September 7, 2000
Jody Williams, 1997 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate; Ambassador for International Campaign to Ban Landmines
Stephen D. Goose, Program Director, Arms Division, Human Rights Watch
In December of 1997, 122 nations gathered in Ottawa, Canada, to sign the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production, and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and On Their Destruction. Commonly referred to as the Mine Ban Treaty, the treaty was the result of a global campaign conducted by over 1,000 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in more than sixty countries. To date, the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty has been signed by 139 national governments and ratified by 107. The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) has been hailed as a groundbreaking example of the involvement of transnational civil society in global governance. The ICBL's Landmine Monitor Report monitors implementation of and compliance with the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty and is the first time NGOs have come together in a coordinated, systematic, and sustained fashion to monitor a humanitarian law or disarmament treaty.
Jody Williams: Introduction
The ICBL began not as a sweeping transnational movement but as three individuals who believed that the use of landmines was a violation of international law. Their work eventually grew into an international campaign consisting of a coalition of NGOs. One of the reasons for the success of the campaign was that NGOs in the coalition were forced to take up the cause on their own initiative because the ICBL lacked an official structure or secretariat.
Keeping NGOs in the coalition focused on the ICBL was and continues to be a challenging task. For example, many of the larger NGOs in the ICBL are concerned with a number of global issues and despite their interest in banning landmines, may find their energies and activities dispersed. The ICBL tries to keep the members of its coalition focused through two methods. First, NGOs must maintain pressure on all governments to keep the issue of landmines in the international spotlight. Second, the ICBL plans ahead and gives its members a roadmap to follow for campaigning activities.
No strong verification measures were built into the Mine Ban Treaty. In response, the ICBL researches and publishes the Landmine Monitor Report. Researched by 115 organizations and individuals in 95 countries, the Landmine Monitor Report is meant not only to inform the world about the global status of landmine clearance, usage, and effects, but to also keep members of the ICBL energized and engaged. The publication of the Landmine Monitor Report coincides with the annual Meeting of States, where progress, problems, and data from the Monitor and the Mine Ban Treaty are discussed.
Stephen Goose: Findings of the Landmine Monitor Report 2000
Overall, the indicators of progress on the banning of landmines are positive. The use and production of, as well as the trade in, landmines have decreased.
Non-signatory governments to the treaty are also moving toward eliminating the use of landmines. The United States has promised to join the Mine Ban Treaty by 2006 if the Pentagon finds alternatives to anti-personnel landmines. The Chinese government has been involved in mine clearance along its border with Vietnam.
In the areas of use, export, production, and clearance of landmines, clear progress has been made. Compared to previous decades, the use of landmines is waning. Further, the export of landmines has virtually stopped altogether, although a black market for landmines exists. Production has also fallen sharply; the number of producers has fallen from fifty-four to sixteen. Of the sixteen producers, some countries, including Egypt, Turkey, and Israel, are not currently producing landmines. In addition, millions of mines are being destroyed by more than fifty signatory and non-signatory nations. The Mine Ban Treaty requires the destruction of stockpiles within four years of ratification and landmine ground clearance within ten years. However, 250 million landmines still exist in stockpiles in a handful of countries, including India, Pakistan, Russia, Belarus, and the United States. China possesses 110 million landmines; sixty to seventy million by Russia; ten million by both Belarus and Ukraine; six million by Pakistan; and approximately four to five million by India. In fact, with 11 million landmines, the United States has the fourth largest stockpile in the world. No clear statistics exist on how much land is cleared annually of landmines.
The funding for mine action programs, for mine clearance and awareness, has been increasing significantly. In 1999, seventeen donors raised $211 million, more than one-third the amount from 1998. However, some programs are in danger, such as those in Afghanistan, which are facing donor fatigue. This figure does not include the money being funneled into research and development on landmine clearance technologies.
The number of landmine victims is also decreasing. However, in terms of funding for victims' assistance, more money is being channeled towards landmine clearance. Victims' assistance tends to get folded into funding for aid to war victims and other development assistance.
Since March 1999, landmines have been used in twenty conflicts around the world. The heaviest use occurred in Chechnya by Russian forces. Yugoslav forces used them in Kosovo, as did Ethiopian forces in the conflict with Eritrea. New use of landmines has occurred in the conflict in Kashmir and also against rebels in the Philippines. At least one Mine Ban Treaty signatory, Angola, has returned to using landmines against rebel forces.
The challenges faced by the ICBL are multifold. On one level, the ICBL must attain universalization of the treaty. For various reasons, fifty-five countries have not joined the treaty, many that possess large stockpiles of landmines. The ICBL must ensure full and effective implementation of the treaty from member states. The ICBL is also placing more emphasis on victims' assistance. Above all, the ICBL faces the challenge of keeping the issue of banning landmines fresh and prioritized by NGOs and governments, so that resources continue to be committed to goals outlined in the treaty.
On another level, the success of the ICBL and the universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty are important because they illustrate the status of treaties dealing with international humanitarian law. The successful implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty translates into increased pressure for other international treaties to be upheld and implemented.
Finally, the Clinton administration could take several steps in its final months to take the United States closer to complying with the Mine Ban Treaty. The US could announce a moratorium or ban on the production of landmines. Further, the American government should squash two initiatives that will hinder the United States' planned accession to the Mine Ban Treaty in 2006. The first initiative is the RADAM mine system, which combines anti-personnel and anti-tank landmines in one canister, and would be prohibited under the Mine Ban Treaty. The second initiative is to make a "smarter" landmine than the "dumb" landmines that are used - in effect creating a more technologically advanced anti-personnel landmine. However, both of these initiatives keep the United States active in perpetuating the use of landmines while the attitude of the Pentagon should instead be focused on banning landmines by 2006.
Prepared by Radha Kuppalli, Junior Fellow.