Does the treaty make a difference to the global landmine crisis?
Yes, on the whole we are most encouraged! A great deal of headway has been made since the treaty was established (3 December 19997) and came into force (1 March 1999).Some key achievements are:
- A noticeable decrease in landmine use - numerous armed opposition groups and governments have given up the weapon in recent years. Landmine Monitor Report lists only three governments as landmine users (Myanmar/Burma, Nepal and Russia) and one (Georgia) as an alleged user;
- Vast tracts of land have been cleared and put back into productive use;
- Importantly, there are now fewer new mine victims each year;
- The trade of antipersonnel mines has all but dried up and production is down;
- Millions of mines have been permanently removed from arsenals around the world and are now out of circulation forever;
- The new international norm – where use anywhere by anyone is considered abhorrent– is gathering strength. More and more states are joining the Treaty and working hard to implement it. Even non-member states are responding to international pressure and abiding by the spirit of the agreement.
However, much remains to be done. Continued mine use by states and non-state actors in several conflicts is of grave concern, as is continued mine production in thirteen countries. Although the annual rate of injuries and deaths caused by antipersonnel mines diminishes, the absolute number of mine survivors keeps growing each year (in 2004 it was estimated at between 300.000 and 400.000 people worldwide) and many of their needs are not being met. At the same time, demining and risk education to safeguard lives and livelihoods remain an important priority. During the Nairobi Summit on a Mine-Free World in November 2004, 24 countries were identified as needing to improve survivor assistance as a priority. More: Landmine Monitor
WHAT WILL THE SIXTH MEETING OF STATES PARTY TO THE OTTAWA TREATY BE ABOUT?
The Sixth Meeting of States Party (MSP) will provide the first opportunity to review progress on the action plan produced as a result of last year’s Nairobi Summit on a Mine-Free World, which charts the road ahead for mine action and the universalization of the mine ban over the 2004-2009 period. The plan includes provisions on:
- clearance of mined areas no later than 10 years after joining the Treaty;
- · survivor assistance for the full rehabilitation and reintegration of survivors back into their communities;
- international cooperation and assistance in mine action for States Parties in need when necessary;
- mine ban universalization;
- destruction of stockpiles no later than five years after becoming a State Party;
- transparency and information sharing on progress in the above areas;
- development of national measures and legislation to ensure Mine Ban Treaty implementation.
The Meeting involves everyone engaged in the fight against antipersonnel landmines: government representatives, civil society players and representatives of international organizations. As in previous meetings of this kind, a number of non-members are expected to send observers. The ICBL is a full participant in the Meeting, with official non-delegate status. Our delegation will consist of over 180 people including campaigners, landmine survivors, deminers and experts from across the world.
More: Zagreb 6MSP page or Nairobi Summit page
WHAT ARE THE ICBL’S EXPECTATIONS FOR 6TH MEETING OF STATE PARTIES?
We hope to receive encouraging news on the implementation of the different elements of the Action Plan produced during the Nairobi Summit on a Mine-Free World. We are also going to work with governments to make sure they:
- Increase the security of at-risk populations by promoting further progress in identifying and clearing mined areas within the deadlines mandated by the Mine Ban Treaty;
- Fully address the needs and rights of landmine survivors to help recreate their lives in dignity;
- Live up to the commitments they made joining the Treaty;
- Keep the ban on antipersonnel mines high on their agendas.
CROATIA IS A MINE-AFFECTED COUNTRY. WHAT IS THE SITUATION THERE?
Croatia’s mine problem dates back to the conflict associated with the break-up of the Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia in the early ‘90s. Twelve of the 21 counties of Croatia are affected by landmines or unexploded ordnance (UXO). About 1.1 million inhabitants live in the mined and suspected mined areas. In 2004, 16 new landmine casualties were reported, including 14 people killed. This represents a significant increase in mine casualties. Croatia has been identified as one of 28 countries in greater need of enhanced victim assistance.
WHAT IS THE SITUATION IN THE BALKANS?
Five countries in the Balkans region (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro) plus the province of Kosovo are mine-affected to different degrees. Bosnia and Herzegovina remains one of the worst-hit countries in Europe, with approximately 4.4% of the national territory potentially contaminated. In 2004, 86 new mine/UXO casualties were reported in four of these five countries, and another 14 in Kosovo.
IS THE TREATY WORTHWHILE WITHOUT THE CHINA, RUSSIA AND THE USA AND OTHERS ON BOARD?
It is most regrettable that these countries, and a few dozen others, remain outside of the treaty. However, this does not take away from the importance of the treaty, nor weaken its achievements as one of the few current successes stories in International Humanitarian Law and multilateral diplomacy. Even without the support of China, Russia and the USA, great progress is being made in implementing and promoting the Mine Ban Treaty. (See above: Does the treaty make a difference to the global landmine crisis.) In sum, the ban and the treaty are working, even without these holdout countries.
It is significant that some States not Party to the treaty are responding to international pressure on this issue. Many are in de facto compliance with the treaty even though they are not legally bound by it. The U.S.A., despite its disappointing policy reversal in March 2004, is basically abiding by the Treaty in practice: it has not used mines since 1991, exported since 1992 nor produced since 1997. It has destroyed part of its antipersonnel mines stockpile and is the biggest contributor to clearance efforts. However, without an official commitment, these trends could be reversed: the U.S. has been developing new mines that appear to be incompatible with the Mine Ban Treaty; a production decision on one type (Spider) is due in December 2005. Other examples of non-members respecting treaty norms include: China and others’ moratoria on the export of antipersonnel landmines and Finland, Israel and Poland (non-member states and former producers) which have given up production.
It is worth noting too that these holdout countries are a shrinking minority. The vast majority of countries are committed to the treaty: ¾ of the world, all of NATO but the U.S.A., all of the Western Hemisphere bar Cuba and the USA, all of the EU (before expansion) except Finland, and all the countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Nevertheless, we urge those countries that have not yet joined to embrace a ban on antipersonnel landmines and take a step towards the Mine Ban Treaty. Especially, we urge those still using this indiscriminate weapon to cease, for example Russia which uses mines in Chechnya, and those that still produce to halt.
More: ICBL’s reaction to the US policy announcement in 2004, latest list of treaty members and non-members.
WHAT IS THE ICBL DOING ABOUT OTHER INDISCRIMINATE WEAPONS SUCH AS CLUSTER MUNITIONS?
We recognize the humanitarian impact of unexploded ordnance other than antipersonnel landmines. Indeed, the field experience of member organizations of the ICBL is that, like antipersonnel mines, such explosive remnants of war cause widespread civilian casualties and hinder reconstruction and development by preventing safe access to infrastructure and land.
It should be noted that the Mine Ban Treaty is focused on antipersonnel landmines and does not specifically address these other weapons. Thus, the ICBL supports efforts to create new international humanitarian law on the wider problem of explosive remnants of war. In recognition of the problem, several NGOs, some of which are members of the ICBL, have created a new coalition called the Clusters Munition Coalition. They have called for a moratorium on the use, production and trade of cluster weapons until the humanitarian concerns can be effectively addressed. The ICBL supports this call and encourages others to join the Coalition.
More: Cluster Munition Coalition.
ISN’T THE MINE PROBLEM BEING SOLVED BY NEW TECHNOLOGY AND CLEARANC TECHNIQUES (E.G. RATS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED PLANTS)?
Unfortunately no new developments to date provide a magic solution. So far, nobody has found a ‘silver bullet’. Clearance continues to rely on a 'toolbox approach', which includes manual and mechanical demining and the use of mine detection dogs. Related areas of surveys, fencing or marking and mine risk education also play an important role in preventing or minimizing casualties.
Research and development is welcomed particularly where it improves the speed, safety and efficiency of existing clearance methods. But R&D needs to be well-coordinated and focused on operational needs. For example, there’s no point spending pots of money on developing a hi-tech solution if this won’t ultimately work in the mine-infested rice paddies of Cambodia or dusty plains of Afghanistan.
More: Mine Action Working Group webpage.
WHAT IS THE MINE BAN TREATY AND HOW DOES A COUNTRY JOIN?
The 1997 Mine Ban Treaty is the international agreement that bans antipersonnel landmines. Also referred to as the Ottawa Convention, it is officially titled: the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction.
The Treaty is the most comprehensive international instrument for ridding the world of the scourge of mines and deals with everything from mine use, production and trade to victim assistance, mine clearance and stockpile destruction. For the first time ever, a conventional weapon in widespread use, has been outlawed.
In December 1997 a total of 122 governments signed the treaty in Ottawa, Canada. In September the following year, Burkina Faso was the 40th country to ratify, triggering entry into force six months later; thus, in March 1999 the treaty became binding under international law, and did so quicker than any treaty of its kind in history.
A government needs to ratify or accede to the treaty in order to become formally bound by its provisions. Accession is the procedure open to governments that did not sign the treaty when it was open to signature (between December 1997 and March 1999). Ratification is open to signatory countries who signed before March 1999.
As of 18 November 2005 there are a total of 154 states that have joined the treaty, and of these 147 are State Parties and a further seven are signatories. A total of 40 countries remain outside of the treaty entirely. These include China, Egypt, Finland, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russia and the United States.
More: Find out who has joined and view the treaty text.
WHAT IS THE ICBL?
In 1992, six organizations came together to launch what was at that time seen as a 'utopian dream': the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL). Today the ICBL is supported by over 1,100 non-governmental organizations in more than 90 countries and continues its work to turn the words of the landmine 1997 Mine Ban Treaty into a reality.
The campaign calls for an international ban on the use, production, stockpiling, sale, transfer or export of antipersonnel landmines. It advocates for: the signing, ratification, implementation and monitoring of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty; increased resources for humanitarian demining and mine risk education programs; and increased resources for landmine victim rehabilitation and socio-economic reintegration.
In recognition of its achievements the campaign was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997, together with its then coordinator, Jody Williams. The Norwegian Nobel Committee applauded the campaign for changing a ban from "a vision to a feasible reality" and recognized that it offers a model for disarmament and peace. Since the adoption of the Mine Ban Treaty, the ICBL has remained committed to capitalizing on the global political momentum that it helped to create. "We will continue to work diligently… [towards] our goal of a world free of mines where all survivors can live in dignity" (Jody Williams, September 2002).
The ICBL has four staff members, a management committee of four people and an advisory boardmade up of 21 members. ICBL members include human rights, humanitarian, children, peace, disability, veterans, medical, humanitarian, mine action, development, arms control, religious, environmental and women's groups.
