The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Global Campaign Against Anti-Personnel Landmines

1. Introduction
2. A Brief Overview of the Ottawa Process
3. A Brief Overview of the International Campaign To Ban Landmines
4. The Origins of the Non-Alignment Movement
5. The NAM Modes Operandi and Draft Landmines Resolution
6. Summary List of Nam Signatories to, and Ratifyers of, the Convention (as of the 25th August 1998)
7. Summary List of NAM Member Countries Not Signatory to, nor Ratifyers of, the Convention (as of the 25th August 1998)
8. Details of NAM Member States that have Ratified the Convention
9. Details of NAM Member States that have signed the Convention
10. Details of NAM Member States that have not signed the Convention
11. Details of States suspended from the NAM
12. Bibliography
13. Notes

Researched for: The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) by Noel Stott and Alex Vines of the South African Campaign to Ban Landmines (SACBL) and Human Rights Watch (HRW),A gust 1998 Published by: The South African Campaign to Ban Landmines (SACBL) And Human Rights Watch (HRW) © 1998 The South African Campaign to Ban Landmines (SACBL), C/O PO Box 32882 Braamfontein 2017, Telephone: +27 (11) 403 4204, Fax: +27 (11) 403 1005, e-mail: noel atsgn case.wn.apc.org , website address http://www.icbl.org © 1998 Human Rights Watch (HRW), 33 Islington High Street, London N1 9LH, Telephone: + 44 (171) 713 1995, Fax: + 44 (171) 713 1800, e-mail: hrwatchuk atsgn gn.apc.org , Web site address: http://www.hrw.org

Acknowledgements

This report is a joint product of the South African Campaign to Ban Landmines (SACBL) and Human Rights Watch (HRW). In working on it we have benefited from the contribution of many individuals in the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and Canada’s Non-Proliferation, Arms Control and Disarmament Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Ottawa.

We would like to acknowledge in particular the contribution made by researchers to the earlier HRW Fact Sheets on which most of this data is based, including Mary Wareham and Andrew Cooper of the HRW office in Washington:

• Anti-Personnel Landmine Policies of the Commonwealth Nations (October 1997)
• Anti-Personnel Landmine Policies of African Countries (November 1997)
• The Mine Ban Treaty and Africa (May 1998)
• The Mine Ban Treaty and the Middle East/North Africa (July 1998).

The compilers accept responsibility for an errors or omissions and will be pleased to correct these in future editions.

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Global Campaign against Anti-personnel Landmines

Introduction

The XII Non-Aligned Movement Summit will be held in Durban, South Africa from the 29th August to the 3rd September, 1998.

74 out of the 113 member states of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) have already signed the recently concluded Convention on the Prohibition Of The Use, Stockpiling, Production And Transfer Of Anti-Personnel Mines And On Their Destruction (sometimes known as the Ottawa Treaty)[ In this text the words «Convention» and «Treaty» are used interchangeably to refer to the «Convention on the Prohibition Of The Use, Stockpiling, Production And Transfer Of Anti-Personnel Mines And On Their Destruction».]

States party to the Convention undertake never under any circumstances to use, develop, produce, stockpile or transfer anti-personnel mines, or to help anyone else to do so.

15 have ratified. While only 8% have ratified so far, a number of NAM member states have passed domestic legislation but not yet deposited at the UN. These include, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Guinea, Mauritania, Namibia and Yemen.

Various other countries have told the UN or the Canadian government that they expect to complete ratification by the end of I998. These include, Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, Cote D'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, Rwanda, Senegal, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia.

Thus a majority of NAM member States (65%) have already formally committed themselves to the ban treaty and in total only 38 NAM countries have not signed or ratified

Several NAM countries, most notably South Africa, have been at the forefront of the movement to eradicate this insidious, indiscriminate weapon from the face of the earth and many have already taken steps domestically to prohibit the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of anti-personnel landmines.

However, a number of members have indicated that they are not prepared to sign the treaty: e.g. Cuba, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Egypt and Sri Lanka. At least six nations – Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and Singapore - continue to produce anti-personnel mines. A number also appear to be undecided about whether to sign the treaty: e.g. Bahrain, Bhutan, Eritrea, Nepal.

A large number of NAM member countries are suffering from an estimated two to five million landmines planted in their soil. Landmines plague NAM members in Africa, East Asia, South Asia, and Europe. The most heavily infested are Angola, Mozambique, Afghanistan and Cambodia as well as the region of Iraqi Kurdistan. Others affected include Bangladesh, Cyprus, India, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Morocco, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, Syria, Swaziland, Tunisia, Uganda, Yemen, and Zambia. In many of these countries anti-personnel mines pose a daily threat to sustainable economic and social development and environmental conservation and perpetuate poverty, the very focal points of the Durban meeting.

Mines continue to be laid in several NAM countries - including Angola, India, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Uganda - by government troops, opposition forces, or criminals.

At least three former producers -- South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe - have decided to ban future production. Nearly all NAM nations have declared a formal ban or comprehensive moratorium on anti-personnel mine exports. Singapore, recognised as one of the biggest producers and exporters of mines in the developing world, has announced only a limited export moratorium, on so-called «dumb» mines. Iraq, known to have exported in the past has not announced a halt.

Members of the NAM should lead in implementing regional and international landmine resolutions, such as those of the Organisation of American States (OAS), Organisation of African Unity (OAU), Southern African Development Community (SADC), and the UN and seek to make their countries mine-free zones.

The Organisation of African Unity (OAU) has endorsed a total ban, first with a Resolution of the 62nd Council of Ministers in June 1995 and again in 1996 and 1997. The Organisation of American States adopted a resolution in June 1996 calling for the establishment of a hemispheric mine free zone. The six Central American states declared themselves the first mine free zone in September 1996, and the CARICOM (Caribbean) states followed suit in December of the same year. The Southern African Development Community (SADC) also became a mine-free zone in August 1997, but this was short-lived because membership was expanded in September to include the Democratic Republic of Congo (former Zaire), a country that has yet to indicate its wish to ban landmines.

The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) urges the NAM governments that have not committed themselves to the ban treaty to do so immediately. Given the overwhelming majority view both internationally but also within NAM itself, it should be an achievable goal for the NAM Summit to issue a declaration of support for the Convention and the urgent need to ban anti-personnel mines globally so that no more children and other innocent civilians will be injured or killed by anti-personnel mines in the next century.

A brief Overview of the

Ottawa Process

A key event in the global march toward a mine ban was the Canadian government sponsored conference held in Ottawa, October 3-5, 1996, which brought together fifty pro-ban governments, as well as twenty-four observer states, dozens of non-governmental organisations with the ICBL, the International Committee of Red Cross and other international groups.

In Ottawa states agreed to a Final Declaration committing themselves to "seek the earliest possible conclusion of a legally-binding agreement to ban the production, stockpiling, transfer and use of anti-personnel mines and to increase support for mine awareness programs, mine clearance operations and victim assistance." Perhaps more importantly, the participants developed a Chairman's Agenda for Action, which laid out concrete steps at the international, regional and national levels for achieving a ban rapidly. And in a dramatic announcement at the end of the conference, Canada's Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy stated that Canada would host a ban treaty signing conference in December 1997. The conference also featured perhaps unprecedented co-operation between governments and NGOs, which has continued to the present day.

The success of this «Ottawa Process» has been stunning:

On 10 December 1996, UN General Assembly Resolution 51/45S, which urged all states to pursue vigorously an international agreement banning anti-personnel landmines, was passed 156-0, with only ten abstentions.

Austria hosted a preparatory meeting from February 12 - 14, 1997 to begin discussions of the elements of a ban treaty. One hundred and eleven governments participated, though many of them were not prepared to commit to a December 1997 time frame. Present in Vienna were Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom as well NAM member states, Botswana, Cameroon, India, Kenya, Malaysia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Pakistan, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe. South Africa, the first nation to speak, made a particularly strong statement in support of the Ottawa process, as did Canada and New Zealand. Austria circulated a draft ban treaty prior to the conference that served as the basis for discussion.

Belgium hosted another conference in late June 1997 at which 107 governments endorsed a Declaration supporting the principles of the Austrian draft ban treaty, the negotiation of the treaty in Oslo in September 1997, and the signing of the ban treaty in Ottawa in December.

Eighty-nine governments came to Oslo as full participants for the negotiations, and another thirty-two as observers. The negotiations, which lasted from September 1-18, produced a treaty that drew high praise from both governments and civil society alike.

The treaty prohibits the use, production, import and export of anti-personnel mines. It requires destruction of existing stockpiles of anti-personnel mines within four years, and destruction of mines in the ground within ten years. It also requires state parties to provide detailed information about anti-personnel minefields and mine stockpiles. It calls on States to provide assistance for the care and rehabilitation of mine victims.

Forty-six (46) NAM governments were full participants, and 17 were observers in Oslo.

Following Oslo, Canada introduced a UN resolution supporting the December treaty signing, which was supported by 127 countries, nineteen abstentions and none voting against it (UNGA Resolution 52/38A).

Sixty-five percent of members of the NAM are already committed to ban the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of anti-personnel landmines. That is, two-thirds of NAM membership has signed the Convention since the 3rd of December 1997 when it opened for signature. Other NAM countries are close to signing.

Some NAM members - Egypt, India, Pakistan, Singapore and Sri Lanka - are known to be actively against a global ban.

The 18 countries that are not part of the NAM family and that have ratified the Convention are:

Andorra, Austria, Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Fiji, France, Germany, Holy See, Hungary, Ireland, Mexico, Norway, Niue, Samoa, San Marino, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

A Brief overview of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL)

Non-governmental organisations brought the global landmine crisis to the attention of the public and governments in the early 1990s, and have been the driving force in the international ban effort.

Six NGOs, including Human Rights Watch, launched the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) in 1992 and it has grown into one of the most diverse and successful NGO coalitions ever. The 1997 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the ICBL and its co-ordinator, Jody Williams. The ICBL now consists of more than 1,300 NGOs in more than sixty nations. It includes organisations involved in demining, victim assistance and rehabilitation, human rights, arms control, humanitarian relief, medical, veterans, religious issues, the environment and more. The ICBL has national landmine ban campaigns, or is active, in many NAM nations, including Bangladesh, India, Kenya, Malawi, Malaysia, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. They all work locally, nationally, regionally, and internationally to ban anti-personnel landmines, clear minefields and to rehabilitate the victims.

The signing of the treaty banning anti-personnel landmines in Ottawa in December 1997 and the receipt of the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize were tremendous achievements for the ICBL. Indeed, the ICBL has now been widely praised as the most impressive exercise of civil society since World War II, and the most encouraging model thus far for innovative post-Cold War activism.

The work in truly eradicating this insidious weapon has however just begun and the ICBL has drawn up an ambitious action plan encompassing a variety of activities related to the treaty, including rapid ratification, universalisation, and effective monitoring, as well as expanded activities related to humanitarian mine clearance and victim assistance. In addition, an unprecedented new initiative in which NGOs will work co operatively with a number of governments to monitor implementation and to investigate and expose violations of the ban treaty is being developed. This latter ground-breaking initiative will build upon one of the most encouraging - and hopefully replicable - aspects of the Ottawa Process: close co-operation in planning, strategizing, and carrying out actions among NGOs, governments, and international organisations.

Current ICBL goals and objectives:

The ICBL has two main calls:

• for a comprehensive ban on the use, production, stockpiling and export of anti-personnel mines, and,
• for increased resources for humanitarian mine clearance and victim assistance programs.

Early NAM supporters of these calls included Malaysia in December 1994, Mozambique in October 1995, Jamaica in April 1996, and South Africa in May 1996.

Included in the ICBL’s current goals and objectives are two that are particularly pertinent to the forthcoming NAM Summit. While the ICBL is encouraged by the fact that in total 129 countries have now signed and 32 have so far ratified the Convention, many of the non-signatory countries are members of NAM.

The treaty is on track to enter into force more quickly than any other international treaty in history, demonstrating the urgency of the need for a ban and the emergence of a new way of creating international standards. Signatories so far include all of the Western Hemisphere except the U.S. and Cuba, all of the European Union except Finland, many African States and countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Nearly every geographic region is represented in those ratifying thus far, as is appropriate to a treaty signed by two-thirds of the world's nations.

1. Treaty Ratification

The ICBL has identified rapid ratification of the treaty as a top priority for 1998. The treaty does not enter into force and become binding international law until six months after forty governments have ratified the treaty. Though many observers believe that it may take three or more years, the ICBL has set a goal of less than one year to reach forty ratifications.

The ICBL is co-ordinating with the International Committee of the Red Cross, UNICEF, and key governments (such as Canada and Norway) in a joint effort to achieve early entry into force. This is crucial not only to make the treaty legally binding, but also to start the clock ticking on various treaty obligations, notably the four years to destroy stockpiles, ten years to destroy mines already in the ground, and six months for reporting requirements. This effort will involve the type of direct advocacy with governments at which the ICBL and its member campaigns and affiliated NGOs have excelled.

The work includes meetings with key government officials at the national and regional/continental levels, as well as at inter-governmental forums and at various landmine conferences. It will also involve development and distribution of information packets on ratification for use by governments and NGOs; letters; phone calls; co-ordination of and assistance to ICBL national campaigns in targeted countries; and use of the media to pressure governments.

2. Treaty Universalisation

Although virtually no one predicted that more than 128 governments would sign the ban treaty, there are still dozens that have not, including some who will continue to produce and/or use anti-personnel mines. While the Campaign believes that a new international norm rejecting these weapons has already been established, a major push will be undertaken to bring the recalcitrant states on board the treaty. This will be done largely with the same strategies that the ICBL used to convince governments to sign: education, stigmatisation, co-ordinated pressure with pro-ban governments, and the ICRC and international organisations.

The universalisation effort will involve targeting specific countries as well as multi-lateral forums such as SADC, the OAU and Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), in addition to regional and national conferences, NGO workshops, and missions by ICBL teams, and other measures. Countries identified for special focus include: The USA, Russia, India, Pakistan, Egypt, Israel, Cuba, Finland, South Korea, Singapore and Vietnam.

The Non-Aligned Movement Summit, which will take place in Durban, South Africa from the 28 August to the 2 September 1998, thus provides an important and unique opportunity for the ICBL to begin to meet the goals of early ratification and universalisation.

The NAM Summit is an important occasion for the NAM Heads of State to consider a range of issues which developing countries have to confront in a globalising era, including of course, their position regarding the devastating humanitarian disaster caused by the use of anti-personnel landmines and the recently concluded Convention on the Prohibition Of The Use, Stockpiling, Production And Transfer Of Anti-Personnel Mines And On Their Destruction.

The presence of anti-personnel landmines in the majority of NAM member States has created, and continues to create, a humanitarian crisis of massive proportions. Anti-personnel landmines are one of the main stumbling blocks to reconstruction and development, and foreign debt and poverty (all of which will be on the Summit agenda) are exacerbated by the presence of these deadly weapons in our soil.

The international community now accepts that anti-personnel landmines are no longer a security issue, but are weapons that have caused a humanitarian crisis of global proportions. The international community is thus united to ban these weapons through the implementation of the «Ottawa Treaty».

The decision by those NAM governments that have signed and/or already ratified the Treaty required political courage. Many of the countries supporting the «Ottawa Treaty» have recently been at war and may return to war. Others have insecure borders and face high security risks. Others have been producers and exporters of anti-personnel mines.

The ICBL needs to ensure that all NAM countries who are signatory to the Convention, ratify as soon as possible and that those who are non-signatories come to see the humanitarian consequences of landmine production, use, and transfer and resolve to stop it by adding their political and diplomatic resources towards the rapid implementation of the international legal norm that stigmatises the weapon and its users.

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ICBL In the course of 1991, several non-governmental organisations and individuals began simultaneously to discuss the necessity of co-ordinating initiatives and calls for a ban on anti-personnel landmines. Handicap International, Human Rights Watch, medico international, Mines Advisory Group, Physicians for Human Rights, and Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation came together in October 1992 to formalise the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL). From the beginning, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines has defined itself as a flexible network of organisations that share common objectives. The Campaign calls for an international ban on the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of anti-personnel landmines, and for increased international resources for humanitarian mine clearance and mine victim assistance programs. In 1993, the Campaign Steering Committee, consisting of the original six organisations, was formalised and the co-ordinator was recognised. As dozens of national campaigns formed and hundreds of organisations joined the Campaign, the Steering Committee was expanded in 1996 and 1997 to reflect the growth and diversity of the Campaign. New members included the Afghan Campaign to Ban Landmines, Cambodia Campaign to Ban Landmines, Kenyan Coalition Against Landmines, Radda Barnen (Sweden) and the South African Campaign to Ban Landmines. In 1998, the ten existing members of the Steering Committee, now the Co-ordination Committee, were reconfirmed and the Committee was expanded to include the Association to Aid Refugees, Japan; Colombian Campaign Against Landmines; Inter-African Union of Human Rights based in Burkina Faso; Landmine Survivors Network based in the United States; Lutheran World Federation based in Geneva; and Norwegian People's Aid. Today, this network represents over 1,300 human rights, de-mining, humanitarian, children's, veterans', medical, development, arms control, religious, environmental, and women's groups in over 60 countries, who work locally, nationally, regionally, and internationally to ban anti-personnel landmines, clear the minefields and rehabilitate the victims. The achievement of a total ban treaty in 1997 was accomplished through an unprecedented co-operation between like-minded governments and civil society. Events lined up throughout the year at a breakneck pace and included major conferences, workshops and meetings in Maputo, Vienna, Brussels, Bonn, Johannesburg, Oslo and Ottawa. The year ended with the unprecedented diplomatic negotiations in Oslo and the signing by 122 nations of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production, and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction. A new international norm was established. In December 1997, the ICBL and its co-ordinator, Jody Williams, received the Nobel Peace Prize. The signing of the treaty banning anti-personnel landmines in Ottawa in December 1997 and the receipt of the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize were tremendous achievements for the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL). Indeed, the ICBL has now been widely praised as the most impressive exercise of civil society since World War II, and the most encouraging model thus far for innovative post-Cold War activism.

The Origins of the Non-Alignment Movement

The Belgrade Summit of 1961 is usually seen as the starting point of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). Its origins however can be traced back to the period immediately after World War II, when the founding of the United Nations in 1945 provided a climate of internationalism which allowed Asian, African and Latin delegations to meet for the first time in order to explore common interests and for newly independent countries to express an identity and strength distinct from the superpowers of the day.

This gave rise to a series of regional conferences, which culminated in the founding of the Arab League (est. 1945), Organisation of American States (OAS, est. 1951) and later, the eventual merger of the rival Casablanca and Brazzaville groups into the umbrella Organisation of African Unity (OAU, est. 1963).

The 1955 conference in Bandung, Indonesia which brought together 29 Asian and African delegations and which issued a declaration calling for closer cultural, economic and diplomatic ties between countries of the two continents was an important precursor to the establishment of the Movement of Non-Aligned countries. At this meeting, India’s Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru made a lasting contribution to the foundations of the eventual NAM by outlining five principles as a basis for international relations: respect for territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful co-existence.

These principles provided a concrete framework for the evolution of non-alignment; for a conscious effort to give organisational form to the concept of a «third world»; and for the «South» to assert itself in an increasily bi-polar world. President Tito of Yugoslavia, Nehru of India and Nasser of Egypt took the leadership role in ensuring that the new international consciousness among new states was galvanised at the Belgrade Summit.

Even though the conditions that created the NAM, namely the East-West conflict has now radically changed, continuing and growing South-North conflict has not altered the basic non-aligned philosophy. NAM will however have to re-examine its positions in the light of the demise of the Cold War, the increase in regional and intra-state conflicts, the destruction of the environment, and the need to build strategic alliances in the new uni-polar, neo-liberal and globalised world as well as how to ensure their own economic and development path.

While NAM Summits have sought to address current international crises, many of the long-standing concerns and themes voiced at Belgrade have continued to reverberate at all NAM Summits: Condemnation of apartheid (until 1994), discussions of Palestinian rights, disarmament, self-determination for all peoples, the return of cultural artefacts to their countries of origin, unequal terms of trade, commodity fluctuations between South and North and the formation of a new international information order.

Their continuing presence on the agenda must be both a unifying element in a movement divided on many other issues and a source of frustration that despite three decades of declarations and resolutions, most of these problems remain at the close of the twentieth century and seem beyond the power of the member states to remedy.

The NAM modes operandi and Draft Landmines Resolution

While no charter, no headquarters, and no permanent secretariat were envisaged at that time, continuity was provided by the compilation of declarations and resolutions from the various non-aligned meetings, held approximately every three years. NAM positions were, and continue to be, reached by consensus. There is no voting as such although members may at a later point enter reservations for the record. Positions taken are also not binding and the responsibility for interpreting the sense of NAM debates rests on the Chairperson, who is also selected by consensus.

The Non-Aligned Movement has thus created a unique form of administrative style. Non-Aligned administration is non-hierarchical, rotational and inclusive, providing all member states, regardless of size and international stature, with an opportunity to participate in global decision-making and world politics. The Summit is the occasion when the Movement formally rotates its Chair to the Head of State of the host country of the Summit, who then holds office until the next Summit in three years time. The Chair is at the same time also delegated certain responsibilities for promoting the principles and activities of the Movement.

By creating the practice of a rotating chair, Non-Aligned countries therefore place the onus of an administrative structure on the country assuming the Chair. When a country assumes the Chair of the Movement as South Africa will, it creates or designates an entire section of the Foreign Ministry to deal specifically with Non-Aligned issues. Secondly, since Non-Aligned countries meet regularly at the UN and conduct much of their work there, the Chairs' Ambassador at the United Nations essentially functions as the "Minister of Non-Aligned Affairs". The work of the non-aligned often consumes the activities of the Chairs' Permanent Mission in New York.

To facilitate the Chairs' responsibilities a number of structures aimed at improving the co-ordination and functioning of the existing Working Groups, Contact Groups, Task Forces and Committees of NAM have been created. The structures also exist in order to promote the process of achieving a commonality of positions and interests and to see to it that Non-Aligned countries speak with one voice in international meetings and negotiations.

The Co-ordinating Bureau is the central point for co-ordination. The Bureau reviews and facilitates the harmonisation of the work of the NAM Working Groups, Contact Groups, Task Forces and Committees. The Heads of State or Government entrust the Chair and therefore the Co-ordinating Bureau with the task of intensifying its actions to further strengthen co-ordination and mutual co-operation among Non-Aligned countries, including unified action in the United Nations and other international fora on issues of common concern.

Besides the Co-ordinating Bureau, the Chair may therefore also preside over NAM mechanisms as necessary. Working Groups may be presided over by other members.

All NAM Working Groups, Contact Groups, Task Forces and Committees meet as often as necessary. In the fulfilment of their mandates due regard is paid to co-ordination, efficiency and preparedness.

The Chairperson is thus delegated to host a summit and to remain in office for three years, until the next meeting. In the interim, NAM foreign ministers convene annually in New York or elsewhere as fixed by the preceding summit. The Non-Aligned Co-ordinating Bureau (NACB), established in 1973, meets more regularly in New York to implement summit decisions and co-ordinate positions among the larger membership.

Dates and venues of previous NAM Summits

Summit	City	Host Country	Date
I	Belgrade	Yugoslavia	September 1961
II	Cairo	Egypt	October 1964
IIII	Lusaka	Zambia	September 1970
IV	Algiers	Algeria	September 1973
V	Colombo	Sri Lanka	August 1976
VI	Havana	Cuba	September 1979
VII	New Delhi	India	March 1983
VIII	Harare	Zimbabwe	September 1986
IX	Belgrade	Yugoslavia	September 1989
X	Jakarta	Indonesia	September 1992
XI	Cartagena	Colombia	October 1995

THE DRAFT LANDMINES RESOLUTION

The draft NAM Summit resolution on landmines as documented in the Communiqué of the Ministerial Meeting of the Co-ordinating bureau of the Non Aligned Movement, Cartagena de Indias, Colombia 19-20 May 1998, is of particular concern to the ICBL.

While noting the opening for signature of the Convention, it states that the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Heads of Delegation «emphasized that elimination of landmines should take into account the legitimate national security concern of States as well as their legitimate rights to use appropriate measures for self defence».

The intended position then, is particularly weak and contrary to the historic role of small and medium sized countries who, together with the 1,300 Non-Governmental Organisations that comprise the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), took the lead in the movement to ban landmines and who achieved through a new way of conducting international diplomacy a Treaty that not only prohibits the production, use,

export and stockpiling of anti-personnel landmines but also commits governments to rapid de-mining and the socio-economic reintegration of victims.

To a large extent, this draft is surprising in that it is in marked contrast to both the letter and spirit and of the Convention which a majority (74) of NAM states have signed.

Full Landmine CommuniquéMinisterial Meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau of the Non AlignedMovement Cartagena de Indias, Colombia 19 - 20 May 1998 15. The Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Heads of Delegation noted the opening for signature in Ottawa during December 1997 of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their destruction. They emphasised that elimination of landmines should take into account the legitimate national security concern of States as well as their legitimate rights to use appropriate measures for self-defence. 116. The Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Heads of Delegation called on States to become parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of certain Conventional Weapons which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW) and the Protocols thereto, and called upon States parties to the CCW to express their consent to be bound to its Amended Protocol II on Landmines and Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons with a view to their entry into forces as soon as possible. 117. The Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Heads of Delegation called upon the international community to provide the necessary assistance to landmine affected countries as well as to the rehabilitation of the victims in the landmine affected countries. They further called for international assistance to ensure full access of affected countries to material, equipment, technology and financial resources for mine clearance The Ministers also called for continued humanitarian assistance for victims of landmines. 118. The Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Heads of Delegation expressed concern about the residue of the second World War, particularly in the from of landmines which cause human and material damage and obstruct development plans in some Non-Aligned countries. They called on States responsible for laying the mines outside their territories to assume responsibility for the landmines, to co-operate with the affected countries, to provide the necessary information, maps and technical assistance for their clearance, to contribute towards defrayal of the costs of clearance and provide compensation for any ensuing losses.

The ICBL, and indeed civil society more generally thus needs to come out with a strong call to all NAM countries to accept the challenge of a mine-free world and the «Ottawa Treaty» as the best means of achieving this.

NAM countries that have signed the Treaty must be urged to make a similar determination and ratify sooner rather than later.

NAM countries that have not yet signed the Treaty must be urged to join the international consensus to end the production and use of this weapon everywhere, to destroy all stockpiles, and to abolish anti-personnel landmines forever from the earth.

NAM countries that have both signed and ratified the Convention, must be urged to use their influence in the Summit discussions to persuade non-signatories to put an end to the inhumane and indiscriminate nature of this weapon and to accept that the disastrous humanitarian consequences of landmines must end.

This can only be done if ALL countries are unanimous in their condemnation and revulsion of anti-personnel landmines and sign and ratify the Convention. All must come to see the humanitarian consequences of landmine production, use, and transfer and resolve to put an end to it by adding their political and diplomatic resources towards the rapid implementation of an international legal norm that stigmatises the weapon and its users – «the Ottawa Treaty».

In summary then:

There are 113 Members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), including the suspended Yugoslavia.

• 129 countries have signed the Convention.
• 33 countries have ratified the Convention.
• 74 NAM members have signed the Convention.
• 15 NAM members have ratified the Convention.
• 38 NAM countries have not signed or ratified.
• A number of NAM member states have passed domestic legislation but not yet deposited at the UN. These include: Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Guinea, Mauritania, Yemen and Namibia.
• Various other countries have told the UN or the Canadian government that they expect to complete ratification by the end of I998. These include: Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, Cote D'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, Rwanda, Senegal, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia.
• Palestine, which is a recognised member of the NAM, does not yet have the international status to sign the Convention.
• Somalia, also a NAM member does not have a central government at present and is therefore unable to sign any international Treaty.
• Yugoslavia’s membership of NAM was suspended in 1992.

LIST OF NON-ALIGNED MOVEMENT (NAM) SIGNATORIES TO, AND RATIFYERS OF, THE CONVENTION ON THE PROHIBITION OF THE USE, STOCKPILING, PRODUCTION AND TRANSFER OF ANTI-PERSONNEL MINES AND ON THEIR DESTRUCTION

(as of the 28th August 1998)

Country	Signatory Date	Ratification Date (accepted, approved, or acceded to the Convention)
1. Algeria / Algérie	3 Dec. 1997
2. Angola / Angola	4 Dec. 1997
3. Bahamas / Bahamas	3 Dec. 1997	YES [31 July 1998]
4. Bangladesh/Bangladesh	7 May 1998
5. Barbados / Barbade	3 Dec. 1997
6. Belize / Belize	3 Feb. 1998	YES [23 April 1998]
7. Benin / Bénin	3 Dec. 1997	Ratified
8. Bolivia / Bolivie	3 Dec. 1997	YES [09 June 1998]
9. Botswana / Botswana	3 Dec. 1997	Ratified
10. Brunei Darussalam / Brunei Darussalam	4 Dec. 1997
11. Burkina Faso / Burkina Faso	3 Dec. 1997	Ratified
12. Burundi / Burundi	3 Dec. 1997
13. Cambodia / Cambodge	3 Dec. 1997
14. Cameroon / Cameroun	3 Dec. 1997
15. Cape Verde / Cap-Vert	4 Dec. 1997
16. Chad / Chad	7 July 1998
17. Chile / Chili	3 Dec. 1997
18. Colombia / Colombie	3 Dec. 1997
19. Côte d'Ivoire / Côte d'Ivoire	3 Dec. 1997
20. Cyprus / Chypre	4 Dec. 1997
21. Djibouti / Djibouti	3 Dec. 1997	YES [18 May 1998]
22. Ecuador / Équateur	4 Dec. 1997
23. Ethiopia / Éthiopie	3 Dec. 1997
24. Gabon / Gabon	3 Dec. 1997
25. Gambia / Gambie	4 Dec. 1997
26. Ghana / Ghana	4 Dec. 1997
27. Grenada / Grenade	3 Dec. 1997	YES [19 August 1998]
28. Guatemala / Guatemala	3 Dec. 1997
29. Guinea / Guinée	4 Dec. 1997	Ratified
30. Guinea-Bissau / Guinée-Bissau	3 Dec. 1997
31. Guyana / Guyana	4 Dec. 1997
32. Honduras / Honduras	3 Dec. 1997
33. Indonesia / Indonésie	4 Dec. 1997
34. Jamaica / Jamaïque	3 Dec. 1997	YES [17 July 1998]
35. Jordan	12 August 1998
36. Kenya / Kenya	5 Dec. 1997
37. Lesotho / Lesotho	4 Dec. 1997
38. Madagascar / Madagascar	4 Dec. 1997
39. Malawi / Malawi	4 Dec. 1997	YES [13 August 1998]
40. Malaysia / Malaisie	3 Dec. 1997
41. Mali / Mali	3 Dec. 1997	YES [02 June 1998]
42. Malta / Malte	4 Dec. 1997
43. Mauritania / Mauritanie	3 Dec. 1997	Ratified
44. Mauritius / Maurice	3 Dec. 1997	YES [03 Dec. 1997]
45. Mozambique / Mozambique	3 Dec. 1997	YES [26 August 1998]
46. Namibia / Namibie	3 Dec. 1997	Ratified
47. Nicaragua / Nicaragua	4 Dec. 1997
48. Niger / Niger	4 Dec. 1997
49. Panama / Panama	4 Dec. 1997
50. Peru / Pérou	3 Dec. 1997	YES [17 June 1998]
51. Philippines / Philippines	3 Dec. 1997
52. Qatar / Qatar	4 Dec. 1997
53. Rwanda / Rwanda	3 Dec. 1997
54. Saint Lucia / Sainte-Lucie	3 Dec. 1997
55. Sao Tomé/Sao Tomé	30 April 1998
56. Senegal / Sénégal	3 Dec. 1997
57. Seychelles / Seychelles	4 Dec. 1997
58. Sierra Leone	29 July 1998
59. South Africa / Afrique du Sud	3 Dec. 1997	YES [26 June 1998]
60. Sudan / Soudan	4 Dec. 1997
61. Suriname / Suriname	4 Dec. 1997
62. Swaziland / Swaziland	4 Dec. 1997
63. Tanzania (United Republic of) / Tanzanie (République Unie de)	3 Dec. 1997
64. Thailand / Thaïlande	3 Dec. 1997
65. Togo / Togo	4 Dec. 1997
66. Trinidad and Tobago / Trinité-et-Tobago	4 Dec. 1997	YES [27 April 1998]
67. Tunisia / Tunisie	4 Dec. 1997
68. Turkmenistan / Turkménistan	3 Dec. 1997	YES [19 Jan. 1998]
69. Uganda / Ouganda	3 Dec. 1997
70. Vanuatu / Vanuatu	4 Dec. 1997
71. Venezuela / Venezuela	3 Dec. 1997
72. Yemen / Yemen	4 Dec. 1997	Ratified
73. Zambia / Zambie	12 Dec. 1997
74. Zimbabwe / Zimbabwe	3 Dec. 1997	YES [18 June 1998]

Note: A number of NAM members (e.g. Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Yemen, Namibia and Guinea) are believed to have passed domestic legislation but not yet deposited at the UN.

LIST OF NON-ALIGNED MOVEMENT (NAM) MEMBER COUNTRIES NOT SIGNATORIES TO, NOR RATIFYERS OF, THE CONVENTION ON THE PROHIBITION OF THE USE, STOCKPILING, PRODUCTION AND TRANSFER OF ANTI-PERSONNEL MINES AND ON THEIR DESTRUCTION

(as of the 28th August 1998)

Country	Comments on Position
1. Afghanistan	Unknown or Undecided
2. Bahrain	Unknown or Undecided
3. Bhutan	Unknown or Undecided
4. Central African Republic	Unknown or Undecided
5. Comores	Unknown or Undecided
6. Congo	Unknown or Undecided
7. Cuba	Opposed to Ban Reason: Occupation of, and use of landmines in, Guantanamo Bay by USA
8. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea)	Unknown or Undecided
9. Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire)	Unknown or Undecided
10.Egypt	Opposed to Ban
11.Equatorial Guinea	Unknown or Undecided
12.Eritrea	Unknown or Undecided
13.India	Unknown or Undecided
14.Iran	Unknown or Undecided
15.Iraq	Unknown or Undecided
16.Kuwait	Unknown or Undecided
17.Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Laos)	Unknown or Undecided
18.Lebanon	Unknown or Undecided
19.Liberia	Unknown or Undecided
20.Libyan Arab Jamahirya	Unknown or Undecided
21.Maldives	Unknown or Undecided
22.Mongolia	Unknown or Undecided
23.Morocco	Unknown or Undecided
24.Myanmar (Burma)	Unknown or Undecided
25.Nepal	Unknown or Undecided
26.Nigeria	Unknown or Undecided
27.Oman	Unknown or Undecided
28.Pakistan	Unknown or Undecided
29.Palestine	Unknown or Undecided: Incapable ?
30.Papua New Guinea	Unknown or Undecided
31.Saudi Arabia	Unknown or Undecided
32.Singapore	Unknown or Undecided
33.Somalia	Unknown or Undecided Incapable ?
34.Sri Lanka	Unknown or Undecided
35.Syrian Arab Republic (Syria)	Unknown or Undecided
36.United Arab Emirates	Unknown or Undecided
37.Uzbekistan	Unknown or Undecided
38.Vietnam	Unknown or Undecided
39.Yugoslavia(1)	Unknown or Undecided

NAM COUNTRIES THAT HAVE RATIFIED THE CONVENTION

1. Bahamas / Bahamas [31 July 1998]

The Bahamas has never possessed landmines. It voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and fully supported the Ottawa Process. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, but did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations. The Bahamas signed the Treaty in December 1997 and ratified in July 1998.

2. Belize / Belize [23 April 1998]

Belize has never possessed landmines. It voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and fully supported the Ottawa Process. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, but did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations. Belize signed the Treaty soon after the opening for signature of the Convention and ratified in April 1998.

3. Bolivia / Bolivie [09 June 1998]

Bolivian authorities estimate that half-million landmines are buried along its 980-kilometre border with Chile. Bolivia signed the Treaty in December 1997 and ratified in June 1998.

4. Djibouti / Djibouti [18 May 1998]

On May 18, I 998, Djibouti became the twelfth government to ratify the Treaty, and the second African State. Djibouti signed the Treaty in December 1997 even though it had not attended the Oslo Negotiations. There is a landmine problem in rural areas due to rebel activity, but few details are available. It has been reported that rebels near Djibouti’s Ethiopian border planted fresh landmines in April 1998.

5. Grenada / Grenade [19 August 1998]

Grenada reports that it has never produced anti-personnel landmines and has no stockpiles. Grenada voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and fully supported the Ottawa process. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, but did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty on the 3rd December 1997 and ratified in August 1998.

6. Jamaica / Jamaïque [17 July 1998]

Jamaica has never possessed anti-personnel landmines. Jamaica was a co-sponsor of UNGA Resolution 51/45S and fully supported the Ottawa Process. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, but did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December and ratified in July.

7. Malawi / Malawi [13 August 1998]

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Malawian troops used landmines to protect the Nacala railway corridor inside Mozambique from attack by Renamo rebels. The United States supplied many of the mines used. Although landmine incidents are infrequently reported, Malawi also has a problem with mines along its side of the Mozambique border. Malawi first expressed its support for a ban at the 4th International NGO Conference on Landmines, held in Maputo, Mozambique in February 1997.

Malawi was a co-sponsor of UNGA Resolution 51/45S, endorsed the Brussels Declaration, but did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Convention in December, and ratified it in August 1998.

8. Mali / Mali [02 June 1998]

There is a slight landmine problem in Mali due to the Tuareg insurgency in the far north of the country. Mali endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Convention in December 1997, passed domestic ratification legislation in April 1998 and deposited it with the United Nations in June 1998.

9. Mauritius / Maurice [03 Dec. 1997]

Mauritius is one of only two countries in Southern Africa (the other being Lesotho) that has never had a landmine problem. It is believed that Mauritius maintains a small stockpile of anti-personnel landmines. Mauritius became the first African country to ratify the Treaty when it both signed and ratified it in December 1997. Mauritius was active in the Ottawa Process, endorsing the Brussels Declaration and participating in the Oslo Negotiations.

10. Mozambique / Mozambique [26 August 1998]

Landmines were used extensively by all sides in the decades long fighting in Mozambique. Mines have claimed some 10,000 victims and continue to do so on a daily basis. More than I, 000 people have been injured by mines since the October 1992 peace accord. Landmines constitute one of the most immediate obstacles to post-war development and agricultural reconstruction.

Human Rights Watch believes the frequently cited UN estimate of two million mines in Mozambique is too high, with the real total in the hundreds, or even in tens, of thousands. But the number of mines is not the measure of the problem. Mozambique clearly has a serious problem that threatens civilians daily and is curtailing economic recovery.

A limited number of landmines continued to be planted after the peace accord, mostly by bandit groups, criminals and poachers. Nearly forty types of anti-personnel mines from more than a dozen nations have been reported in Mozambique, However, mine clearance efforts have been plagued with delays and controversy.

President Chissano announced in October 1995 that Mozambique was prepared to head an international campaign against anti-personnel mines, but little concrete action was taken for the next year and a half as the Mozambican military wanted to retain the option of using landmines.

However, as the 4th International NGO Conference on Landmines (held in Maputo February 25-28,1997) approached greatly increased attention to the issue domestically, regionally and internationally spurred a policy decision. On February 26, Mozambique's Foreign Minister addressed the NGO Conference and announced an immediate ban on the use, production, import and export of anti-personnel mines. Destruction of Mozambique's stockpile was not addressed at this time.

Mozambique endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Treaty negotiations in Oslo. It signed the Treaty in December. The process of ratification by the Council of Ministers has been completed and the instrument was deposited at the UN in August.

11. Peru / Pérou [17 June 1998]

Both the Peru government and rebels have used mines. As recently as August 1998, landmine incidents have been recorded in a disputed border area with Ecuador in the Andean foothills. Mine clearance is believed to be on the agenda of current peace talks. Mines are also found along Peru’s border with Chile.

Peru attended the Oslo Negotiations andsigned the Treaty in December 1997 and ratified in June 1998.

12. South Africa / Afrique du Sud [26 June 1998]

South Africa has been one of the most active and important NAM nations in the global process to ban anti-personnel mines. On February 20,1997, South Africa demonstrated bold leadership by announcing, effective immediately, a comprehensive ban on use, production, and trade of anti-personnel mines, as well as its intention to destroy existing stocks.

While South Africa has had few landmine incidents on its own soil, it was in the past the largest producer and exporter of landmines in all Africa. It used mines in, or supplied mines to, many other African nations. South Africa's mines have been found in Angola, Mozambique, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe and exported further afield to Cambodia, Rwanda and Somalia.

In 1996 the Minister of Defense stated that South Africa had 261,423 anti-personnel mines in its stockpile, along with 49,756 anti-tank mines. A significant number of these mines were destroyed in a "big bang" ceremony in May 1997. The remaining stockpiled anti-personnel landmines were destroyed on October 30,1997. South Africa has kept "a very limited and verifiable number [5000] solely for training specific military personnel in demining techniques and for research into assisting the demining process".

South Africa is now emerging as a leader in the field of mine clearance equipment.

South Africa has played a prominent role in the Ottawa process. It hosted an important OAU conference on landmines in Johannesburg in May of 1997 and chaired the Oslo diplomatic conference on the Treaty in September. South Africa endorsed the Brussels Declaration. South Africa was the third country to sign the Ottawa Treaty in December. The National Assembly agreed to ratification on May 5, and the process was completed in June, making South Africa the 21st country.

13. Trinidad and Tobago / Trinité-et-Tobago [27 April 1998]

Trinidad and Tobago does not possess anti-personnel mines. Trinidad voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and endorsed the Brussels Declaration. It did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations, but signed the Treaty in December 1997 and ratified in April 1998.

14. Turkmenistan / Turkménistan [19 January 1998]

Turkmenistan is considered a regional leader on the need for an immediate ban on anti-personnel landmines, holding conferences to promote the Ottawa Process. Turkmenistan attended the Oslo Negotiations andsigned the Treaty in December 1997 and ratified in January 1998.

15. Zimbabwe / Zimbabwe [18 June 1998]

The government of Zimbabwe estimates that there are one to three million mines planted along its borders with Zambia and Mozambique. Zimbabwe inherited the lengthy border minefields from the Rhodesian government, which the Rhodesians boasted constituted the second largest man-made barrier in the world, after the Great Wall of China. Initially the minefields were demarcated on both sides by security fencing with prominent signs. By 1977 the Rhodesians stopped demarcating the minefields on the hostile side and stopped maintaining them. As a result mine laying became uncontrolled and unrecorded and booby trapping flourished. The minefields remain lethal today, claiming new victims. Clearance of the minefields will be dangerous, costly and time consuming.

In March 1995, a senior government official acknowledged that Zimbabwe had produced ZAP PloughShear ("Claymore" type) mines until October 1992, but said a decision had been recently made not to produce any more anti-personnel mines. Zimbabwe Defense Industries (ZDI) has acknowledged manufacturing the PloughShears, while maintaining "a claymore mine is not a landmine." ZDI has stated that the government ordered a stop to production in 1992 and that "as a result ZDI was forced to destroy all claymores in its stocks."

On May 21,1997 Zimbabwe banned the transfer and use of anti-personnel mines and stated that it would destroy its entire stockpile except for a small number for mine clearance training. Zimbabwe endorsed the Brussels Declaration. It participated in the Oslo Negotiations, and signed the Treaty in December. It has passed domestic legislation in support of ratification, and in June became the 20th country to deposit its instrument of ratification with the UN.

NAM COUNTRIES THAT HAVE SIGNED THE CONVENTION BUT HAVE NOT YET RATIFIED

1. Algeria / Algérie

Algeria has a slight landmine problem. German and Italian troops laid minefields in the Northern Coastal areas during World War II and French troops laid mines near the Tunisian and Moroccan borders until 1962. The mines were mostly German and Italian mines of World War II vintage and French mines from the 1950's. Some new mines have been laid due to Algeria's current security problems of the 1990s. Algeria did not endorse the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations initially as an observer. However, in Oslo in September, Algeria announced it had changed its position and would sign the Treaty in December. Algeria has since signed the Treaty but has not ratified it, although according to UN or Canadian government sources will complete ratification by the end of I998.

2. Angola / Angola

Angola is one of the most mine-affected countries in Africa if not the world, with UN and U.S. estimates as high as nine to fifteen million mines. Globally, only Afghanistan is thought to be more heavily mined. Angola also has one of the highest rates of landmine injuries per capita in the world. Out of a population of about nine million, it has over 70,000 amputees, one in 470 people. Even with renewed peace, the millions of mines present a hazard not only to civilians, but also to the reconstruction of the war-devastated economy and the rebuilding of society.

Mines were used extensively by both government and rebel forces during the near continuous fighting between 196I and 1994. Mine warfare intensified during the "third war" from late 1992 to late 1994, with thousands of new mines being laid by both sides to obstruct roads and bridges, to spoil agricultural land and to encircle besieged towns with mine belts up to three kilometers wide.

Landmines continued to be laid after the signing of, and in violation of, the Lusaka Peace Accord of November 1994, as part of the continuation of sporadic hostilities, as a barrier to freedom of movement, and in order to mark frontiers in contested zones. In 1998, Human Rights Watch continued to receive reports of limited planting of new mines by government and UNITA forces, Cabindan factions, as well as bandits and criminal elements. According the Saturday Star of 25 July 1998, quoting UN reports, UNITA fighters have «begun laying landmines and fortifying their positions», as all-out war moves several steps closer again.

As many as fifty-two different types of anti-personnel mines from eighteen countries have been identified in Angola. Existing records of the locations of mines are extremely scanty and no comprehensive mine survey for Angola has been done. According to various estimates, only some 80,000 mines have been cleared since 1992, and some 150 square kilometers of land returned to the population. The United Nations, the Angolan government, UNITA, commercial firms and non-governmental organizations are all involved mine clearance activities in Angola.

The government of Angola first publicly stated its support for a total prohibition of anti-personnel mines in May 1996. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. Angola signed the Treaty in December but has yet to ratify it although according to UN or Canadian government sources will complete ratification by the end of I998.

3. Bangladesh / Bangladesh

In the past, Bangladesh did not produce or export mines, but maintained a stockpile of anti-personnel landmines and insisted on the right to use them, citing security considerations. There are uncleared landmines along the Burma/Myanmar border. The Bangladesh army has several battalions with mine clearing capability. They have cleared landmines on international peacekeeping operations, including in Kuwait and in Cambodia.

Bangladesh co-sponsored UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo negotiations only as an observer. Initially it was therefore believed that Bangladesh was opposed to a ban, but it signed the Treaty on the 7 May 1998.

4. Barbados / Barbade

Barbados has never possessed landmines. It voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and fully supported the Ottawa Process. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. It is signed the Treaty in December in Ottawa.

5. Benin / Bénin

There is no landmine problem in Benin. Benin endorsed the Brussels Declaration but did not attend the Oslo Negotiations. Benin signed the Treaty in December and is currently engaged in its ratification process.

6. Botswana / Botswana

During the Rhodesian war landmines were planted in northern Botswana. No known incidents have occurred since 1980 and all mines have reportedly been cleared. Botswana may maintain a stockpile of anti-personnel landmines. Botswana endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. Botswana signed the Treaty in December and is at present in the process of ratifying the Convention.

7. Brunei Darussalam / Brunei Darussalam

Brunei does not have a landmine problem. It is not known whether its armed forces maintain a stockpile of landmines. Brunei voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations only as an observer. Brunei however signed in December 1997.

8. Burkina Faso / Burkina Faso

There is no landmine problem in Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December and is believed to have ratified it on the 29 July 1998 although no deposit has as yet been made at the UN.

9. Burundi / Burundi

On 21 February 1996, the Conseil National pour la Defense de la Democratie representative in Bukavu, Zaire, expressed his deep concern regarding the use of anti-personnel mines in the Bubanza area of Burundi. Reports of landmine use in Burundi continue in 1998.

Burundi endorsed the Brussels Declaration but did not attend the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December but has yet to ratify it.

10. Cambodia / Cambodge

Since the 1960s, War has been a defining feature of the Cambodia landscape and has been socially and economically devastated through the use of landmines during the Vietnam War, and through mine laying by Vietnamese, Khmer Rouge as well as government forces. Over half of the country is believed to be affected and it is estimated that there are some four to six million mines. Mines were also used extensively along the frontier with Thailand and in the settling of commercial and other disputes. As a result, one per every 384 inhabitant is an amputee. 61% of mine victims go into debt to pay for their medical treatment. During the 1997 coup d’etat reports of new mines being laid in the Battambang region were received.

The Cambodian Mine Action Center recently announced that mine-related injuries and deaths have decreased to between 100 – 150 per month compared to 300 – 400 per month five years ago.

Cambodia voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December but has yet to ratify it.

11. Cameroon / Cameroun

There is no landmine problem in the Cameroon and voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December but has yet to ratify it.

12. Cape Verde / Cap-Vert

There is no landmine problem in Cape Verde. It voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and it endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Negotiations in Oslo. It signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

13. Chad / Chad

Chad has a serious landmine problem, complicated by the fact that there are no records mine numbers or mine victims. Libya invaded north Chad in 1973 and occupied the whole of the Tibesti region down to a line approximating to the 16th parallel north of the Equator. They continued to occupy this Aouzou strip until 1994 and during their occupation laid a considerable number of mines, most of which remain today. There are large concentrations of anti-personnel and anti-tank mines in northern Chad in the desert and mountain areas of the Aozou strip and along the border with Niger. Internal conflict has also left mine concentrations in Eastern Chad, around Tine on the Sudanese border and near the Nigerian border. Shifting sand in this region has moved landmines, making them even more hazardous.

The UN Department of Humanitarian Affair’s Landmine Database in January 1997 reported that there were 70,000 uncleared landmines in Chad. According to the Chadian military there are approximately 10,000 mines in Aouzou; 2,000 in Zouar; 31,000 in Wour; 10,000 in Oudi Doum; 2,000 in Fada; 5,000 in Ounianga-Kabir and 10,000 in other locations. Landmines restrict travel in parts of the country and have also restricted access to oases in the north.

A joint Chadian-Libyan initiative to clear landmines in the north in 1995 claims officially to have neutralised 529 anti-tank mines and destroyed 263 others. However, a UN Official told Human Rights Watch that the Libyans gave the Chadian official responsible for verifying these efforts a Toyota Land Crussier in return for declaring the work complete. French engineers, as part of their Military Assistance Programme, and the engineers of the Chadian army have also carried out some mine clearance assistance. The Chadian authorities report that more than 1,000 mines have been cleared in these efforts. An invitation by N'djemena for UN assistance in this task failed to develop into practical support and the French military has provided training to a platoon of Chadian military engineers to demine the country.

The mines left by the Libyan army are mostly Belgian in origin, with some Italian, German, Yugoslav, American and Russian types present. The most common anti-personnel mines are NR409 (Belgian); PPM2 (German); M14 (US); M18 (US); PMA3 (Yugoslavia); PMN (Russian).

Chad co-sponsored UNGA Resolution 51/45S and endorsed the Brussels Declaration, but did not attend the Oslo Negotiations. Although it co-sponsored the 1997 UNGA resolution in support of a ban, Chad did not sign the Treaty until 7 July 1998.

14. Chile / Chili

Mines continue to pose a problem in Chile especially in border areas with Argentina, Peru and Bolivia as a result of some 500 000 being planted by the Chilian military over the last three decades.

Chile attended the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

15. Colombia / Colombie

Anti-personnel landmines lie scattered across various parts of Colombia as a result of the more than 30 years of civil war between guerrillas and government troops. There is little accurate information on the number of victims or how many mines have been laid, suffice to say that mines have been used by guerrillas to prevent attacks on their camps and by governments to protect oil pipelines.

Colombia attended the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

16. Côte d'Ivoire / Côte d'Ivoire

There is no landmine problem in Côte d'Ivoire. The Ivory Coast, as it is sometimes known as, endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. Côte D'Ivoire signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

17. Cyprus / Chypre

There is a problem of uncleared landmines from the 1974 hostilities on the island. Both the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot forces consider the minefields under their control as integral to their defense. There are 132 confirmed minefields on the island but there are likely to be other undeclared sites.

Most mines found in Cyprus are of U.S. origin, such as the M-16A2. Most of these mines are deployed in mixed anti-personnel/anti-tank configurations of six to twenty mines each and located in or near the buffer zone which separates Greek Cypriot and Turkish forces, and along North-South roads. There have also been some post-1974 minefields laid around strategic installations. Some are clearly marked, while others are not. There have been civilian casualties. A UN initiative to use Canadian engineers for demining in 1992 failed because the Cypriot communities failed to reach agreement. The U.S. government has identified Cyprus as a producer of anti-personnel landmines, though the government of Cyprus denies it.

Cyprus was a co-sponsor of UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration and did not attend the Oslo Negotiations. Cyprus signed the Convention in December 1997.

18. Ecuador / Équateur

Between 1995 and 1998 Ecuador and Peru buried a combined 100 000 – 150 000 landmines in their border wars. As recently as August 1998, Ecuador has been accused of causing landmine incidents in a disputed border area with Peru in the Andean foothills. Peace negotiations between these states include the issue of mine clearance. Ecuador attended the Oslo Negotiations andsigned the Treaty in December 1997.

19. Ethiopia / Éthiopie

An estimated 500,000 landmines remain from the Ethiopian civil war, causing some five casualties per week. There are many minefields dotted across the country with sixteen types of Russian, Italian, Czech, Pakistani, Egyptian, East German and U.S. anti-personnel landmines reported in them. A virtual landmine barrier was established along the Somali border by the Mengistu government.

There continue to be civilian casualties, such as in May 1996 when one passenger was killed and five seriously hurt when a landmine exploded under a train that was travelling from Djibouti to Ethiopia.

Ethiopia endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. Ethiopia signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

20. Gabon / Gabon

There is no landmine problem in Gabon. Gabon endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

21. The Gambia / Gambie

Although there is no landmine problem in The Gambia, its government did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations. The Gambia did in fact vote «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and sign the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

22. Ghana / Ghana

There is no landmine problem in Ghana and was a co-sponsor of UNGA Resolution 51/45S. Ghana endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

23. Guatemala / Guatemala

Guatemala has a problem with uncleared mines. The Organisation of American States has a programme to remove the mines as part of its vision to clear the whole of Central America by the year 2000. It attended the Oslo Negotiations andsigned the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

24. Guinea / Guinée

There is a slight landmine problem along the border areas of Guinea mainly as a result of a spill over of conflict in neighboring states. Guinea endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations. Guinea signed the Treaty in December. Guinea has passed legislation in support of ratification, but has not completed the process and formally deposited it with the UN.

25. Guinea-Bissau / Guinée-Bissau

There remains a slight landmine problem, a legacy of the 1959-73 struggle for independence from Portugal. The PAIGC has also admitted that during their nationalist struggle they manufactured PMD-6 (Box mines), but production ceased soon after independence.

A former Portuguese military commander told Human Rights Watch in July that after planting mines around a strategic base, the Portuguese had to abandon it, because they could not find the mines they had laid. Mines placed to protect bridges were equally counter-productive and in the 1970s the Portuguese forces in Bissau preferred to use dummy minefields. Since 1990 there have been a number of reported incidents, involving Russian or Portuguese anti-personnel mines. Osvaldo Semedo, the government delegate at the May 1997 OAU meeting on landmines in South Africa, reported that in 1997 two civilians in a town in the east of the country fell victim to landmines, demonstrating that landmines continue to pose a threat, twenty-three years after independence. Fear of landmines in some areas still prevents local people from fully utilising their land.

On February 7,1998 the Guinea-Bissau army launched a campaign to destroy its landmines by blowing up some 2,300 anti-personnel and anti-tank mines near Bissau. Foreign diplomats and Senegalese army officials were there to witness the destruction.

The chief of staff of the Guinea-Bissau national armed forces was suspended in late February for dereliction of duty because a number of weapons, including anti-personnel landmines, captured in Senegal's Casamance province were taken from a military depot of the Bissau army.

Guinea-Bissau did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations, but it did sign the Treaty in December. It has not yet ratified it.

26. Guyana / Guyana

There is no known landmine problem in Guyana. Guyana claims not to have produced or exported mines. It claims also not to maintain a stockpile of mines. Guyana voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, and fully supported the Ottawa process. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, but did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December 1997 in Ottawa.

27. Honduras / Honduras

Both the Contras of Nicaragua and the Salvadoran FMLM used Honduras for logistical camps. Landmines were used on both borders and within Honduran territory to impede cross-border pursuit and incursions. Homemade as well as industrial mines have been found. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December 1997 in Ottawa.

28. Indonesia / Indonésie

Indonesia does not have a landmine problem though a number of «sea-mines» from the 2nd World War continue to pose a risk.

29. Jordan

Jordan has a problem with uncleared landmines resulting in between five and ten landmine casualties every year especially shepards, farmers, hunters and military personnel. Mines are found along Jordan’s borders with Israel and Syria and sporadic floods wash mines downstream. About 10% of Jordan’s population live in areas still dangerous and economically unproductive because of landmines.

Jordan is one of the strongest supporters of the Ottawa Process in the Middle East region. Jordan endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations as a full participant. Jordan voted «Yes» on the 1996 UNGA Resolution supporting negotiations of a total ban on anti-personnel mines as soon as possible and voted «Yes» on the 1997 UNGA Resolution calling on states to sign the Treaty. Jordan signed the treaty in August 1998 becoming the 129th country to do so.

30. Kenya / Kenya

There is no known current landmine problem in Kenya although there have been media reports of a few landmine incidents in the Turkana region. Kenya maintains anti-personnel landmine stockpiles and has used anti-personnel mines in the past along the Somali border in the North East Province. Kenya did not endorse the Brussels Declaration. Nevertheless, Kenya attended the Oslo Negotiations as a full participant and signed the Treaty in December. It has yet to ratify it.

31. Lesotho / Lesotho

The tiny mountain Kingdom of Lesotho is believed to be one of only two countries in Southern Africa unaffected by mines (the other being Mauritius). Lesotho states that it does not maintain a stockpile of landmines. Lesotho was a co-sponsor of UNGA Resolution 51/45S, endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. Lesotho signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

32. Madagascar / Madagascar

There is no known landmine problem in Madagascar, but some landmines were used as a deterrent to opposition marches in the immediate vicinity of the Presidentiaal Palace in 1991. In 1997, the government was considering allowing a French firm to open up a factory to produce weapons, including landmines. However, following diplomatic protests this plan was suspended. Madagascar did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations; it did, however, sign the Treaty in Ottawa in December. It has yet to ratify it.

33. Malaysia / Malaisie

There is a problem of uncleared mines from the long guerrilla insurgency mounted by the Communist Party of Malaysia. The areas, which still have a problem, are in mountainous and remote terrain, especially along the Malaysia/Thailand border. Malaysia does not produce or export mines, but it is not known whether it maintains a stockpile of landmines.

Malaysia was one of the first nations to express support for an immediate ban on anti-personnel mines, in remarks the UN General Assembly in December 1994. Malaysia voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and endorsed the Brussels Declaration. Malaysia participated in the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December 1997.

34. Malta / Malte

Malta does not produce or export anti-personnel mines, but it is not known whether there are stockpiles. Malta announced its support for a global ban in May 1996. It co-sponsored UNGA Resolution 51/45S and endorsed the Brussels Declaration. It participated in the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December.

35. Mauritania / Mauritanie

As a result of the war in the Western Sahara, there is a landmine problem in Mauritania. Soldiers and civilians are occasionally killed or injured by mines planted along the Western Sahara border. The mines most commonly found in Mauritania are Spanish, French, Russian and German. There are no known maps recording landmine locations. The area around the military outpost of Bir Mogrein is reported to be heavily mined and fighting against Polisario in 1975-78 left unrecorded minefields. The region between the port of Nouadhibhou and Zouerate and between Zouerate and Bir Mogrein is thought to be mined.

Mauritania endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Convention in December and is believed to have ratified it but not yet deposited.

36. Namibia / Namibie

The former government of South Africa and its army, the South African Defense Force (SADF), used mines in northern Namibia during its illegal occupation, primarily in fenced and marked areas around military encampments and installations, but also along power lines. The landmines that the SADF planted in northern Namibia were however not properly cleared when South African forces withdrew just prior to independence in 1990. These mines continue to injure people and livestock and to disrupt civilian life. Poachers have also planted a number of mines in Namibia since independence.

A U.S. Department of Defence database indicates that Namibia has produced wooden PMD-6 mines, but Namibian officials deny this claim. The condition of some of Namibia's stockpile of mines is suspect; Human Rights Watch has obtained copies of two confidential documents indicating that the arsenal at Grootfontein Military Base is poorly maintained and contains explosives and weapons, including several types of mines, that are unstable and very hazardous.

Namibia co-sponsored UNGA Resolution 51/45S and endorsed the Brussels Declaration. Although it did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations, Namibia signed the Treaty in December and has passed national legislation in order to ratify but as yet no deposit has been made at the UN.

37. Nicaragua / Nicaragua

According to a study by America Watch both the Sandinista Popular Army and the Contra resistance used landmines during the 1970s and 1980s conflicts, mining strategic economic and communications installations and border areas with Costa Rica and Honduras. An estimated 135,000 were laid. Czech and former USSR as well as USA and Portuguese mines have been found.

Nicaragua signed the Treaty in December 1997, participating in the Brussels conference and the Oslo Negotiations.

38. Niger / Niger

As a result of World War II, there is a slight landmine problem in the far north of Niger. Tuareg insurgency forces exacerbate the situation somewhat. Niger voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations. However, Niger signed the Treaty in December. It has not yet ratified it.

39. Panama / Panama

Panama has no known problem with uncleared mines. Panama signed the Treaty in December. It has not yet ratified it.

40. Philippines / Philippines

Both the Armed Forces of the Philippines and rebel groups such as the National Democratic Front and the Moro National Liberation Front have used mines. Cease-fire agreements have addressed the use of landmines as hostile acts. The Philippines attended the Oslo Negotiations andrecently a number of Philippine senators have urged the government to ratify the Treaty as soon as possible. It is believed that the government has ordered the destruction of landmines in stock.

41. Qatar / Qatar

Qatar is not mine-affected. Qatar endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations as a full participant. It voted «Yes» on the 1996 UNGA Resolution supporting negotiations of a total ban on anti-personnel mines as soon as possible and voted «Yes» on the 1997 UNGA Resolution inviting all states to sign the Treaty. Qatar signed the treaty in December 1997 but has not ratified yet.

42. Rwanda / Rwanda

According to the U.S. State Department some 50,000 anti-tank and anti-personnel mines were planted over the course of the Rwandan civil war which started in 1990. The UN Department of Humanitarian Affair’s Landmine database gives a higher estimate: 250,000. Many known minefields stretch along the border with Uganda. The heaviest concentration of known landmines is in the northeastern portion of the country, in the rural farmlands and tea plantations north of Kigali. Rwanda is thus faced with a serious landmine problem.

The mines used range from those of World War II vintage to the modern non-metallic anti-personnel and anti-tank types, produced in a range of countries, including Belgium, Egypt and South Africa. These mines have caused a significant number of civilian casualties. The Red Cross reported in 1993 between two and four new mine casualties a day. For example on March 20, 1996 in Kivumu in the Nyamyumba municipality a Caritas bus carrying three religious community sisters detonated a mine: one nun was killed instantly, and another died from injuries at the Ruhengeri hospital. The third survived unscathed.

Rwanda endorsed the Brussels Declaration. Although it did not participate in the Oslo Negotiations, it signed the Treaty in December. It has yet to ratify.

43. Sao Tomé e Principe / Sao Tomé

There is no landmine problem in São Tomé e Principe. Sao Tomé voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations. On the 30 April 1998, Sao Tomé became the 125th nation (and 39th in Africa) to sign.

44. Senegal / Sénégal

Senegal has had a number of landmine incidents in its Casamance province where the separatist movement, the Movement des Forces Democratiques de la Casamance (MFDC), has been active. On 25 January 1993 a landmine exploded under a Red Cross vehicle in Casamance, killing its seven occupants. Since 1993 there have been additional landmine incidents in Casamance. Although several of these have been reported in the media, the number is probably higher but the military has censored information about incidents in the province. Between June 1997 and January 1998, landmines killed thirty-two people and 109 suffered amputations. Women and children are conspicuous amongst Ziguinchor's regional hospital mine victim patients. By December 1997, the Senegalese army claimed to have disarmed over 1,600 mines, manufactured in Belgium, Portugal, Spain and Russia. Most of these mines appear to be secondhand, from porous arsenals and old minefields in neighboring states.

The rebels claim that the Senegalese military use landmines too. Human Rights Watch was told by the MFDC in November 1997 that government forces planted mines in Kandialand, Bouraf and Boutoute. The Senegalese Minister of the Interior, Abdouramane Sow stated in November that "it is not the vocation of the Senegalese army to use anti-personnel landmines" and he promised to respect the Mine Treaty. Privately the Senegalese military admits to having a stockpile of anti-personnel landmines, including Claymores, which have been used in regional peacekeeping operations such as ECOMOG in Liberia.

The MFDC separatists are split on their use of landmines. Its hardliners want to step up the fight at any cost. Despite statements in November 1997 and February 1998 that they would stop using mines, incidents continue to occur. The Senegalese human rights NGO, Rhaddo, has been in dialogue with them over this.

Senegal endorsed the Brussels Declaration. It participated in the Oslo Negotiations, and signed the Treaty in December. It has yet to ratify the Treaty.

45. Seychelles / Seychelles

The Seychelles island does not have a landmine problem and the government states that it does not even have a stockpile of anti-personnel landmines. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, participated in the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December, although it has yet to ratify it.

46. Sierra Leone

Rebel forces in the east and south have used a small number of landmines along roads. Of the thirty-seven landmine-related deaths in 1993, three were civilians. There has been an average of three to four landmine incidents every month. In 1997 following a coup, the Nigerian military has been responsible for laying new minefields, resulting in some civilian casualties. The Nigerian press also reported in September 1997 that the military had intensified laying of landmines around and particularly on the passage routes of ECOMOG troops and that there had been civilian landmine casualties.

Sierra Leone was a co-sponsor of UNGA Resolution 51/45S. It committed itself to support the Ottawa Process on May 21, 1997, just prior to the coup. President Kabbah was restored to power in March and Sierra Leone signed in July 1998.

Landmine warfare however continues in the north of the country.

47. St. Lucia / Sainte-Lucie

St. Lucia has never possessed anti-personnel landmines. It voted «'Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and fully supported the Ottawa Process. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration, and although it did not participate in the Oslo negotiations, it signed the Treaty in December 1997.

48. Sudan / Soudan

The ongoing civil war has left Sudan with one of the most severe problems with uncleared mines in Africa. There are thought to be between 500,000 and 2 million landmines, many of them older types, many of them of Soviet-origin. More recently mines have come from the Middle East, including from Iran and Iraq.

There have been many civilian casualties including near Khartoum. In October 1996 a landmine exploded at a makeshift market place on the outskirts of the Sudanese capital killing one person and wounding another. There have also been incidents on the Eritrean border and in the south. Human Rights Watch has obtained reports that fresh landmines have been planted near the Eritrean border, in the south and in the Nuba mountains in 1998.

Sudan endorsed the Brussels Declaration. It participated in the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it. Several of the Sudan People's Liberation Army factions have also indicated that they will not use anti-personnel landmines, but in late 1998 landmine warfare appears to continue.

49. Suriname / Suriname

At the time of going to press no information on the landmine situation in Suriname could be found. Suriname attended the Ottawa signing ceremony and signed at the same time. It has not yet ratified the Treaty.

50. Swaziland / Swaziland

Swaziland has a very limited landmine problem. Several Swazi citizens have been killed or maimed by mines along the Mozambique border, including army officers patrolling the border and Ministry of Agriculture officials rehabilitating the fence, which controls foot-and-mouth disease.

At the February 1997 4th International NGO Conference on Landmines, held in Maputo Mozambique, a Swazi official for the first time called for a ban "with immediate effect». Swaziland endorsed the Brussels Declaration. It participated in the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December. It has not yet ratified it.

51. Tanzania (United Republic of) / Tanzanie (République Unie de)

Tanzania experienced a limited number of landmine incidents in the 1960s, blaming Portuguese forces, which denied laying the mines. Tanzanian forces used mines in Uganda in 1979 and in Mozambique in I986-88. The Tanzanian military maintains anti-personnel mine stockpiles.

The Tanzanian government in 1996 indicated that it supported a total ban on production, export and operational use of anti-personnel mines in principle. It endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations and signed the Treaty in December. It has not yet ratified the Treaty.

52. Thailand / Thaïlande

Mines were also used extensively along the frontier with Thailand during the many wars in Cambodia. Thailand attended the Oslo Negotiations as an observer and was present in Ottawa in December 1997.

53. Togo / Togo

There is no landmine problem in Togo. Togo endorsed the Brussels Declaration but did not attend the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in December, but has yet to ratify it.

54. Tunisia / Tunisie

The Tunisian military report that they clear between 200 and 300 landmines of World War II vintage annually. These landmines are generally reported by local residents, or are recorded following an incident. These mines are of German, British, French, Italian and US origin and are principally concentrated at Kasserine, Sbeitla, Sidi Bouzid and Mareth battlefields in west central Tunisia. Mjez El-Bab and Pont du Fahs in the north are also seriously affected.

It voted «Yes» on UNGA Resolution 51/45S. Tunisia did not endorse the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations as an observer. Yet, it signed the Treaty in December. It has not ratified.

55. Uganda / Ouganda

The Lord's Resistance Army began planting landmines in 1994 in the north of the country. A limited number of anti-personnel landmines were also used during the Tanzanian-backed invasion to overthrow Idi Amin in 1979 and during the military campaign in 1986 of the National Resistance Army, which resulted in Yoweri Museveni becoming president.

Uganda has produced two types of anti-personnel landmines but in August 1997 announced it had ceased production. Anti-personnel landmines, a PMD-6 (Box mine type), a plastic mine and grenades were produced at Nakasongola, north of Kampala. The factory was run by the Ugandan army s National Enterprises Corporation (NEC) and had a capacity of producing 50,000 plastic anti-personnel mines per year. Construction of the factory began in 1987 and it was commissioned in 1992, but by 1995 reportedly produced only 10,000 plastic anti-personnel mines. The factory, constructed with assistance from a Chinese company, China Wanbao Engineering Corporation, also produces other weapons.

According to NEC's Acting Managing Director, Maj. Fred Mwesigwe, the factory’s landmine and grenade section is being converted to a dry cell (battery) production line.

Uganda voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, endorsed the Brussels Declaration, and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. Uganda signed the Treaty in December. It has not yet ratified the Treaty.

56. Vanuatu / Vanuatu

There are no reports that Vanuatu has a landmine problem or possesses anti-personnel mines. It voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S. It announced full support for the Ottawa Process at the Australia NGO Forum in August 1997, but did not participate in the diplomatic meetings in Brussels or Oslo. Vanuatu did, however, sign the Treaty in December in Ottawa.

57. Venezuela / Venezuela

Venezuela participated in the diplomatic meeting in Oslo and endorsed the Brussels Declaration and signed the Treaty in December in Ottawa.

58. Zambia / Zambie

Zambia has minefields along both its Angolan and its Namibian borders. Zambians continue to be victims of mines laid over fifteen years ago. Public awareness of the problem is poor. In 1994, Zambian defense ministry spokesperson, Major Jack Mubanga, said, "There are a lot of landmines in Southern and Western provinces, but it is too costly for the government to embark on an exercise to have them removed. It is very expensive to carry out such an assignment."

Zambia continues to maintain a stockpile of anti-personnel mines. Nearly thirty types of anti-personnel mines from ten nations have been found in Zambia. Zambian police are concerned about the weapons trade from Angola into western Zambia, which has included landmines.

Zambia voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, endorsed the Brussels Declaration and participated in the Oslo Negotiations. It signed the Treaty in New York on December 12. It has not ratified the Treaty yet.

59. Yemen / Yemen

Southern secessionists mined the defences of Aden and Mulallah in the south of Yemen during the civil war. The government of Yemen has estimated that it has cleared one-third of approximately 66,000 landmines planted during the 1994 conflict. Mines of British, Czech, Egyptian, Hungarian, Italian and Russian origin have been cleared by a nationally organized mine clearance program run by the Military Works and Engineering Section with technical assistance provided by the United Nations. As with other countries of the region, a common mine clearance problem is shifting sands that constantly change the location of landmines.

In August 1998, the United States gave a 2.5 million dollar grant to Yemen to fund its landmine clearing operations.

In November 1997, the government of Yemen hosted a meeting on landmines promoting the Ottawa Process and the Mine Treaty. Government representatives from more than a dozen countries in the region attended along with NGOs, the Red Cross and the ICRC.

Yemen endorsed the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations as a full participant. Yemen voted «Yes» on the 1996 and 1997 UNGA Resolutions. Yemen signed the Treaty in December. The parliament on May 12, 1998 passed the necessary legislation to ratify the Treaty, but as yet has not completed the ratification process by formally depositing its instrument of ratification with the United Nations headquarters in New York.

DETAILS OF NAM COUNTRIES THAT HAVE NOT SIGNED THE BAN CONVENTION

Of the NAM countries that have not signed the Treaty, those that have shown some willingness to sign are Congo-Brazzaville, Democratic Republic of Congo (before the new rebel advance on Kinshasa in August 1998), and Liberia. The Central African Republic, Comoros, Equatorial Guinea and Eritrea have shown less interest. Those most hostile to a ban include, Iran, Iraq, India, Pakistan, Cuba, Egypt, Libya, Morocco and Nigeria.

Sadly, some of the most seriously mine-affected countries that are members of the Non-Aligned Movement have shown very little interest in a ban.

1. Afghanistan

Afghanistan is one of the most mine-infested countries of the world as a result of the past 15 years of conflict The large influx of returning refugees in 1992 resulted in a huge increase in mine casualties as did the military activities between the Kabul government and the Taliban movement. In 1995 alone 4000 persons were either killed or wounded by mines. According to the March 1997 UN demining database, ten million mines are in Afghanistan and one per every 631 inhabitants are amputees.

Although Afghanistan did not attend the Oslo Negotiations nor did it endorse the Brussels Declaration it is believed to be supportive of a ban. It has not yet signed the Treaty.

2. Bahrain

Bahrain is not mine-affected. Bahrain did not participate in the Brussels conference or the Oslo Negotiations and it has not signed the Treaty. Bahrain did however vote «Yes» on the 1996 UNGA Resolution supporting negotiations of a total ban on anti-personnel mines as soon as possible and «Yes» on the 1997 UNGA Resolution inviting all states to sign the Treaty.

3. Bhutan

The situation regarding landmines in The Kingdom of Bhutan is not known at the time of going to press, and Bhutan has not been active in the Ottawa Process. Its links with India might be a measure of why.

4. Central African Republic

There is no landmine problem in the Central African Republic, which voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S calling for an international ban as soon as possible. The CAR did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations and has not signed the Ottawa Treaty.

5. Comoros

There is no landmine problem in the Comores. The Comoros voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations. It did not sign the Treaty.

6. Congo (Brazzaville)

There is no significant current landmine problem in the Congo. Congo voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and endorsed the Brussels Declaration but did not attend the Oslo Negotiations. It co-sponsored the UNGA resolution in support of the Treaty, but did not sign it in December.

7. Cuba

Cuba makes use of anti-personnel landmines exclusively in the area immediately surrounding the Cuban territory occupied by the US at the Naval Base in Guantanamo and does not export mines of any type.

Cuba participated as an observer in many of the Ottawa Process meetings and attended the Ottawa signing ceremony but believes that «the final objective of any international treaty on landmines must guarantee the protection of civilians as well as the defensive capacity of all States to preserve their sovereignty and territorial integrity». Cuba asserts that mines are vital for safe-guarding their national security interests against US «aggression» but will clean its minefields once the US withdraws its troops from the Guantanamo Naval Base.

8. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea)

When the North Korean army swept across the border with South Korea in 1950 landmines were used to a very limited extent. However when the U.S. entered the war, the UN forces began to make use of mines. These mines were captured by North Koreans and used to slow the U.S. advance.

9. Democratic Republic of the Congo (former Zaire)

Reports of landmine incidents in Zaire started in 1995. Initially the laying of landmines were in the Goma area and there were in late 1995 a rapid rise in the number of incidents involving antitank and anti-personnel mines. For example, on October 24, 1995 an international aid worker lost a leg and suffered head injuries after stepping on a mine in Goma. More incidents followed including in February 1996 an anti-tank mine exploded near the camp of Panzi, killing four and injuring six others. In late 1997 as forces loyal to Laurent Desire Kabila marched on Kisangani, government forces laid minefields around the airport. These failed to stop the airport falling quickly to the rebel forces and there have since been civilian casualties.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo co-sponsored UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations. Although the DRC was a co-sponsor of the UNGA resolution in support of the Treaty and was present at the signing ceremony in Ottawa in December it did not sign. It could be argued that the DRC is obliged to sign the Treaty as a result of joining the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

10. Egypt

Egypt is one of the most mine-affected countries in the world. It is also Africa's sole remaining anti-personnel mine producer. The UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs Landmine Database in January 1997 reported that Egypt suffered from some 23 million landmines. The Egyptian government reports that these mines have claimed 5,017 civilian casualties, resulting in 418 dead.

The government also claims that mined areas make up 288,000 hectares. Most of these landmines are left over from the Second World War, particularly in the area of the El Alamein battlefield. Areas near the Egypt/Libya border, along the Red Sea coast of the Eastern Desert and areas of the Sinai peninsula are also known to have uncleared mines. The mines found in Egypt range from German, U.S. and British mines of World War II vintage to modern British, U.S., Russian and Israeli types. Civilian casualties are not rare. For example on 5 January 1996 three Israeli tourists were killed and one injured when their jeep set off a landmine in the Sinai desert. In the Qantara region a landmine explosion in the same month injured two Egyptian farmers. Egypt reports that its mine clearance efforts to date have removed 11 million mines from 103,000 hectares of land.

Egypt has produced landmines in at least three facilities, all of them run by the Ministry of War Production as part of its 10-plant Egyptian Military Factories (EMF) group. They include licensed versions or close copies of Russian, Italian and American mine designs. Egyptian mines are known to have been deployed in Afghanistan, Angola, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Somalia, Iraq and Nicaragua.

One of these firms, the Heliopolis Company for Chemical Industries (EMF Factory 81) has exported a small plastic A/P mine, the T/78, to a number of Middle Eastern countries. It is not known if EMF's other mine-producing facilities - the Kaha Company for Chemical Industries (Factory 270) and the Maasara Company for Engineering Industries (Factory 45) - also export mines. Egypt produces at least twelve types of anti-tank mine and six types of anti-personnel mines: a copy of the Czech PP-Mi-SK; the T/79, a copy of the Italian VS-50; U/I Bounding Fragmentation Stake AP; U/I Bounding AP; U/I "Shu" AP; U/I shallow-water AP.

Egypt has been aggressively seeking international financial support to clear its minefields. What it does not say is that it maintains a significant mine production capacity and has exported to at least seven countries, although Egypt told Human Rights Watch in May 1997 that it had imposed a moratorium on its exports.

Egypt voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S and attended the Brussels and Oslo Negotiations as an observer. It has spoken out against the Ottawa process and has not sign the Treaty.

11. Equatorial Guinea

There is no landmine problem. Equatorial Guinea voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations. It did not sign the Treaty.

12. Eritrea

Thirty years of war has left Eritrea with some 150,000 and uncleared landmines. Some of these mines and minefields are located close to populated areas. Unpopulated areas of the country have not yet been surveyed for mines.

Some sixteen types of Russian, Italian, Czech, Pakistani, East German and U.S. manufactured anti-personnel mines have been reported. Demining teams have cleared up to a million mines since the end of the war but even so an estimated 2,000 civilians have died from landmine explosions since 1991.

There have been incidents of new landmines planted by Sudan-backed rebels along the Sudan border.

Eritrea voted "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45S, but did not endorse the Brussels Declaration or attend the Oslo Negotiations. Although it was a co-sponsor of the UNGA resolution in support of the Treaty and was present at the signing ceremony in Ottawa in December it did not sign.

13. India

There is a problem of uncleared landmines along the India/Pakistan border in Kashmir and along the India/China border. India produces two U.S.-designed anti-personnel mines (M-14 and M16A1).

Although India is not known to have exported mines, it declared a moratorium on anti-personnel landmine exports on March 5, 1996. India states that it supports the use of anti-personnel landmines for self-defense in demarcated fields and along international borders. India favours a ban on randomly deployed mines and on the use of anti-personnel landmines in internal conflicts. India announced in October 1996 that it would continue to produce anti-personnel landmines for domestic use, and has no plans to destroy existing stockpiles. It did, however, vote "Yes" on UNGA Resolution 51/45. India did not endorse the Brussels Declaration and attended the Oslo Negotiations only as an observer.

14. Iran

Iran has a severe problem with uncleared landmines along its borders with Iraq, the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan. Thousands of civilians, including farmers and shepherds, have fallen casualty to landmines left over from the 1980-1988 Iran/Iraq war. The government of Iran has estimated its uncleared landmines at 16 million, reports a lack of maps and clearance equipment and places great emphasis on the international community’s responsibility for transfer of technology and facilitation of demining.

Iranian military and private experts believe that Iran produced significant quantities of anti-personnel mines during the Iran/Iraq war yet no open source contains data on Iranian production of anti-personnel mines. In December 1997, a representative of the Government of Iran said that it does not export anti-personnel mines.

Iran was a full participant to the October 1996 Ottawa strategy meeting and also participated in the Brussels conference but did not sign the Brussels Declaration. Iran participated in the Oslo Negotiations as an observer. Iran was absent from voting on the 1996 UNGA Resolution supporting negotiations of a total ban on anti-personnel mines as soon as possible and abstained from voting on the 1997 UNGA Resolution inviting all states to sign the Treaty. While Iran did attend the Ottawa ceremonies, it did not sign, and made a statement, «We welcome the initiative by some states to ban [anti-personnel mines] through adoption of a legally binding agreement amongst themselves.»

15. Iraq

Iraq is severely mine-affected as a consequence of the Gulf War, the Iran/Iraq War, and two decades of internal conflict. Mines Advisory Group (MAG) estimates that at least four million landmines were laid in northern Iraq (Kurdistan). The Iran/Iraq and Iraq/Kuwait borders are also mined. Almost any kind of anti-personnel mine can be found in Iraq -- some of the more common mines are of Italian, Russian, Belgian, Chinese and U.S. origin. Landmines have prevented the return of refugees and displaced persons, particularly in the area bordering Iran.

Iraq has been involved since the 1970s in the establishment of a domestic landmine production capacity. Though Iraq deployed enormous quantities of mines in Kuwait and Iraqi Kurdistan, the vast majority of mines used were imported. Iraq has manufactured a copy of the Italian Valsella Valmara 69 bounding anti-personnel mine, at least one anti-personnel mine developed with Yugoslav assistance, one ex-Soviet model and two older Italian mine designs.

Iraq did not participate in meetings of the Ottawa Process, did not cosponsor relevant UN General Assembly resolutions and did not sign the Convention.

16. Kuwait

According to a 1993 U.S. State Department report, during the recent Persian Gulf War, Iraqi forces laid millions of mines to prevent Allied Forces from recapturing Kuwaiti territory. Allied forces also dropped Gator scatterable anti-personnel mines from the air. In the aftermath of the conflict, Kuwait had an estimated 728 square kilometres of mined land seeded with landmines of Russian, Italian and U.S. origin. The UN gives an estimate of 5 million mines in Kuwaiti soil.

The Government of Kuwait spent over U.S. $700 million hiring over 4000 private contractors from a number of different co