| <Previous | Next> |
| <Previous | Next> |
Key developments since May 2000: The UK continues to be one of the biggest contributors to mine action internationally, spending approximately US$23 million in its financial year 2000/2001, a significant increase from the previous year.
The United Kingdom signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997, ratified it on 31 July 1998 and the treaty entered into force on 1 March 1999. National legislation (the Landmines Act 1998) includes penal sanctions, but introduces an interpretation of the Mine Ban Treaty’s comprehensive prohibition on assisting anyone to engage in a prohibited activity that has drawn criticism from the International Campaign to Ban Landmines and the UK campaign against landmines, Landmine Action. The UK’s Ministry of Defence interprets “assistance” as involving a deliberate and cognizant act.[1] Under the Act, UK personnel are protected from prosecution for the “mere participation in the planning or execution of operations, exercises or other military activity” where non-Mine Ban Treaty States use antipersonnel mines. Military training reportedly includes a requirement for the UK position on antipersonnel mines to be stated by UK personnel should they find themselves present during the planning of joint operations during which antipersonnel mines may be used. But, the legislation itself appears to permit any action by troops short of laying antipersonnel mines. The legal interpretation was stated in a Declaration deposited at the United Nations together with the UK instrument of ratification.[2]
On 17 May 2000 the Ministry of Defence stated in a Parliamentary Written Answer that “UK armed forces were involved in 15 joint operations involving the use of anti-personnel landmines over the last three years, primarily involving operations in the Balkans. However, in no instances were UK armed forces responsible for their use.”[3] This was subsequently clarified as referring to mines “not laid at that time by our operation partners or the UK Armed Forces but [mines that] were a remnant of war, or previous actions, in the area of operations. As such the 15 operations did not involve the laying of anti-personnel landmines, but their existence in the areas in which operations took place means that their presence was a factor in those operations.” [4]
The UK participated in the Second Meeting of States Parties in September 2000; the UK delegation included members of the UK Mission to the UN Conference on Disarmament, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Department for International Development (DFID). The UK actively participated in the intersessional Standing Committee meetings in Geneva in December 2000 and May 2001.
The UK submitted its transparency reports as required by Article 7 of the Mine Ban Treaty on 26 August 1999 and 17 April 2000.[5] The third Article 7 report was submitted to the UN on 25 April 2001, for the period from 1 April 2000 to 31 December 2000.
At the United Nations General Assembly on 20 November 2000 the UK voted in favor of Resolution 55/33V, which calls for universalization and full implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty, and also co-sponsored and voted for Resolution 55/37, which calls upon States that have not already done so to adhere to Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW).
The UK is a party to the CCW Amended Protocol II, and attended the Second Annual Conferences of States Parties in December 2000. At the Second Annual Conference the UK co-sponsored proposals presented by the Netherlands that extensive consideration be given to amending the CCW in order to deal with the issue of “explosive remnants of war,” but did not express views in plenary sessions on other proposals to amend the CCW. The MoD submitted its second report as required by Article 13 of Amended Protocol II on 29 November 2000.
The UK continues to support efforts “for the widest possible ban on anti-personnel mines through work in all appropriate fora, including the Conference on Disarmament.”[6]
The UK was a producer and exporter of antipersonnel mines, but reported (on 26 August 1999) that it had completed conversion or decommissioning of production facilities.[7] British companies continue to cooperate with European companies in the development and production of antivehicle mines. There is concern that some of these mines have fuzes that may enable the mine to be activated by a person, and thus have the effect of antipersonnel mines.[8]
There were two attempted sales of antipersonnel mines in the UK in 1999, by the Romanian arms company Romtehnica and by Pakistan Ordnance Factories. The UK government has made no further announcements as to the progress of investigations into these two incidents.
The UK completed destruction of its stockpile of more than two million antipersonnel mines in October 1999. In April 1998 it was announced that the UK would “retain about 4,000 anti-personnel landmines, less than half of one per cent of current stocks, in order to be able to carry out training in demining.”[9] The UK’s second Article 7 Report stated that 2,088 Ranger mines, 1,056 C3 (Elsie) mines, and 1,375 antipersonnel mines of foreign manufacture were retained, “for the development of and training in mine detection, mine clearance, or mine destruction techniques as provided for in Article 3 of the Convention.” The third Article 7 report shows an increase of 400 non-UK types in the total number of antipersonnel mines retained, with 490 non-UK mines transferred “for the development of and training in mine detection.”[10]
UK forces also possess “inert” antipersonnel mines which are designed for training purposes. UK forces do not use live mines for training.[11] Landmine Action has pointed out that the retention of stocks for training therefore appears unnecessary.
The UK’s Article 7 reports provide no information on the technical characteristics of a number of British antipersonnel mines (most of which are found in minefields in Africa), nor on other antipersonnel mines still possessed by the UK that were manufactured overseas. In addition, no information is reported on the Projector Area Defense (PJRAD) fragmentation mine, which is not considered as an antipersonnel mine by the MoD, or Claymore-type mines (which are prohibited by the Mine Ban Treaty when used with tripwire detonation). The MoD has advised Landmine Monitor that Claymore tripwires have been destroyed. The MoD’s view is that the illegality for UK personnel of using antipersonnel mines, and the consequent changes to drill, makes physical adaptations or barriers to the use of Claymores in tripwire mode unnecessary.[12]
As reported in last year’s Landmine Monitor report,[13] at the May 2000 Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention, the UK delegation declared that it had a different understanding of the Mine Ban Treaty than other States Parties as to whether mines designated as antivehicle or antitank, but which may be detonated by the unintentional act of a person, are considered to be antipersonnel and hence prohibited. But the UK supported a proposal by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to hold consultations on this issue, which took place on 13-14 March 2001 in Geneva with the UK attending. An ICRC report of the meeting was produced which included proposals for best practices. Several experts recommended that antivehicle mines with tripwires, breakwires or tilt rods as the sole fusing mechanism should be regarded as antipersonnel mines. Some experts also recommended that pressure mines should not be capable of being activated by less than 150 kilograms, and that double- or triple-sensor fuzes could be used in order to discriminate between people and vehicles. The experts recommended further research to determine if antihandling devices can discriminate between intentional and unintentional contact of a person and that States review the sensitivities of their mines with antihandling devices.[14]
The MoD contributed a “non-paper” to the ICRC consultation, urging that consideration of humanitarian concerns “is pursued in a context that takes realistic account of military operational and procurement factors” and that it address “clearly identified humanitarian issues not just unquantifiable theoretical risks.” The UK stated that antivehicle mines do not achieve their intended purpose when they are detonated by “anything or anyone other than the desired category of enemy vehicle.” As a result of the Mine Ban Treaty prohibition on antipersonnel mines, “without ADD [anti-disturbance devices] the military utility of AVM can be all but lost, and therefore retrofitting of ADD might be wholly legitimate. This does not imply that the AVM has in any sense been reconfigured as an APM.”[15]
The results of the ICRC consultations were presented to the Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention on 11 May 2001 in Geneva, but the UK delegation did not contribute to discussion of this issue. The MoD has subsequently informed Landmine Monitor that it supports the principle of best practices regarding antivehicle mines.[16] At this Standing Committee meeting, Landmine Action presented research conducted with Loughborough University, which showed that the forces exerted by a person in a variety of circumstances, including while running, alighting from a truck or skipping, could far exceed the equivalent of 150 kilograms.[17]
The MoD acknowledges that some very sensitive antidisturbance devices do exist, but claims that these are not found among UK stocks.[18] According to Parliamentary statements, “all UK weapons systems have been checked for compliance with the provisions of the Mine Ban Treaty. There are no weapons or munitions in the UK inventory which fall under the Ottawa definition of an antipersonnel mine.”[19]
However, Landmine Action remains concerned that some antivehicle mines retained by the UK may have features that could cause them to explode from the unintentional act of a person, thus being defined as antipersonnel mines under the Mine Ban Treaty. These mines are listed in the table below.
UK Antivehicle Mines
|
Mk 7/4 (standard) and Mk 7/7 (waterproofed) blast mines.
Can be used with L39A 1B1 tilt-rod fuze. |
Manufactured by BAE Systems/Royal Ordnance
Approx. 21,200 L39A 1B1 tilt rods were destroyed as part of a disposal program between April 1995 and April 1996. Mines to be withdrawn from stocks in October 2001. |
|
L3A1 lightweight non-metallic mine. Rubber-cased with single impulse
fuze.
|
Total stock held: not known.
To be withdrawn from stocks in October 2001. |
|
Barmine pressure operated blast mine.
Has three add-on fuze options including Anti Disturbance Double Impulse (ADDI) fuze (detonates mine when it is rotated about its longitudinal axis); and the Full Width Attack Mine Electronic (FWAM (E)) fuze, with a seismic and magnetic sensor. |
Manufactured by BAE Systems/Royal Ordnance.
Total MoD stock held: not known. |
|
AT2 shaped charge mine (scatterable submunition). Contains integral
anti-handling device. Designed to self-destruct after a maximum four days.
|
The MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) containing the AT2 is manufactured
by a consortium of European companies including the UK’s BAE Systems and
Hunting Engineering.
Total MoD stock held: estimated 100,000. |
|
Shielder Vehicle Launched Scatterable Mine System L35A1 mines with full
width attack magnetic influence fuzes. L35A1 are designed to self-destruct after
a maximum fifteen days. They contain no integral anti-handling device, but
moving the mine through the earth’s magnetic field will cause it to
detonate.
|
Manufactured by Alliant Techsystems (United States). Total MoD stock held:
minimum 63,300 L35A1 mines.
|
The MoD and Foreign Office have previously stated that the UK does not hold stocks of antipersonnel mines elsewhere, and that other States do not have antipersonnel mines located in the UK, including the British Indian Ocean Territory of Diego Garcia. United States antipersonnel mines are said to be stored on US ships offshore Diego Garcia.[20] At the May 2001 Standing Committee meetings, the UK delegation issued a statement asserting, “We wish to affirm that US stocks do not fall under our national jurisdiction or control and we do not therefore have any obligations under Article 4 [regarding stockpile destruction] of the [Mine Ban Treaty] in respect of them.”[21]
In January 2000 the UK government stated that, “the question of transit is being looked at carefully by legal advisers.”[22]
Although the Landmines Act 1998 was extended to Guernsey and the Isle of Man on 11 October 2000, it has not yet been extended to cover British Overseas Territories. Thus UK citizens are prohibited from using, developing, possessing or transferring antipersonnel mines in these territories, but nationals of other countries are not. The Overseas Territories are: Anguilla, Bermuda, British Antarctic Territory, British Indian Ocean Territory (including Diego Garcia), British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), Gibraltar, Montserrat, Pitcairn, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, St Helena, and Turks and Caicos Islands.
The UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) contributed US$22,880,000 (£16 million) to humanitarian mine clearance, mine awareness education and research and development for mine clearance in the financial year 2000/2001.[24] The UK has also indirectly funded mine clearance through the European Community, with contributions of £5.4 million (US$8.8 million) in 1998 and an estimated £3.3 million (US$4.8 million) in 1999.[25] To date, the majority of funding has gone to country-based mine action programs, with most of the funds applied to humanitarian mine clearance.
The US$22.9 million in mine action funding for 2000/2001 represents a significant increase from US$20.2 million in 1999/2000, and a dramatic increase from US$7.3 million in mine action funding in 1998/1999. Expenditure in 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 included exceptional expenditure for Kosovo.
The tables below summarize mine action spending by the UK by activity and country.[26]
Mine Action Spending by Activity
|
1997-98
|
1998-99
|
1999-2000
|
2000-2001
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
(a) Humanitarian mine clearance(1)
|
£4,149,642(3)
(US$5,933,988) |
£3,990,468(3)
(US$5,706,370) |
£12,300,000
(US$17,589,000) |
£14,500,000
(US$20,735,000) |
|
£200,000(4)
(US$286,000) |
£250,000(4)
(US$357,500) |
£35,000(4)
(US$50,050) |
|
|
|
(b) Military initiative mine clearance(2)
|
Nil
|
£205,000
(US$293,150) |
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Nil
|
£125,000(5)
(US$178,750) |
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
|
(c) Mine awareness
|
£250,000(4)
(US$357,500) |
Nil
|
£1,292,339
(US$1,848,045) |
£500,000
(US$715,000) |
|
(d) Research and development
|
£376,673
(US$538,642) |
£548,343
(US$784,131) |
£500,000
(US$715,000) |
£1,000,000
(US$1,430,000) |
(1) Includes clearance of antipersonnel mines and other unexploded
ordnance as well as mine awareness; programs are often integrated so separate
costs are not available.
(2) Military mine clearance has taken
place in the Balkans since 1992. Military advisers have been attached to UN Mine
Action Centers assisting in the development of mine action programs, supervising
mine clearance carried out by the Entity Armed Forces, and providing mine
awareness to local populations. The Mine Information Training Centre at Minley
in Surrey has provided mine awareness training.
(3) Includes
integrated mine awareness activities.
(4) Payment made from
Foreign and Commonwealth Office funds.
(5) Value of surplus
equipment re-deployed to mine clearance projects.
Funding for Mine Action by Country[27]
|
1996-97
|
1997-98
|
1998-99
|
1999-2000
|
Recipient agency (1999-2000)
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Afghanistan
|
£1,050,000
(US$1,514,100) |
£2,106,500
(US$3,037,573) |
£920,000
(US$1,326,640) |
£1,900,000
(US$2,739,800) |
UNOCHA
|
|
Albania
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
£50,070
(US$72,201) |
Albanian Army
|
|
Bosnia and
Herzegovina |
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
£500,000
(US$721,000) |
International Trust Fund
|
|
Cambodia
|
£1,058,700
(US$1,526,645) |
£689,686
(US$994,527) |
£693,000
(US$999,306) |
£2,274,000
(US$3,279,108) |
HALO Trust, MAG(1), CMAC(2)
|
|
Croatia
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
£100,000
(US$144,200) |
UNMAS(3)/
CROMAC(4) |
|
Egypt
|
£500,000
(US$721,000) |
£87,308
(US$125,898) |
Nil
|
Nil
|
Government of Egypt
|
|
Georgia
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
£220,781
(US$318,366) |
£340,000
(US$490,280) |
HALO Trust
|
|
Guinea Bissau
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
£138,860
(US$200,236) |
|
|
Iraq
|
£785,000
(US$1,131,970) |
£658,972
(US$950,237) |
£740,000
(US$1,067,080) |
£451,764
(US$651,444) |
MAG
|
|
Jordan
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
587,156
(US$846,679) |
Government of Jordan
|
|
Laos
|
£148,307
(US$213,859) |
£101,250
(US$146,003) |
£500,000
(US$721,000) |
£833,351
(US$1,201,692) |
MAG
|
|
FYR of Macedonia
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
£52,000
(US$74,984) |
UNICEF(5)
|
|
Mozambique
|
£408,900
(US$589,634) |
£487,500
(US$702,975) |
£362,500
(US$522,725) |
£403,000
(US$581,126) |
HALO Trust
|
|
Nicaragua
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
£283,000
(US$408,086) |
Organization of American States
|
|
Sierra Leone
|
£4,500
(US$6,489) |
UNMAS
|
|||
|
Yemen
|
£47,772
(US$68,887) |
Nil
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
|
Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia |
£275,000
(US$396,550) |
Nil
|
Nil
|
Kosovo
£5,664,339 (US$8,167,977) |
HALO, UNMAS, MAG, and three commercial mine clearance companies
|
(1) Mines Advisory Group.
(2) Cambodian Mine Action Center.
(3) UN Mine Action Service.
(4) Croatian Mine Action Center.
(5) UN Children’s Fund.
A cooperation protocol on humanitarian demining was signed on 17 July 2000 between the UK, United States, Netherlands, Belgium and the European Union. No information on the progress and plans of this agreement has been made available.
In March 2001 DFID indicated plans to continue funding mine action at a level of approximately £10 million (US$14.4 million) per year, primarily through the UN. Commitments made so far are:
Albania: £369,648 (US$528,600) to the Albanian Army.
Chad: £270,000 (US$389,340) through the UN Development Program for Level 1 Survey by Handicap International.
Cambodia: £1,430,571 (US$2,045,717).
Croatia: £150,000 (US$216,300) through UNMAS to support CROMAC.
Georgia: £456,529 (US$652,836).
Guinea Bissau: £120,000 (US$171,600).
Iraq: £616,008 (US$880,891).
Jordan: £270,000 (US$386,100).
Laos: £616,889 (US$882,151).
Lebanon: £333,000 (US$480,186) through UNMAS for establishment of an emergency program and through UNICEF for mine awareness education.
Nicaragua: £283,000 (US$408,086).
Thailand: £300,000 (US$432,600) through the Survey Action Center[28] for a survey by Norwegian People’s Aid.
Yemen: £285,000 (US$410,970) to the government of Yemen’s Demining Action Program, managed by the UN.
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Kosovo): £7,899,620 (US$11,296,456 million) primarily to three commercial mine clearance organizations and HALO, MAG, and UNMACC.
The additional annual cost to the defense budget of the Mine Information and Technology Center (MITC) established in November 1997 was reported as £125,000 (US$203,750).[29] The mission of the MITC is “to minimize the risk of landmine casualties, by providing mine information and training in support of UK and international [military] operations. MITC co-operate openly with other mine awareness organizations, including non-government organizations.”[30] The Center has provided mine awareness training to over 48,000 people including over 1,500 refugees returning to Kosovo.[31]
DFID has provided a small amount of support for research and development of new technologies for humanitarian mine clearance (£500,000 in 1999-2000). Additional funding was given for assessment trials of prototypes and full field trials of equipment for antipersonnel mine detection and clearance, preliminary vegetation clearance, operator safety tests and studies to improve the effectiveness of UN-managed operations.[32] The UK has joined the International Test and Evaluation Program for Humanitarian Demining (ITEP), under which the MoD’s Defence Evaluation and Research Agency will evaluate new equipment including mine detection technology for humanitarian demining.
DFID does not specify funding allocated for mine survivors, instead providing support for “health care and community-based rehabilitation assistance...through DFID’s bilateral development co-operation programs or institutional program support. The financial records do not disaggregate assistance to land mine survivors from other categories of special needs.”[33]
On 11 October 2000 the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund announced a further round of grants for mine clearance, mines awareness education, and disability and prosthetics work totaling £1,189,593 (US$1,716,106). The Fund supported projects in Afghanistan, Angola, Pakistan, Laos and Sri Lanka, and in some cases with multi-year funding. The Fund has also continued to provide significant support to the campaign against landmines.
The Falkland/Malvinas Islands were heavily contaminated by antipersonnel mines used by British and Argentine forces in the war of 1982. Remaining mined areas are marked and fenced. As a result of negotiations between the UK and Argentina, Foreign Ministers agreed, at a meeting on 17 July 2001, that an Exchange of Notes on a de-mining feasibility study should take place. The government of Argentina has confirmed its commitment to funding the feasibility study.[34]
| <Previous | Next> |
[1] Landmine Monitor discussions with MoD, May 2001.
[2] See Landmine Monitor Report 2000, pp. 744-746.
[3] Hansard, 17 May 2000, col 161W.
[4] Letter dated 18 October 2000 from John Spellar MP, Minister of State for the Armed Forces, to Dr. Jenny Tonge MP.
[5] Article 7 reports, submitted 26 August 1999, for the period 1 March 1999 to 1 August 1999, and submitted 17 April 2000 for the period 1 August 1999 to 1 April 2000.
[6] Report of the United Kingdom to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, 17 January 2001, p. 1.
[7] Article 7 report, submitted on 26 August 1999, Form E.
[8] See Landmine Monitor Report 2000, pp. 746-749; in addition, the BAE Systems/Royal Ordnance Defence product range includes LAW 80, MLRS, the Barmine and MINX (mines in the new century) http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/royal_ordnance/index.html.
[9] Letter from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to UK Working Group on Landmines, 27 April 1998.
[10] Article 7 report, dated 25 April 2001.
[11] Article 7 report, submitted on 26 August 1999, Form D.
[12] Landmine Monitor discussions with MoD, May 2001.
[13] See Landmine Monitor Report 2000, p. 751.
[14] Robert Gravett, “Report on the Technical Expert Meeting on anti-vehicle mines with sensitive fuses or with sensitive anti-handling devices, hosted by the ICRC in Geneva, 13-14 March 2001,” International Committee of the Red Cross, April 2001.
[15] Robert Gravett, “Report on the Technical Expert Meeting on anti-vehicle mines with sensitive fuses or with sensitive anti-handling devices,” International Committee of the Red Cross, April 2001, Annex C.
[16] Landmine Monitor discussions with MoD, May 2001.
[17] Dr. M.A. King et al, “Civilian Footsteps; forces exerted on the ground by civilians during everyday activities,” Landmine Action, May 2001.
[18] Landmine Monitor discussions with MoD officials, 8 May 2000. Remarks of the UK delegation at the Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention, Geneva, 29 May 2000.
[19] Hansard, 19 October 1999, col. 420.
[20] See Landmine Monitor Report 2000, pp. 752-753.
[21] United Kingdom Permanent Representation to the Conference on Disarmament, “APL Mine Stockpiles & Their Destruction: A Progress Report: Landmine Monitor Fact Sheet,” 11 May 2001.
[22] Hansard, 24 January 2000, col. WA168.
[23] For details of past funding see Landmine Monitor Report 1999, pp. 689-695. Fuller details are available from Landmine Action.
[24] Hansard, 11 July 2001, col. 530W.
[25] Department for International Development, Humanitarian mine action, a progress report, (London: DFID, February 1999), p. 7, and Humanitarian mine action, second progress report (London: DFID, September 2000), p. 2. Exchange rate used: GBP1=$1.43.
[26] Hansard, 29 March 2001, col. 721W.
[27] Ibid, col. 723W, and DFID, Humanitarian mine action, second progress report,London, September 2000.
[28] The Survey Action Center reports that US$842,000 has been pledged by DFID for unspecified SAC activities: “May 2001 Update,” Global Landmine Survey.
[29] Bowers and Dodd, “Anti-personnel mines and the policies of two British Governments,” RUSI Journal, February 1998.
[30] Fax dated 23 July 2001 from MoD to Landmine Monitor.
[31] CCW Amended Protocol II Article 13 report, 29 November 2000, Form F, and fax dated 23 July 2001 from MoD to Landmine Monitor.
[32] DFID, Humanitarian mine action, second progress report, London, September 2000.
[33] Hansard, 25 October 1999, col. 709.
[34] Information provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, 31 July 2001.
