Update on Standing Committee on Mine Clearance

(Friday 31 May 2002 Geneva, Switzerland) Update on the Standing Committee Meeting on Mine Clearance, Mine Awareness and Mine Action Technologies held in Geneva 28-29 May 2002

STANDING COMMITTEE ON MINE CLEARANCE, MINE AWARENESS AND MINE ACTION TECHNOLOGIES
Geneva
28-29 May 2002

The sessions on Mine Clearance, Mine Awareness and Mine Action Technologies took place over one and a half days and included a global overview and a session focused on Mozambique.

Anne Capelle, opened the first day of the standing committee meeting with a presentation on behalf of the ICBL Mine Action Working Group (MAWG). The input followed on from the presentation made by Sara Sekkenes during the intersessionals in January 2002 and looked at the progress made since then and challenges still facing mine-affected countries working to clear mines in compliance with the Mine Ban Treaty. The presentation is on the GICHD website.

The input focused on the challenges related to Article 5 of the treaty, which specifies that State Parties are obliged to clear all mines in mined areas within ten years of their becoming a States Party. Given this tight deadline, it is important to keep monitoring what State Parties have done in terms of mine action and what remains to be done and to collect data on the problem and tools for analyzing it. There is a need for careful planning and prioritising of mine action. And, the presentation argued, the humanitarian impact of the landmine problem should be one of the key factors in guiding decisions about priorities. It was proposed that mine-affected countries should be categorised as high-, medium- or low-impact countries and that they each develop strategic national mine action plans (which provide an overview of the problem and identify the resources available and those still needed).

While the goal of a mine-free world remains the main objective of the treaty, it needs to be recognised that this is a long-term objective and that addressing the humanitarian impact of mines should drive short- and medium-term decisions on mine action. It was noted that the countries with the gravest humanitarian landmine problem are, on the whole, not yet States Parties. The input wrapped up with challenges on two issues: 1. the need for an easier data-gathering process, such as a Landmine Impact Survey and 2. the need for more detailed information to be provided in the Article 7 reporting process.

Stan Brabant gave a presentation on Mine Risk Education (MRE) on behalf of ICBL MAWG. He looked at the requirements in Article 6 on International Cooperation and Assistance and gave an overview of the problem of MRE today and the gaps worldwide. He presented findings on ten countries worldwide – Angola, Burma, Chad, Ethiopia, Georgia, India, Iran, Iraq, Nepal, and Somalia – where there are little or no activities on MRE and where the humanitarian impact of landmines is at an alarming level. Importantly there is only one State Party in this list (Chad) and two are signatories (Angola and Ethiopia). The conclusions of the presentation were that MRE save lives, MRE helps mobilize public opinion which might lead to a pressure within the country to accede to or ratify the treaty, and that data collected for MRE about mine-affected areas serves as a basis for future survey and clearance. His presentation is available here.

The Norwegian delegation expressed support for the ICBL input on mine action, stressing that the humanitarian impact of landmines must guide the priorities of donor countries. Landmine Impact Surveys should be used, followed by strategic planning, to ensure effective deployment of funds and efficient programmes to meet the objective of mine action ie addressing the humanitarian impact.

Jordan made a statement in the session giving a brief picture of the mine action activities in the country, while UK and Argentina presented the mine problem in the Falkland/Malvinas and actions taken in order to free the area from mines. Chad followed with a presentation of the survey conducted in the country and some activities following this survey, especially related to MRE.

The next session was focusing on Implementation Plans and Progress and UNMAS started by focusing on the impact issue. UNMAS plans to introduce a Quarterly Operational Reporting Template with the use of IMSMA. With help from practitioners in the field the report will contain information on: progress in national mine action workplans; a reporting on the humanitarian and the socio-economic impact of landmines; a progress of clearance operations at a provincial level (or one level below the national level); personnel deployed in mine action activities; the beneficiaries of MRE; and finally the funding requirements. The format is still being developed and will be available at the UN website E-mine when completed. UNMAS stressed the need to focus on strategies, plans and priorities.

This was followed by presentations from mine-affected countries: El Salvador, Nicaragua, DRC, Chad, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Greece, Albania, Tunisia, Peru, Croatia, and finally Afghanistan. All delegates gave an introduction and update on activities in their country related to ongoing clearance operations and future plans. The Organization of American States (OAS) gave a short statement expressing their concern about the number of new victims and areas where there is no MRE.

In an intervention from the floor, the ICBL reiterated the importance of the high-, medium- and low-impact categories to facilitate planning and ultimately reduce the humanitarian impact of mines. We acknowledged the important efforts of State Parties with a minor mine problem to clear mines within a short period of time and with limited resources.

UNICEF underlined the need for MRE in countries where little can be done in relation to mine clearance. They also pointed to the essential role of MRE in informing the population of what is taking place during mine clearance operations.

The second day began with an informative presentation by the Mine Action Program in Mozambique about their achievements and lessons learned. In their input, the National Demining Institute (IND) spoke about how mine action was integrated in the overall peacekeeping agreement. They outlined how a 5 year National Mine Action Plan (2002-2005) with 6 core objectives had been developed: poverty reduction; follow the Ottawa treaty Obligations; keep a “Development” oriented approach; work in accordance with International Mine Action Standards; establish Government Priorities and Guidelines; and create funding mechanisms. The targets of the National Plan are to clear all high- and medium- impact sites, destroy all UXO, destroy all existing stockpiles, survey and mark all low impact areas, reestablish the Operational National Mine Risk Education, and establish long-term survivor and victim assistance programs. The Accelerated Demining Program gave an input with a historic briefing and information on current problems. HI gave a presentation of the MRE existing in Mozambique, while UNDP talked about Mozambique related to the importance of coordinating all agencies involved in mine action and the importance of capacity building at all levels.

The presentation was followed by further inputs by Brazil, France, and Zambia and then statements by the following donor countries: the Netherlands, Austria, Brazil, Italy, Japan, Canada, Belgium, and the EU.

The second item on the agenda was tools of implementation and the Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA). Here Daniel Eriksson of UNMIK MACC presented detailed information on how the application in Kosovo, and Al Azi Mansour, from the Yemen Mine Action Center focused on theYemen experience. Furthermore, a presentation was given on how IMSMA can be used as a tool for the reporting in Article 7 as IMSMA will be the data collection tool and will ease the reporting requirements in Article 5.

The last session was on mine action technologies. Various projects were presented, with a special focus on new developments in the technology field with proven impact in the field. Chad made an important statement expressing dissatisfaction on the Standing Committee discussions regarding technologies. Chad called for more effective, affordable and simple technology to help countries meet their targets and said that if the discussions cannot focus on these kinds of technologies, the item should be removed from the agenda of the committee.

Some of the conclusions of the Standing Committee session were that: MRE must be an integrated part of mine action and of the daily lives of affected population, MRE should go to the grassroots of societies affected by mines, and MRE should work hand-in-hand with other mine action activities. IMSMA was recognized as an essential instrument for monitoring and reporting on mine action. All new technologies presented in the Standing Committee should be user-oriented and practical.