the 24 States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty identified as having the greatest needs in terms of victims assistance
Increase in casualties linked to coca eradication program (Plan Patriota) resulting in intensified use by non state armed groups aiming to protect their camps and coca fields
Survivors are increasingly engaged by the government in awareness campaigns and activities but , there is little information on the positive impact these government actions have on the actual life of survivors and their families
Private foundations, international organizations and NGOs are achieving results due to their presence and knowledge of the situation at the municipal and community level, and due to their cooperation and networking. They play a key role in providing assistance to all segments of society, as they are not identified with the government

The “New” Campaign to Ban Landmines – Dealing with Non-State Armed Groups (NSAG)

Use and production of mines by NSAGs is reported on a frequent basis, with the FARC as the principal user of antipersonnel mines, and regular reports of ELN use. There have been no specific reports of use of antipersonnel mines by AUC in this reporting period (since May 2005), though mines have been seized from and turned in by AUC members

Swiss-based NGO Geneva Call and the Colombian Campaign to Ban Landmines are engaged in dialogue with the ELN
Mine use by NSAGs is not only raising the casualty rate at an alarming rate, but also complicating de-mining efforts. Under Treaty obligations, Colombia should be mine-free by 2011. While the government can vouch for minefields under its control, it is uncertain whether it can do so for areas under its jurisdiction that rest under the control of NSAGs.

Potential Interviewees:

Mariano Jose Guerra Diaz – Retorno y Vida

Alvaro Jimenez Millan – Colombian Campaign to Ban Landmines

Links to MSP Side Events:

“Americas: A forgotten continent? – The challenges of implementation of the Convention in Latin America”

Thursday, 21 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Wednesday September 20, Afternoon Session

-Article V implementation discussion

Friday September 22, Morning Session

-Preventing and suppressing prohibited acts and facilitating compliance

Implementation support

GEORGIA (ABKHAZIA)

Landmine Related Facts

Georgia is not a state party to the Landmine Ban Treaty
Since independence, Georgia has not produced, imported or exported antipersonnel (AP) landmines, but did inherit an unknown quantity of Soviet AP landmines. Abkhazian forces also maintain a stockpile of AP landmines of an unknown quantity
While Georgia insists that it has upheld its 1996 moratorium on the use of AP landmines, there are serious allegations that Georgian forces used them from 2001-2004. No reports of use have surfaced since then
The area around the IngurRiver, which separates Georgia and Abkhazia is the most heavily mined area of the region. Others in Georgia include some border areas with South Ossetia and sites of former Soviet military bases.
Georgia’s stated reasons for not acceding to the mine ban treaty are that it does not have control over its entire territory, nor the financial capabilities to ensure that its commitments would be carried out. The Abkhazian authorities will not commit to not using AP landmines as they claim they need them for defense, and that they need security guarantees that there will be no war before they would be in any position to make such a commitment.
At the inter-sessional Standing Committee meetings in May 2006, Georgia said that its position on non-accession to the Mine Ban Treaty was being reconsidered
In 2005, 31 casualties were reported, 15 of which took place in Abkhazia. The total included 5 fatalities. The ICBL-Georgian Campaign has collected data on over 350 mine survivors since 2001

Suggested Angles

On the Way? Administrative Signs that Georgia May be Getting Closer to Signing the Ottawa Convention.

At the intersessional Standing Committee meetings in May 2006, Georgia said that its position on non-accession to the Mine Ban Treaty was being reconsidered.
The main barrier to becoming a signatory remains the lack of control over mined territories in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, however discussions are proceeding nonetheless.
Georgia also stated it would require technical and financial assistance to complete its treaty obligations.
In October 2005, the first ever government sponsored workshop on mine action was held in Tbilisi. “ConfidenceBuilding and Regional Cooperation Through Mine Action” was attended by over 70 participants from national and international NGO’s and government delegations.

Crossing the Lines to Help: Georgian Engineers Clearing Minefields in South Ossetia

There were reports that Georgian combat engineers cleared mines in South Ossetia in 2005.
It was reported in October 2005, that the Senior Engineer Officer of the General Staff made a public offer to the seperatist republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia that Georgia would clear mines laid during the conflicts.

GREECE

Landmine Related Facts

Greece is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty.
Greece is affected by landmines and ERW, having maintained minefields along its heavily militarized border with Turkey on the EvrosRiver
Almost 25, 000 mines are counted in this area
Greece is a former producer of antipersonnel mines, and also imported them from Germany and the United States.
At least seven people were killed and one other was severely injured in the Evros minefields during 2005, including one deminer killed. This is a significant decrease compared to 16 people killed and eight injured in 2004.
In February 2006, Greece contributed €1.9 million ($2,365,310) for mine action in Iraq through the International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq (IRFFI)

Suggested Angles

‘’ European Dream ‘’ Often Ends Tragically

The heavily mined border between Greece and Turkey is swiftly becoming a problem for both nations as illegal migrants, hoping to cross through Turkey into Europe, are caught in these areas and become casualties.

At least seven people were killed and one other was severely injured in the Evros minefields during 2005, including one deminer killed
3,371 illegal immigrants and 112 smugglers were arrested by Greek authorities in 2005
On 28 May, two Georgian men were killed in an Evros minefield while trying to enter Greece from Turkey. On 9 December 2005, two illegal immigrants were killed in a minefield in Evros; their nationality is not known
Prompted by the large amount of migrant casualties,the Ministry of Public Order began a review of the files of eight landmine survivors requesting refugee status. One of these survivors, from Burundi, was granted asylum in early 2006 after appealing against the refusal of his first application; however, he was refused a disability pension

Victim Assistance Needed!

Helping survivors of mine incidents is a an aspect of mine action that requires greater attention in this country. A large part of the problem is that many of the mine accidents happening within Greece happen to illegal migrants in the EvrosRiver minefields, along the Turkish border.

In 2004 at the Nairobi Review Conference, Deputy Minister of National Defense Vasileios Michaloliakos stated that, “At the national level and until all antipersonnel mines are cleared from our northeastern border, Greece will continue to provide full medical care to illegal immigrants wounded. Moreover, my country looks favorably into the possibility of covering the expenses of prostheses and relevant training for those innocent and unsuspecting people....”
Landmine Monitor has seen little evidence of the above statements being implemented
When submitting its Article 7 report for 2005 –a State Party obligation - Greece did not include details of mine survivor assistance. There is little official information on mine casualties and services available for survivors, considering the significant number of mine casualties each year
Greece has a law that protects the rights of people with disabilities and ensures their inclusion in society but in 2005 the deputy ombudsman reported that nearly 60 percent of people with disabilities had been not been able to benefit appropriately

Potential Interviewees:

Louisa O’Brien, LM Researcher (Greece) and advocate for survivors’ rights.

Links to MSP Side Events:

The International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: A Tool for Furthering Victim Assistance

Tuesday, 19 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Tuesday September 19th, Afternoon Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Clearing mined areas

-Assisting the victims

Wednesday September 20th, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Assisting the victims

ISRAEL

Landmine Related Facts

The State of Israel has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty. Its long-held position is that while it supports the humanitarian objectives and aspirations of the treaty, landmines are still considered essential for Israeli security, given its hostile environment
Israel is a mine-affected country with mines dating from WWII and newer ones along its borders, near military camps and near infrastructure that it has laid for its own protection. A further hazard has arisen from Palestinian improvised explosive devices (IEDs), including homemade mortars, rockets, mines and roadside bombs
In 2005 and the first five months of 2006, Landmine Monitor identified no new landmine casualties in Israel but that IEDs do regularly harm civilians
Israel has no national agency to manage or coordinate demining efforts. The IDF Engineering Corps is in charge of all UXO and contractors do the same on an emergency basis
Israel declared a moratorium on the export of antipersonnel mines in 1994 that was extended for three-year periods in 1996, 1999, 2002 and most recently, July 2005
In November 2005, at the UN, Israel stated that mines used by non-state armed groups presented the primary humanitarian risk for innocent civilians, and that it was Israel’s position that non-state armed groups could not be permitted to use landmines

Suggested Angles

Good Cop, Bad Cop: Israel’s Postive Mine Action

Israel’s use of anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions in its recent conflict with Lebanon have put it in the hot seat of international scrutiny. Prior to this conflict however, Israel exhibited responsible conduct regarding the production, use, stockpiling and transfer of mines that should not be forgotten in light of the present circumstances.

The Israel Defense Force destroyed 15,510 outdated stockpiled mines in 2005
Israel extended its moratorium on the export of antipersonnel mines for three years in July 2005 and Israeli officials anticipate that the regular three-year renewals will continue
In the most recent Landmine Monitor reporting period, there is one allegation of anti-personnel mine use by Palestinian groups and no allegations of use by Israeli forces in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
Israel is a member of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) and its Amended Protocol II on landmines. It participated in the protocol’s Seventh Annual Conference of States Parties on 23 November 2005, and submitted on 22 November 2005 a national annual report as required by Article 13
Clearance operations were conducted in the northern part of the JordanValley in 2005, following the displacement of mines as a result of flooding
Although not a State Party, it takes the position that it supports the humanitarian objectives and aspirations of the treaty. It maintains that landmines are still considered essential for Israeli security, given its hostile environment

Constructive Developments: Domestic Clearance Activity

(following is excerpted from the 2006 Landmine Monitor)

“In 2000, the Israeli government and Jerusalem municipality approved a new public housing program that included two new high schools and a youth center in Tzur Baher, a small Palestinian village in the eastern outskirts of Jerusalem. The only land available for construction was contaminated with landmines laid by the Jordanian army in 1967. Responsibility for clearance of the land was disputed between Jerusalem and the IDF, which said its policy was not to clear minefields for civilians due to the risk to soldiers. In 2005, the Ministry of Justice decided that the municipality should fund and contract a civilian mine clearance company, while the IDF would assure the quality of the clearance undertaken. The Israeli company, Maavarim Civil Engineering Ltd., was selected to conduct the clearance. The company returned 50,000 square meters of mine-affected land to the community in November 2005 through both manual and mechanical clearance. No antivehicle mines were found; antipersonnel mines were found, but the number was not communicated to Landmine Monitor. Quality assurance was conducted using mine detecting dogs. The overall project was supervised by the IDF, which gave the final certification. Although the IDF does not usually follow International Mine Action Standards (IMAS), Maavarim’s standing operating procedures are reportedly based on IMAS and this operation was said to be conducted in accordance with IMAS.”

Links to MSP Side Events:

“Lebanon: the Challenges of Mine Action in the Immediate Aftermath of War”

Thursday, 21 September 2006, 8:30-10:00

Room XXIII, E Building, Palais des Nations

LEBANON

Landmine Related Facts

Lebanon is not a State Party, citing its long-standing conflict with Israel as the reason for this
Events favourable towards a potential accession to the Treaty occurred in 2005, including a statement from the Foreign Minister to IBCL Diplomatic Advisor, Ambassador Satnam Jit Singh that Lebanon was giving serious thought to accession on an ICBL mission there in June 2006
For the first time ever, in 2005 Lebanon voted in favor of the annual pro-Mine Ban Treaty UN General Assembly resolution in the First Committeecalling for universalization and full implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty. However, it was absent from the final plenary vote in December 2005
There were 22 new mine casualties in 2005, which is an increase from 2004
A nationwide technical survey started in 2005; 9.8 square kilometers of suspected area had been surveyed by May 2006, resulting in the cancellation of 7.2 square kilometers as not contaminated
The south of Lebanon, already heavily mined from a 25 year long conflict with Israel as well as civil conflict, is now even more contaminated with mines, UXO and especially unexploded cluster munitions from the July-August 2006 conflict

Suggested Angles

One Step Forward, Many Steps Back? Lebanon, the Middle East and Universalization

Prior to the recent military conflict between Lebanon and Israel, Lebanon was taking key steps towards becoming a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty. While the Israeli attacks may now steer the Lebanese government in the other direction on this issue for security reasons, this situation also highlights the importance of more Middle Eastern states signing onto the Ban in an effort to decrease the severe humanitarian repercussions of this weapon and in a bid to build confidence in a highly unstable region.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in late 2005 initiated a process with the Lebanese Army that is expected to lead to a recommendation to the government that Lebanon accede to the Mine Ban Treaty. The Foreign Ministry has been consulting with the National Demining Office (NDO) and the Ministry of Defense regarding the ramifications of and procedures for accession
Lebanon sent delegations to the Intersessional Standing Committee meetings in Geneva in June 2005 and May 2006. However, Lebanon did not attend as an observer the Sixth Meeting of States Parties in Zagreb, Croatia in November-December.
The national Landmine Impact Survey (LIS), which was completed in 2003, estimated that 22 out of 24 districts, covering a total area of 137 square kilometers, were affected to some degree by mines and/or UXO.
Only five countries out of 18 that are in the region considered as the Middle East are States Parties yet many are mine affected

More Mines/UXO, More Victims, More Mine Action Needed!

The Israeli attacks of July-August 2006 have left behind new quantities of UXO, adding to a pre-existing mine problem in southern Lebanon and now expanding into some city centres. As Lebanese citizens return to their homes, they are confronted with this issue. How to address the immediate problems of the necessary mine action required for their safety and security – education, victim assistance, clearance – with existing mine action structures and funds may not be completely possible. What new solutions will emerge?

Returning refugees face a serious threat from unexploded bombs in their home communities. While the Lebanese Army and the Mines Advisory Group (MAG) have begun clearing operations, Lebanon’s National De-mining Office reports that 3 people have been killed and 10 injured by UXO since 14 August.
Casualties were already on the rise in 2005, at least 22 new landmine/UXO casualties were recorded, including five people killed and 17 injured versus the 14 casualties the year before.
A total of 1835 submunitions have been destroyed in less than two weeks.
Lebanese mine risk education (MRE) had been delivered largely by local NGOs. In 2005 the National Demining Office (NDO) reported that 20 percent of affected areas still required mine risk education (MRE) and 35 percent needed refresher courses – these percentages have now increased with the increase in affected areas.
Most of the 2,500 remaining minefields in Lebanon are not marked to international standards; according to the NDO, this has been due to lack of funding.

Potential Interviewees:

Habbouba Aoun, Landmine Resource Centre (Beirut)

Ayman Sorour, PROTECTION

Links to MSP Side Events:

“Lebanon: the Challenges of Mine Action in the Immediate Aftermath of War”

Thursday, 21 September 2006, 8:30-10:00

Room XXIII, E Building, Palais des Nations

NEPAL

Landmine Related Facts

Nepal has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty, nor has its new government articulated a policy on the landmine issue
It is heavily mine affected due to a civil war between Maoist insurgents and the royalist government which was escalating until recently
On 26 May 2006, the government of Nepal and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) agreed to a bilateral cease-fire and a Code of Conduct that includes non-use of landmines
There is no organized system for recording mine accidents in Nepal and as such, publications like Landmine Monitor get their information from a variety of sources. One source, UNICEF, reports 197 new casualties of victim-activated explosions in 2005
Nepal also lacks a central mine action coordinating body, and consequently these types of activities, including mine risk education, fall to the work of NGOs. An Mines Risk Education (MRE) Working Group exists, composed of over ten organizations and national organizations
Reportedly the Nepalese government provides emergency evacuation after an incident and free medical and prosthetic treatment but the quality tends to be inadequate and many hospitals suffer from being understaffed

Suggested Angles

Ceasefire is a Glimmer of Hope

Nepal has been embroiled in a civil conflict with Maoist insurgents for over a decade, in which a massive quantity of mines and UXO accumulated. However, in May 2006 the government of Nepal signed a bi-lateral ceasefire with the insurgent group that includes a Code of Conduct with one provision for the non-use of landmines. Not only does this put a stop to laying new mines, but the ceasefire may allow for a level of stability to ensure that necessary victim assistance and mine action can take place.

Throughout Nepal, civilians faced a hazard from landmines that were emplaced close to roads, government buildings, some airports, hydroelectric stations and telecommunications towers. Landmine Monitor researchers have also found evidence that Maoists also used schools at night to produce explosive devices
Children accounted for 56% of 2005 casualties
Peace talks and initiatives to create an interim government with Maoist participation created openings for developing a program to address the hazards posed by mine and ERW contamination
Representatives of both the former RNA and the Maoist People’s Army attended a workshop on mine risk education organized by UNICEF in Kathmandu in June 2006
The MRE working group aims to develop a campaign that follows International Mine Action Standards (IMAS and has noted that this was not possible before due to insufficient cooperation, absence of a civilian mine clearance organization and low literacy levels – all by-products of an unstable nation

The Other Side of the Coin: Displaced People Need to be Aware of Mine Risks

There is certainly much good to be had from the recent ceasefire between the government of Nepal and Maoist insurgents within the country, but an important flag has been raised by some humanitarian organizations - how to deal with returning populations who may be unaware of the weapons that await them?

Recent research and reports of mine incidents indicate that security forces do not apply common rules or standards to marking and fencing, despite the Royal Nepalese Army stating that mines emplaced around its barracks and other installations are mapped, fenced and marked
According to Landmine Monitor, a senior police officer has stated it was not necessary to inform or warn the public of the risks of minefields
Nepal lacks a nationally-recognized symbol for mined areas, although a warning sign was decided on at a recent MRE workshop organized by UNICEF
Nepal receives funding from only two nations, Canada and New Zealand, and while several NGOs are in Nepal and capable of educating returning populations about the dangers, the question of funding desperately needs to be addressed

Potential Interviewees:

Mrs. Purna Shova Chitrakar, Ban Landmines Campaign Nepal

Links to MSP Side Events:

-The International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: A Tool for Furthering Victim Assistance

Tuesday, 19 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Thursday September 21, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Universalizing the Convention

POLAND

Landmine Related Facts

The Republic of Poland signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 4 December 1997, but has yet to ratify. It is one of three signatory states in the world
Poland remains contaminated by large quantities of explosive remnants of war (ERW) and, mines, as a result of World War II. For example, in 2005 more than 39,000 items of unexploded ordnance (UXO) were found
It was estimated that at the end of the war, in 1945, 80 percent of Poland’s territory (or 250,000 square kilometers) was mine- and UXO-affected
In 2005, police sources reported 44 new civilian casualties from explosive materials in Poland
Polish stockpiles are decreasing. Poland was recorded as having 984,690 stockpiled antipersonnel mines at the end of 2005, a decrease of 12,990 mines from previous reports
Poland does not have a formal civilian mine/ERW action program but organizations like the Polish Red Cross are very active in bringing information about the issue to the public

Suggested Angles

Nine Years Later: Poland Has Yet to Ratify

Poland was an original signator to the Mine Ban Treaty in 1997 yet still has not ratified it domestically so as to fully accede. It insisted on a serious of pre-conditions being necessary first but did announce itself ready to begin the ratification process in Nairobi in 2004. Necessary formal documents were prepared by 2005 but after a change of the government the issue has been left hanging in the balance. Will 2007 be the year for Poland?

The largest current obstacle appears to be the new government’s conservative national security outlook which has led to a request for further analysis before ratification can proceed
There is also a need for increased visibility of the mine issue among the Polish public, so that civil society can put pressure on the government to speed up ratification
A visit from the Executive Director of Mines Action Canada, Paul Hannon, and David Pratt, Special Ambassador for the Canadian Red Cross in June 2006 ended optimistically but both men acknowledged that more pressure is needed to ensure movement
With the recent accession of the Ukraine and Latvia, Poland remains as one of only two EU states outside of the Treaty (Finland is the other)

Poland’s State Party Practices

While Poland waits to ratify the Mine Ban Treaty, it has been very active and supportive on the issue in other ways.

Poland has voluntarily submitted three Article 7 (Transparency) reports since it signed the Convention in 1997
In 2002, Poland confirmed that it was already complying with the Ottawa Convention prohibitions on the production and use of landmines – having ceased production
Poland has also voted in favour of every UN General Assembly resolution in favour of a landmine ban since 1996
According to the Landmine Monitor, Poland contributed 424 military engineers to missions abroad in 2005, assistance worth US$1.74 million

Potential Interviewees:

Mr. Bartlomiej Kokoszka, Polish Polish Red Cross Dissemination officer

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Thursday September 21, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Universalization

RUSSIA

Landmine Related Facts

Russia is not party to the Landmine Ban Treaty. It has refused accession on the grounds that antipersonnel (AP) landmines are an effective and necessary military tool to protect the country against the flow of weapons, drugs, and terrorists. Additionally, they claim that they are not in a position to uphold all of the commitments signing on would entail, particularly Article 4 which requires states parties to destroy all stockpiled AP landmines within four years
Russia is one of only 13 countries that continue to produce AP landmines.
In 2004, the Russian defense minister stated that, while 19.5 million AP landmines were destroyed between 2000 and 2004, Russia retains 26.5 million (mainly Soviet era) AP landmines in its stockpiles; 23.5 million of which are due to be destroyed by 2015
Despite the contested statement by Russian military officials in August 2005 that Russian Ministry of Defense forces have not used AP landmines in Chechnya in either 2004 or 2005, Russia has been a known user of AP landmines since 1999, mostly in Chechnya but also in Dagestan, Tajikistan and along the Georgian border
While government clearance teams are said to remove about 100,000 mines and explosive remnants of war (ERW) annually, the country is still heavily contaminated with such weapons dating from the Second World War. As a result of more recent conflicts, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan, and North Ossetia are greatly affected by the presence of landmines.
In 2005 there were at least 305 new casualties from either landmines, ERW or improvised explosive devices (IED) including 72 fatalities. A great majority (226) were caused by IEDs, including 44 fatalities
There is no civilian mine action program in Russia
While physical and psycho-social rehabilitation services are available to landmine survivors, they are inadequate to meet the needs of the population. Likewise, while disabled persons are protected under the 1995 Federal Law on Social Security of Disabled, the law is often not upheld, and disabled persons face extensive discrimination and access to work and social services is very limited

Suggested Angles

Forgotten souls: War Disabled and Mine Survivors are Not Receiving Proper Services and have Extreme Difficulty Re-integrating into Society

While physical and psycho-social rehabilitation services are available to landmine survivors, they are inadequate to meet the needs of the population. Likewise, while disabled persons are protected under the 1995 Federal Law on Social Security of Disabled, the law is often not upheld, and disabled persons face extensive discrimination and access to work and social services is very limited.
According to official sources there are approximately 12.2 million disabled people in Russia. Almost 90% are unemployed despite hiring quotas.

Holdout Countries Preventing a Truly Global Ban on AP Landmines

Great powers China, India, Pakistan, Russia, and the USA remain outside the treaty
Russia is one of the very few who has stated the military utility and lack of viable alternatives as a main reason against accession to the Mine Ban Treaty. It also notes the financial difficulty in meeting the treaty obligations, especially with regards to stockpile destruction.
However, Russia has stated its commitment in principle to the Mine Ban Treaty, but noted in January 2005 that “progress towards a mine free world should be realistic, phased, and based on maintaining the necessary level of stability.”

Mine Action is Not just about Landmines

226 of 305 casualties in Russia in 2005 were from weapons other than AP landmines, with many being improvised explosive devices (IED’s)
There are also extensive quantities of abandoned explosive ordinance (AXO) in some areas
Explosive remnants of war (ERW) remain an acute problem in Dagestan, especially in areas which saw heavy fighting in 1999. In 2004, it was estimated that it would take a further 5-6 years to clear the aras of all ERW.
Government clearance teams undertook over 300 tasks in 2005 to deal with explosive remnants from World War II which still haunt the country in many regions, including many which have not been the scene of recent conflict. Of 40,000 items destroyed, almost ¾’s were explosive items other than landmines.

Links to MSP Programme

Monday September 18, Afternoon Session

Informal Meeting to Discuss the Entry into Force of Protocol 5 of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons

- Deals with Explosive Remnants of War (ERWs)

- Russia is greatly affected by WWII era ERWs as well as more recent ones

Thursday September 19, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

- Destroying stockpiled mines

- Universalizing the Convention

TURKEY

Landmine Related Facts

In May 2006, Turkey reported a total of 819,816 antipersonnel mines emplaced in an unspecified number of areas within the country and along the border with Syria
The number of reported mines increased in 2006 because previously suspected areas were proven as minefields
Turkey is a State Party, but has not enacted new implementation legislation, citing that its existing legislation is sufficient
There were at least 220 new landmine/UXO casualties in 2005, a significant increase from 168 in 2004 and 67 in 2003
The Initiative for a Mine-Free Turkey and German NGO Medico International, began a research initiative in May 2006 to determine the number and needs of survivors in Diyarbak?r, Mardin and Siirt
Mine Risk Education (MRE) in Turkey is quite limited mainly provided by local NGOs in the context of public awareness-raising on the issue of landmines/UXO

Suggested Angles

Turkey and the PKK

The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a non-state armed group (NSAG) active in Turkey, signed Geneva Call’s Deed of Commitment in July 2006. As many states involved in internal conflicts with NSAGs, the Turkish government has often express its aversion to engaging NSAGs at any level not to afford them any kind of recognition.

The DoC is used as an extension of the Mine Ban Treaty, which can only apply to states. By signing on, the PKK committed to cease the use of antipersonnel mines and to cooperate in mine action and stockpile destruction programs
The PKK maintained operational bases in Kurdish areas of northern Iraq from which they launched operations into Turkey, resulting in incursions by Turkish military forces against them, according to past Landmine Monitor reports
At the 6MSP in Zagreb, Turkey made a statement in reference to Article #46 of Nairobi Action Plan regarding relations between States Parties, universalization and NSAGs that indicated it felt it should be consulted on this subject regarding the PKK: “... we take the view that when engagement with ‘armed non-state actors’ is contemplated, the concerned State Party should be informed and its consent would be necessary for such an engagement to take place “

The Right to Know – MRE in Turkey

Within the last reporting period of Landmine Monitor, the number of mine and UXO casualties in Turkey increased, as did reports of new mines and explosive devices allegedly being laid by security forces and one NSAG, the Kurdistan Workers Party. The mine risk education that is being conducted is minimal at best but seems to be expanding, as conducted by NGOs.

Turkey stated that people living next to minefields that have been laid by government forces are warned of the dangers, and that mined areas are marked and fenced but the country lacks an MRE coordinating body
Often, casualties occur when people conducting normal activities do so unaware of landmine warning signs. For example, one child was killed and another injured in December when they pastured sheep in Çald?ran district of Van province
In another incident in April, a 10-year-old boy was killed after a landmine exploded while he was digging in the ground near the village of Tasliburun
The Diyarbak?r Bar Association produced a book of photographs of mine casualties, to increase public awareness of the mine issue. A poster and a brochure were also produced for elementary schools
The Hakkari Group, and NGO, has activities planned including basic MRE in local areas, and it planned to use results of its 2005 survey of mine incidents and casualties to raise awareness

Potential Interviewees:

Mutebar Ogretan, NGO Worker

Mehmet Balci, Geneva Call

Links to MSP Side Events:

-Photo Exhibit Looking at Someone Else’s Grief by Ahmet Sik

18-22 September 2006,

1st Floor, E Building, Palais des Nations

-The Humanitarian Crisis Caused by AP Mines and the Efforts of the Regional Government of Iraqi Kurdistan to resolve it

Friday, 22 September 2006, 13:00-15:00

Room XXVI, E Building, Palais des Nations

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Tuesday September 19th, Afternoon Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Clearing mined areas

-Assisting the victims

Wednesday September 20th, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Assisting the victims

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Landmine Related Facts

USA is not a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty
Its policy on anti-personnel mines is as follows: ““Landmines still have a valid and essential role protecting United States forces in military operations.... No other weapon currently exists that provides all the capabilities provided by landmines.”
The US government spent over $95 million in fiscal year 2005 on humanitarian mine action programs
The United States has not produced any type of antipersonnel mine since 1997
The Pentagon requested $1.3 billion for research on and production of two new landmine systems—Spider and Intelligent Munitions System—between fiscal years 2005 and 2011; these systems contain feature that could make them victim-activated and therefore appear incompatible with the Mine Ban Treaty
The Patrick J. Leahy War Victims Fund, administered by the US Agency for International Development (USAID), is the main vehicle through funding is provided for survivor assistance. Since 1989, the Leahy War Victims Fund has provided over $125 million in support for victims of war in 30 countries

Suggested Angles

USA Research Leads to Breakthrough in Mine Clearance Technology / Threatens Development of New Mines

U.S. Department of Defense’s Humanitarian Demining Research & Development Team launched the operational phase of their new humanitarian demining program in spring of 2006. Designed to make mine detection faster, safer and more accurate, this development is an interesting contrast to the rights held by the American government to use, produce, transfer and stockpile anti-personnel mines.

The HSTAMIDS is the first operational dual sensor mine detector, combining ground penetrating radar, and a highly sensitive metal detector into one unit, with advanced data fusion algorithms that enable the system to reliably and consistently detect metallic and low-metallic anti-personnel and anti-tank mines, while discriminating against harmless metallic debris
A recent testing period that included Canada, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom showed that the newly trained dual-system operators significantly outperformed experienced metal detector operators
Thus far, operators employing only seven HSTAMIDS have already cleared more than 60,200 square meters, which includes data collection and verification. In addition, The HALO Trust HSTAMIDS operators have accurately discriminated more than 78,400 pieces of harmless clutter in six different minefields
The US stockpiles 10.4 million antipersonnel mines, the third largest landmine stockpile in the world after China and Russia. It has 2.8 million non-self-destructing landmines, including 403,000 Claymore mines
The US is engaged in research and production of two new landmine systems—Spider and Intelligent Munitions System— systems could signal a reversal of the de facto moratorium on production in place in the USA since 1996. These systems include features that can make them victim-activated and therefore equivalent to anti-personnel mines

Advocacy and Aid in a State not Party

The United States has not signed the Mine Ban Treaty and appears unlikely to in the foreseeable future. Nonetheless, advocacy groups such as the United States Campaign to Ban Landmines (USCBL) continue to be very active, as do other groups supporting land mine survivors and mine action programs in other countries.

USBCL issued several action alerts on efforts to block a resumption of US antipersonnel mine production
The USCBL gave support to a successful House floor amendment in June 2006 by Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) to add US$10 million to the State Department’s humanitarian demining budget
Disarm, a documentary on landmines, filled the 400-seat American Film Institute theatre on 31 May 2006 at its WashingtonDC premiere
Estimates for mine action funding for fiscal year 2006 is $98 million, with a $13 million increase in State Department NADR funding for mine action in Iraq
In fiscal year 2005, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) contributed funding of $3.15 million to Landmine Survivors Network (LSN) which has offices in Washington and all over the world

Potential Interviewees:

Mark Hiznay, Human Rights Watch

Steve Goose, Human Rights Watch

Links to MSP Programme topics:

Thursday September 21, Morning Session

Consideration of the General Status and Operation of the Convention

-Universalizing the Convention

YEMEN

Landmine Related Facts

· The Republic of Yemen is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty

· Yemen is mine affected, owing a long history of conflict. Much of the mined areas are along border areas. The Landmine Impact Survey (LIS) of 2000 showed a total of 592 villages in 19 of the country’s 20 governorates were mine/UXO-affected

· The last reported mine use by government forces was in 1994. Yemen completed destruction of its stockpile of 74,000 antipersonnel mines on 27 April 2002

· Mine clearance in Yemen is undertaken by the Engineering Department of the Ministry of Defense with staff seconded to the Yemen Mine Action Centre - YEMAC

· Mine risk education reached 191,262 people in 92 communities during 2005

· Casualties doubled in 2005, compared to 2004

· Several survivor assistance and disability organizations withdrew from Yemen in 2005-2006, and national organizations faced funding difficulties

Suggested Angles

Article 5 Pressures

Article 5of the Ottawa Convention stipulates that all States Parties destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible or within 10 years. Yemen, an original Signatory of the Treaty, will reach its deadline on March 1, 2009. Although still two and a half years away, some doubt is mounting that this deadline may not be reached in time.

The goal of Yemen’s 2005-2009 strategy is to ensure “all communities classified as high and medium impact, and 27 percent of the most critical low-impacted areas (147 square kilometers) are cleared by the end of March 2009.”
This is not in full compliance with the requirements of the Mine Ban Treaty - fencing of mined and mine-suspected areas is only an interim step towards the destruction of all antipersonnel mines in mined areas, as required by Article 5
More difficulties are presented by nature. As a result of shifting sand in some desert locations, landmines have sunk further below the surface, in some cases up to two meters in depth. High mineral levels and large numbers of metal fragments make metal detectors ineffective. These areas have been marked instead but without precision
Mechanical clearance equipment was tested in Yemen in 2005, in the areas where clearance operations had to be suspended, but the tests did not achieve positive results

Yemeni Youth and Women are Driving Forces in Mine Action

Women and young people, traditionally the highest at risk for mine accidents, have become an active force in Yemen by taking on important and useful roles in many aspects of mine action.

The Yemini Executive Mine Action Centre (YEMAC) sends medical teams of both men and women to travel to target communities to visit registered landmine survivors

A female Yemeni youth attended an Engaging the Youth workshop on mine action in Beirut in 2005
Yemen received a grant of $3,000 from Mines Action Canada for a Youth Empowerment Project to carry out MRE in two governorates
On July 10th 2006, youth leaders from Lahj, supported by YMAA members, held a one day MRE session for 19 youth (11 females and 8 males) from mine affected villages in the region

Potential Interviewees:

Mr. Saleh Al-Dhahyani, Yemen Association for Landmine Survivors

Mrs. Eishah Mohammed, Yemeni Yemen Mine Awareness Association