Many soldiers, including high-ranking leaders, have called for a ban on antipersonnel mines.
Military arguments for outlawing antipersonnel mines:
- their military value is questionable: they do not lend much advantage on the battlefield and they kill your own soldiers
- alternatives exist
- they violate international humanitarian law and the rules of war
- long-term humanitarian consequences far outweigh any possible military utility
It is important to take up some of these points with the military. Get them on your side! Military-to-military dialogue can be most effective.
See this letter to the Whitehouse from US military veterans.
Also, see this ground-breaking study by the International Committee of the Red Cross in 1996.
The military can become important allies! Here officers of the Belarussian army pose with campaigners after destroying some of Belarus' considerable antipersonnel mine stockpile. Credit: Brian Liu/NSP Toolbox DC
Breaking the rules of war
- Antipersonnel mines are indiscriminate and inhumane weapons and therefore go against international humanitarian law. Like other weapons of their type (such as dum dum bullets and pepperspray) they can and should be outlawed completely.
- The law of war imposes certain restrictions on how combatants operate. It says that they have to distinguish between civilian and military targets and that the injuries inflicted should be proportionate with military objectives.
- Antipersonnel landmines fail both the discrimination and the proportionality tests.