Author(s):
Chayer Amelie <amelie@icbl.org> .
Sunday 05 July 2009
November 2008
Summary of the Extension Request
Duration of the proposed extension: 8 years (though the operational plan is for 8 years and 10 months).
Reasons for the proposed extension: limited resources to increase capacity; difficult terrain and heavy rains on the Ecuador border; complicated logistics; heavy reliance on a single helicopter for transporting deminers and for medical evacuations.
Humanitarian, social, economic, and environmental implications of the extension: With mined areas in such remote areas and only one casualty from landmines reported in 2007 there are few humanitarian and socio-economic implications; tourism and mining could occur near the border areas if the area was cleared.
Other relevant information: On average, one in four working days is cancelled because of the weather. Peru is committed to funding 70% of the mine action budget during the extension period; an economic downturn and the government's austerity program could affect the proposed long-term funding; and management of the program with the army is considered poor. The agreement with Ecuador on joint mine action in the common border areas is viewed by the two countries as more of a historical political milestone in the relations between the countries than as a more efficient way of clearing landmines.
A. Duration of the proposed extension
Peru has requested an extension to 1 March 2017. It would seem that it would take much less than eight years to clear 0.5km2 but Peru provides numerous reasons as to why they need so much additional time (which is already a reduction from the 10 years sought in its original extension request). It should be noted that 1 March 2017 is the end of the eighth year in the plan. The operational plan and the budget, however, assume a 12-month plan in 2017, which includes the need for US$2.6 million for the year and exceeds the 1 March 2017 deadline request by 10 months.
B. Reasons for the proposed extension
The landmine problem is in two very distinct locations and mine clearance is conducted by two different entities. According to the operational plan, in the interior of the country where the mined areas are high-tension electrical towers and other infrastructure including prisons and police bases, clearance is scheduled for completion in 2010. In the border areas with Ecuador where operations are more challenging, Peru requests eight more years to 2017. On this border 35 mined areas remain to be cleared covering some 190,000m2 and containing 29,084 landmines.
Peru has cited many reasons that have prevented it from meeting its Mine Ban Treaty obligations on time: budget cuts, jungle, high elevation, poor road conditions, extreme temperatures, rain, floods, logistics, coordination with Ecuador, the reliance on a single helicopter for evacuation and transporting deminers to the mined areas, and staff rotations among the army's deminers. Peru also states that during the extension period, bad planning, political opposition and acts by non-state actors could negatively impact on mine action ( page 65).
Peru established a demining program after hostilities ended in 1998 with the assistance of the Organization of American States (OAS). There are national standing operating procedures and the OAS raises funds and supports Peru's mine action center, CONTRAMINAS, for quality assurance/quality control. In 2004-2005, no clearance occurred in the border areas with Ecuador due to political changes in the government and reduced budget allocations. Clearance resumed in July 2006 but little land has been cleared since then. Most of the effort through 2007 has been spent clearing infrastructure. The national police will continue to clear the mined infrastructure and the Peruvian army will clear the border areas.
The plan to clear infrastructure by the end of 2010 includes: 384 high-tension towers; three antenna transmitters; one electric substation; three prisons and two police bases covering an area measuring 334,667m2. The timeframe of 26 months from January 2008 is achievable based on past results.
In an effort to shorten the time needed to clear the border with Ecuador, Peru plans to open a demining training center and CONTRAMINAS is discussing how some of the police units now clearing infrastructure could be moved to the border area in 2011 to speed up clearance. Along with a restructuring of the demining teams the possibility of moving police units to the border gives reason to believe that Peru could meet its Article 5 obligations in significantly less than eight years although in a meeting in Lima in September with the ICBL, CONTRAMINAS was not prepared to officially reduce the extension period sought.
C. Humanitarian, social, economic, and environmental implications of the extension
As of December 2007, Peru had cleared 536,698m2 in ten years. Clearing infrastructure was given priority in 1998 because the impact has been greater where the infrastructure has been mined. Over 10 years, more than 1,600 mined areas involving infrastructure have been cleared leaving 881 for 2008-2010.
Landmine casualties have been relatively few. In 2007, there were four reported casualties from mines and 15 from ERW.
D. Other relevant information
Since 2000 the government has provided approximately 60% of the demining budget. During the eight-year extension period it is committed to increasing its contribution to cover 70% of the US$25 million budget. For the two-year program with the national police to clear infrastructure the private electricity companies affected by the mined infrastructure will reimburse some, but not all of the costs, of clearance. The Extension Request does not provide an explicit amount they have received from the companies or plan to receive through 2010, however, the government of Peru is committed to funding 73% of the costs of clearing the infrastructure inside the country.
The ICBL learned on a mission to Peru in September that productivity would be greatly enhanced if a helicopter for medical evacuation could be made available on a permanent basis to the border operations. As it currently stands, the helicopter is not permanently allocated to the clearance operations, so the branch of the military that "lends" it often takes it away when it is needed elsewhere. This has major implications on the ability to carry out clearance even on the days when the weather would permit helicopter travel. The mission also noted a lack of sufficient demining equipment for the police units, including body protection gear and metal detectors that were needed replacement and communication systems (radios, etc.) that are about 20 years old.
E. Conclusions and recommendations
Peru has focused most of its efforts on clearing mines near infrastructure in the interior of the country rather than minefields in the border area with Ecuador, which is the more difficult area for clearance operations. To date, Peru has demonstrated a remarkably low level of productivity even given the difficult conditions along the border with Ecuador. The focus on training and capacity building with funds provided by the OAS may be one reason why the demining has not advanced "as soon as possible," as required by the treaty. A lack of political support is also demonstrated by the lack of a permanently allocated helicopter and modern equipment for the police deminers.
Peru's commitment to provide 70% of the remaining budget for demining and its decision to reduce the length of period requested from ten to eight years is welcomed. But the ICBL believes the operational plan could be reduced to far less than eight years with sufficient political commitment and international assistance. Ongoing discussions within CONTRAMINAS to move some of the police demining units to the border areas in 2011 after the infrastructure is cleared, and provision of a full-time evacuation helicopter would be essential to meeting this objective.