| <FIJI | GABON> |
Key developments since May 2001: France has continued its prominent role in addressing Mine Ban Treaty universalization and compliance issues. In September 2001, France became co-rapporteur of the Standing Committee on Victim Assistance. CNEMA has reported new concerns about certain French antivehicle mines that may function as antipersonnel mines. France provided about $2.7 million for mine action programs in 2001, an increase from the previous year.
France signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997 and enacted national ban legislation on 8 July 1998. France formally ratified the treaty on 23 July 1998, becoming a State Party on 1 March 1999. Since the completion of stockpile destruction in December 1999, France has concentrated on Mine Ban Treaty universalization and compliance initiatives.
France attended the Third Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in Managua, Nicaragua, in September 2001 with a delegation headed by Samuel le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action. France financed the printing of commemorative stamps by the Nicaraguan post office and travel for six delegates from Africa. At the meeting, France was chosen to become co-rapporteur of the intersessional Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-economic Reintegration.
France actively participated in the Standing Committee meetings in January and May 2002.[1] In 2001, France continued to make financial and diplomatic contributions to encourage participation by all countries in Standing Committee meetings and Meetings of State Parties. Ambassador de Beauvais said that France is pleased about the promotion of multilingualism by Canada and European countries.[2]
France submitted its annual Article 7 transparency report for calendar year 2001 on 30 April 2002, including the voluntary Form J on which mine action funding and assistance was reported.
National legislation established the Commission Nationale pour l’Elimination des Mines Anti-personnel (CNEMA, the National Commission for the Elimination of Antipersonnel Mines) to ensure full implementation of the treaty, including assistance to mine action projects and mine victims in other countries.[3] CNEMA’s annual report for 2000 was presented to Prime Minister Lionel Jospin in December 2001.[4]
The report included calls for: follow-up to proposals made at the seminar in Bamako, Mali, in February 2001; active participation in treaty implementation, especially the operationalization of Mine Ban Treaty Article 8; the inclusion in bilateral defense and cooperation agreements of a clause encouraging mine eradication; the creation by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of a new humanitarian demining project within the Fonds de Solidarite Prioritaire (FSP, Fund for Priority Solidarity), with two-year funding totaling FF20 million ($2.85 million); increased support to multilateral organizations working on mine action and Landmine Monitor.[5]
CNEMA’s mandate formally expired on 8 June 2002. At the CNEMA plenary assembly on 20 December, the executive secretary explained that the then-prime minister had decided to leave the responsibility for renewing the mandate to the next government. The Mine Action Ambassador confirmed that; in the interim, CNEMA’s mandate continues.[6]
Brigitte Stern, the president of CNEMA, delivered a statement to the Third Meeting of States Parties regarding Article 8 and facilitation of compliance.[7] She suggested that there was a need in the short term to make Article 8 more operational, and in the longer term to develop a better mechanism to facilitate compliance. She noted that various precedents exist for the latter, including environmental conventions, which focus on follow-up and support; she suggested that these approaches could be entrusted to a “study group” composed of international lawyers and field-based mine experts.[8]
France has focused on compliance measures at Standing Committee meetings. In a letter in March 2002, Ambassador de Beauvais expressed French willingness to continue to work with Canada on this issue:
This is an essential objective of our diplomacy ... particularly with regard to the challenge posed by the multiplication of alleged cases of violation... We intend to remain active on this issue ... to bring an important juridical contribution... In addition, our presence in the coordination committee since the Managua conference gives us an additional opportunity to foster and stimulate the dynamic launched in lead-up to the Fourth Meeting of States Parties and the first review conference... The French government wants to convince States Parties that pragmatic and concerted measures can be taken in order to assure effective compliance with the Treaty, without interfering with the text of the Treaty.[9]
Ambassador de Beauvais has said that France is unwilling to denounce publicly specific States that may have committed violations, noting, “Our objective aims at improving the Convention mechanism without pointing fingers at any particular State Party.”[10] At the same time, he has noted the importance of ICBL and Landmine Monitor identifying specific countries and instances of concern regarding compliance.
On 29 November 2001, France cosponsored and voted in favor of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 56/24M, calling for universalization and full implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty. Ambassador de Beauvais stated that the French delegation actively participated in efforts to win over as many countries as possible.[11]
According to Ambassador de Beauvais, during 2001 “the French government has taken advantage of each occasion to encourage non-signatories to accede to the treaty, including within the EU, and to encourage signatories to ratify the treaty.... Non-signatories who have decided not to become States Party in the near future have been encouraged to rapidly take concrete legal and practical intermediate measures. This is notably the case in Afghanistan.”[12] He also observed that almost all sub-Saharan African countries are now party to the Mine Ban Treaty since the Pan-African Seminar on universalization and implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty, co-organized by France and Canada in February 2001, in Bamako, Mali.
However, when Handicap International called on the Minister of Foreign Affairs to take a stand on massive new mine use in India and Pakistan, the Minister declined to take any concrete measures in relation to these two countries, while reaffirming the French contribution to universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty in general terms.[13]
France is a State Party to Amended Protocol II of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) and submitted its report in accordance with Article 13 of the protocol on 26 November 2001. This report details relevant legislation and mine action assistance given from 1992-2001. It outlines the directive of 12 November 1998 from the Army Chief of Staff, banning the use of antipersonnel mines and participation in joint operations which include mine use, including the planning of operations.[14]
France attended the Third Annual Conference of States Parties to Amended Protocol II and the Second CCW Review Conference in December 2001. France supported the formation of a Governmental Group of Experts to look at the issues of “explosive remnants of war” and antivehicle mines.[15] France has also argued that the submunitions issue must be a priority for the CCW, as submunitions represent a particular danger for the civilian population.[16]
France was previously a major producer and exporter of antipersonnel mines; production ceased in 1995 and export ceased in 1993.[17] The Ministry of Defense indicated in 2001 that no contract for licensed production of mines or mine components has been signed since 1975.[18]
Information on the decommissioning or conversion of the former production facilities of Giat Industries has not been included in France’s Article 7 Reports, including the report submitted on 30 April 2002.[19]
In April 2001, seven machines (“enfouisseur de mines,” type Matenin PM 10) for emplacing antivehicle mines were offered for sale at a closed auction, with more proposed for sale on 11 July.[20] CNEMA questioned the Ministry of Defense, which replied that the machines are exclusively for burying antivehicle mines and “are technically unusable for the use of antipersonnel mines and are conceived for burying at a depth that is not adapted to antipersonnel mines.”[21]
Destruction of the French antipersonnel mine stockpile was completed on 20 December 1999, with 1,098,281 mines destroyed from 1996 to 1999.[22] In March 2002, France’s Ambassador for Mine Action confirmed that France has no Claymore-type directional fragmentation mines in its stockpile.[23]
A total of 4,514 mines were initially retained for training or development purposes, as permitted by Mine Ban Treaty Article 3. In 2000, the number of antipersonnel mines retained ranged from 4,361 to 4,539. On 1 January 2001, the number retained was 4,526. On 1 January 2002, it was 4,479, indicating 47 mines were consumed during the year.[24] The specific purposes for which the mines are used has not been stated in any of France’s Article 7 Reports. Ambassador de Beauvais noted that the mines “were destroyed in accordance with the provisions governing training and testing of equipment.”[25]
The ICBL has expressed concern about certain antivehicle mines with sensitive fuzes or sensitive antihandling devices that may function as antipersonnel mines or explode from an unintentional act of a person. The ICBL and many State Parties have said such mines are prohibited by the Mine Ban Treaty. France and only four other State Parties have publicly taken a contrary view. At the Standing Committee meeting in May 2002, France expressed its support for a statement by the United Kingdom that the scope of the Mine Ban Treaty does not extend to antivehicle mines with antihandling devices or sensitive fuzes that may be activated by the unintentional act of a person.[26]
Landmine Monitor has, in the past, identified three French mines of concern: HPD F2, MIACAH F1, and MI AC Disp F1.[27] The CNEMA report for 2000, presented in December 2001, provides information on these mines, as well as three others: HPD F3, MIACAH F2, and ACPR F1.[28] From information obtained in interviews with members of the Army and Giat Industries, CNEMA has identified these six types as French antivehicle mines that may function as antipersonnel mines.[29]
The CNEMA report gave extensive details on these mines, which Landmine Monitor cannot reproduce due to space considerations, but summaries of the findings follow.
CNEMA reports that the two HPD mines, which explode from changes in the magnetic field, are so sensitive that doubts remain about possible activation by the unintentional presence of a person. CNEMA recommends that this be tested. Additional concerns are raised by information contained in the French military engineering manual Gen 150 Edition 2000. Regarding the HPD F2 it states:
After laying: from 10 minutes up to 30 full days, the mine cannot be lifted. The electromagnetic mine detector disturbs the mine and can activate it. It is therefore dangerous and prohibited to try to locate HPD F2 mines with a detector, during the period of activity. The movement of metal items (spades, picks, vehicles...) is detected and can, in some cases, activate the mine. Beyond 2 meters, there is no risk of explosion.[30]
Nearly identical language is used regarding the HPD F3.[31] Amended Protocol II to the CCW, to which France is a party, prohibits the use of “mines, booby-traps or other devices which employ a mechanism or device specifically designed to detonate the munition by the presence of commonly available mine detectors as a result of their magnetic or other non-contact influence during normal use in detection operations.”[32]
The M1 AC Disp F1 also explodes as a result of variations of the magnetic field. Giat, the manufacturer, states that the activation system has been reinforced, so that the mine is insensitive to light variations in the magnetic field. Giat noted that this mine is in theory insensitive to a human’s presence, except if the mine is shaken (“agitee”).[33] Despite Giat assurances about the reinforced activation system, CNEMA is concerned about this mine’s potential antipersonnel characteristics and recommends testing.
The MIACAH F1 and F2 are activated by breaking a very thin, almost invisible wire, placed across a road or path. CNEMA reports that the diameter of the wire is such that a child can break it. The Ministry of Defense agreed, stating, “This mine explodes because of the snapping of a wire (an integral part of the mine) which can be caused by a non-intentional contact with a person. In order to find a solution, the Army General Staff initiated a study, the aim of which is to replace the activation system by a mechanism which can discriminate between people and vehicles. New equipment has already been presented to relevant departments.”[34] CNEMA will track these changes to ensure that both mines are taken unambiguously out of the scope of the Mine Ban Treaty.[35]
The ACPR F1 mine has an auxiliary fuze well for a traction fuze (tripwire), which may allow unintentional activation by a person. The CNEMA regarded this mine as outside the scope of the Mine Ban Treaty, but was concerned about the need for physical modification to prevent use with a tripwire.
The French position on antivehicle mines with antihandling devices or sensitive fuzes was reaffirmed during the Third Meeting of State Parties in September 2001. The Mine Action Ambassador stated that “this subject belongs within the CCW... Our concern is that this debate must not hinder the main task of the Ottawa Process, which is the universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty. Anti-vehicle mines are very important for some of the countries we want to join the Treaty. Thus I’m calling for serious reflection and not to go too fast to conclusions.”[36] France is studying ways to deal with this issue within the CCW, reinforcing the technical requirements for antivehicle mines.[37]
When asked about reported stockpiling of the AT2 S3 sensor, Ambassador de Beauvais said this information was from a source dealing with in-development products or with non-final commercial agreements. He said the AT2 is a “mine head” (“tête à mine”) developed by Germany for version 2 of a multiple rocket launcher. France has bought the first version of the launcher, which uses a grenade warhead, and not a mine warhead.[38]
In December 2001, the Ministry of Defense sent to Handicap International the Army Chief of Staff directive of 12 November 1998. The directive forbids all French soldiers, without exception:
Although French soldiers may participate in a multinational operation with a State that is not party to the Mine Ban Treaty, they must not at any time be put in any of the above situations.[39]
Regarding the suspected mined area in the military storage area of La Doudah, Djibouti, France’s Ambassador for Mine Action stated in March 2002 that this was cleared in 1989, but acknowledged, “It is not impossible that some mines, still missing, are still in the area, following land slippage.”[40] The Article 7 Report submitted on 30 April 2002 repeats previous statements that some of the mines may not yet have been located.[41]
The Article 7 Report also states, “Some possible mined areas stemming from world conflicts 1914-18 and 1939-45, could remain on French territory, are not considered in this report.”[42]
In addition to mine action policy described in Landmine Monitor Report 2001, the French government considers that its funding policy is part of its efforts to universalize the Mine Ban Treaty via eligibility conditions for the distribution of its bilateral assistance: “Our policy regarding assistance is a European Union one, and favors States Parties and signatories. Each situation of humanitarian emergency is reviewed case by case, and aid is exceptionally granted when the state is indicating its commitment to put into practice the Ottawa Convention principles and objectives.”[43]
The government reports that in 2001 its contribution to mine action programs was about €3 million ($2,694,000), not including research and development funding and the mandatory national contribution to European Union mine action.[44] It includes the total of two-year (2000 and 2001) funding for projects in Cambodia and Mozambique. Comparisons with previous funding are also complicated because the reported figure for 2000 ($1,170,000 after deducting the EU contribution) included half of the project-funding for Cambodia and Mozambique.
[47] The name of the FAC has been changed to the Fonds de Solidarité Prioritaire (FSP, Fund for Priority Solidarity).
In 2001, most of this expenditure was dedicated to mine clearance and demining training (around €1.6 million), and €0.5 million to victim assistance and mine awareness. Ambassador de Beauvais said that more attention will be paid to victim assistance in the next two-year FSP project. He also indicated that eligibility conditions will be more flexible, so that more countries can benefit. Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine stated that most of the FAC/FSP funds were already engaged at the beginning of 2002 and that a new two-year project would be created for 2002-2004.[48] In March 2002 Ambassador de Beauvais explained that the new FSP project will start at the beginning of 2003, with funding of €3,048,980 ($2,737,984).[49]
Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine stated in December 2001 that South-east European countries and Nicaragua will have priority in demining funding.[50] Because 98 percent of credits allocated to humanitarian demining via the Title IV budget line in 2001 (€228,673, $205,348) have been used, credits allocated in 2001 will double in 2002, reaching €457,347 ($410,697). In the Balkans, a particular effort will be made regarding Croatia in 2002, including funding of €78,000 for demining archeological sites in Vucedol commune in Vukovar district.[51]
France also prioritizes support for NGOs actively involved in mine action. Its favored partner is Handicap International. The International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Trust Fund also receive French support. In 2001, Handicap International received governmental funding of €60,980 ($54,760) for its advocacy activities, and the same amount was given for the release of the Landmine Monitor Report 2001.[52]
Non-financial assistance to mine action has also been provided on a substantial scale. French military personnel have been engaged in demining operations as part of their duties during 2001 in Croatia under WEUDAM (Western European Union Demining Assistance Mission) auspices (one person, 1999-2001), in Kosovo under KFOR auspices (113 people, 1999-2001), Benin (three people, 2000-2001), Namibia (two people, 2001), and Zambia (two people, 2001).[53]
Training in mine clearance has been provided to both military or civilian personnel, including from, Benin, Cambodia, Lebanon, and Nicaragua. This is mainly done at the engineering school in Angers, which contains the Minex Center and the new National Center For Humanitarian Demining Training created in May 2001.[54] The new Center provides training in accordance with international standards, and an agreement has been made with Lebanon for a five-year program to train Demining instructors. Twenty trainees per year will receive training, with one session in Angers and a training period in Lebanon.[55]
Following on to the February 2001 regional landmine conference co-hosted by France in Bamako, Mali, the proposed regional military demining training center at Ouida, Benin, will open in the second half of 2002. In July 2001, an agreement was signed between Benin and France for the construction of the building, and construction started in 2002. During the first year, training will be carried out under French direction by French managers and Benin officers. The center will host a first group of 30 military trainees and 6 instructors.[56]
Because of difficulties caused by the presence of mines near the Angolan border, Namibia and Zambia asked France for assistance. A team from the Angers engineering school visited the area on 27 October-7 November 2001, in order to assess the need for demining training. In March 2002, the possibility was being considered of training about 15 Zambian officers, joined by Namibian officers, to staff the demining unit, which the government in Lusaka is willing to set up.[57]
France continues to devote significant funds to R&D in mine clearance technologies. In 2001, France dedicated €14,914,000 ($13,393,000) to R&D programs on “contreminage,” including €1,093,000 for research into detection of mines, €821,000 for neutralization, and €13,000,000 for demining systems.[58] Handicap International is concerned that funds dedicated to R&D are five times higher than funds dedicated to mine action programs.
The CNEMA pointed out in 1999 that these projects appear to have military rather than humanitarian demining applications. Addressing this issue, Ambassador de Beauvais explained that the Délégation Générale pour l’Armement (DGA, General Delegation For Armaments) is participating in relevant civil projects. The Technical Establishment of Bourges is involved in the International Test and Evaluation Program, and DGA representatives participate in seminars on humanitarian demining organized by the European Commission.[59]
On 2 April 2001, a French soldier serving with SFOR in Bosnia and Herzegovina was killed by a landmine explosion near the southwestern town of Prozor, during a reconnaissance operation.[60]
The Minister of Defense informed HI that demining work has caused nine deaths and tens of injuries to French soldiers in the last ten years.[61] However, the Mine Action Ambassador said the Army’s epidemiological data does not separate out injuries or deaths caused by landmines. This data should be available later. He added the relevant military departments had no record of any deaths or injuries to French military personnel as a result of landmines or unexploded ordnance in 2001.[62]
As co-rapporteur of the Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-economic Reintegration, France stated at the meeting on 28 January 2002, “We have to take field realities into account, without dogmatism, and to accept the particularity of each situation.... If such an approach can be extended in a more or less near future, our Standing Committee will despite everything keep a major role within the international demining community, as a nerve center for information and as a place dedicated to the sharing of methodologies, programs and available funds. It’s not up to it to initiate national projects, but it has its own responsibility for their working out and their effective execution.”[63]
As to concrete measures that the government will take to promote this bottom-up approach, Ambassador de Beauvais said, “In order to be efficient, efforts must promote exchange of information and confrontation of methods at the international level, while the field approach advocated by Handicap International, which is pragmatic and concerned about local realities, must be favored.”[64]
In 2001, Handicap International continued its work to gain greater recognition of the rights of mine victims and to encourage universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty. On 1 March 2001, the anniversary of the treaty’s entry into force, HI launched a campaign to gain the United States’ accession. The Shoe for Bush campaign asks French citizens to send a shoe to President Bush, either a real shoe by post-mail or a virtual one by email. In September 2001, HI organized the seventh shoe pyramid in 30 cities across France, and called on all non-signatories of the Mine Ban Treaty to join the mine ban process as soon as possible.
HI also pursued its campaign for increased funding of mine action and increased diplomatic effort to gain universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty. Letters were sent to all parliamentarians and to the government on 1 March 2001 and on several other occasions, including the presidential and parliamentary elections in April 2002.
HI has launched an initiative of regional networking among actors involved in victim assistance in four countries in Southeast Asia: Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam. This process started with a series of national workshops, followed by a regional conference organized in Thailand in November 2001, bringing together representatives from all areas of civil society and government. The workshops and conference were the opportunity for technical actors in each area of victim assistance to exchange views and information and learn from each others’ experience.
In December 2001, HI released the second edition of its report on victim assistance, “Landmine Victim Assistance: World Report 2001,” which gives information on the number of reported casualties, describes services offered and legal structures existing in the countries concerned by the problem of landmines.
From 17-19 April 2002, 90 researchers from 75 countries met in Paris to discuss their finalized country reports prepared for the ICBL's Landmine Monitor Report 2002. The National Commission for the Elimination of Anti-Personnel Mines hosted the meeting, working in close cooperation with the ICBL. Several pro-ban governments participated in the meeting and Paris-based diplomats from over 30 countries attended the opening plenary, which featured remarks by France’s Minister of Development Cooperation, Charles Josslin, and ICBL Ambassador Jody Williams, 1997 Nobel Peace Laureate.
| <FIJI | GABON> |
[1] France was represented variously by Ambassador de Beauvais; Ambassador Hubert de la Fortelle, and other members of the Permanent Mission to the Conference on Disarmament; Brigitte Stern, CNEMA; and members of the Ministry of Defense.
[2] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[3] Article 9, Law No. 98-564, 8 July 1998; see also Landmine Monitor Report 1999, pp. 587-588.
[4] “Rapport 2000,” Commission nationale pour l’élimination des mines antipersonnel, (Paris: La Documentation française, 2001). For details of the 1999 report and recommendations, see Landmine Monitor Report 2001, p. 687. Exchange rate as in Landmine Monitor Report 2001: US1 = FF7.016, used throughout.
[5] Commission nationale pour l’élimination des mines antipersonnel, Rapport 2000, (Paris: La Documentation française, 2001), p. 51.
[6] “Conclusions Summary no. 11,” National Commission for the Elimination of Landmines, Plenary Assembly, 20 December 2001, and Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[7] Statement of Brigitte Stern to the Third Meeting of State Parties, Managua, Nicaragua, 18-21 September 2001; all translations in this report by the Landmine Monitor researcher.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[10] Minutes of the preparatory meeting of the Third Meeting of State Parties, presided by Ambassador de Beauvais, 10 September 2001.
[11] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Letter from HI to Hubert Vedrine, Minister of Foreign Affairs, 11 March 2002, and response from Hubert Vedrine, to HI, 25 March 2002.
[14] Amended Protocol II, Article 13 report, 26 November 2001, Forms A, D, E.
[15] Letter to Handicap International from Alain Richard, Minister of Defense, 17 December 2001; letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[16] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[17] See Landmine Monitor Report 1999, pp. 590-598.
[18] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 12 February 2001.
[19] See Landmine Monitor Report 2000, p. 636, and Landmine Monitor Report 2001, p. 690.
[20] Bulletin Officiel d’Annonces des Domaines, Ventes du 16/04/2001 au 30/04/2001, p. 41; Bulletin Officiel d’Annonces des Domaines, Ventes du 1/07/2001 au 31/07/2001, p. 97.
[21] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[22] Article 7 report, 3 May 2000, Form F.
[23] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[24] Article 7 report, Form D, 3 May 2000, and Letters from Ambassador de Beauvais, 12 February 2001 and 27 March 2002.
[25] “Les mines retirées du stock ont été détruites conformément aux textes en vigueur pour des opérations d’entraînement ou d’évaluation de matériel.”
[26] The French delegate said that France had “nothing to add to the UK statement, nor to take away.” Standing Committee on General Status and Operation, Geneva, 31 May 2002. For UK remarks, see report on the United Kingdom in this edition of the Landmine Monitor.
[27] Landmine Monitor Report 2000, pp. 636-638, and Landmine Monitor Report 2001, p.691.
[28] Commission nationale pour l’élimination des mines antipersonnel, Rapport 2000 (Paris, La Documentation française), pp. 15-23.
[29] Ibid.
[30] GEN 150 Edition 2000, section III, p. 19, original emphasis.
[31] GEN 150 Edition 2000, section III, p. 22.
[32] CCW, Amended Protocol II, Article 3(5).
[33] Commission nationale pour l’élimination des mines antipersonnel, Rapport 2000 (Paris, La
Documentation française), p. 20.
[34] Response from the Ministry of Defense, quoted in Commission nationale pour l’élimination des mines antipersonnel, Rapport 2000 (Paris, La Documentation française), p. 17.
[35] Commission nationale pour l’élimination des mines antipersonnel, Rapport 2000 (Paris, La
Documentation française), p. 17.
[36] Statement of the French Delegation to the Third Meeting of State Parties, Managua, Nicaragua, 18-21 September 2001.
[37] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[38] Ibid.
[39] Letter to HI from Alain Richard, Ministry of Defense, 17 December 2001.
[40] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[41] Article 7 Report, Form C, 30 April 2002.
[42] Ibid.
[43] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[44] Ibid. Exchange rate at 29 April: US$1 = €0.898, used throughout.
[45] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002. The funding for Mozambique was previously stated as for 2000-2001, but none of the funds appear to have been spent in 2000 and are shown again in the total for 2001. Abbreviations: HI – Handicap International; UNDP TF – United Nations Development Program Trust Fund; ITF – International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victims Assistance; CMAC – Cambodia Mine Action Center; ESAG – Ecole Supérieure et d’Application du Génie d’Angers.
[46] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[47] Ibid.
[48] Letter from Hubert Vedrine, Minister of Foreign Affairs Minister to Deputy Georges Colombier, 5 June 2001.
[49] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002; this funding had been proposed, but not voted on as of 27 June 2002.
[50] Letter from Hubert Vedrine, Minister of Foreign Affairs, to Xavier Darcos, Deputy, 3 December 2001.
[51] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[52] Ibid.
[53] Amended Protocol II Article 13 report, 26 November 2001, Form E. Abbreviations: WEUDAM – Western European Union Demining Assistance Mission, KFOR – Kosovo Protection Force.
[54] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002. Note on the National Center of Humanitarian Demining, presented during the Third Meeting if States Parties to the Convention, in Managua, Nicaragua.
[55] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[56] Ibid.; for details of the Bamako seminar and recommendations made, see Landmine Monitor Report 2001, p. 689.
[57] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[58] Ibid.
[59] Ibid.
[60] “Mine Blast Kills French Soldier,” The Independent (British daily newspaper), 5 April 2001.
[61] Letter to HI from Alain Richard, Minister of Defense, 17 December 2001.
[62] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
[63] Statement by Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, SC on Victim Assistance, 18 January 2002.
[64] Letter from Samuel Le Caruyer de Beauvais, Ambassador for Mine Action, 27 March 2002.
