Clearing the Mines
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
CLEARING THE MINES REPORT BY THE MINE ACTION TEAM FOR THE THIRD REVIEW CONFERENCE OF THE ANTIPERSONNEL MINE BAN TREATY June 2014 REPORT FOR THE THIRD REVIEW CONFERENCE OF THE ANTI-PERSONNEL MINE BAN TREATY CONTENTS Report for the Third Review Conference INTRODUCTION ANNEXES of the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty ASSESSING 15 YEARS OF AFFECTED STATES NOT PARTY ARTICLE 5 IMPLEMENTATION 1 Armenia 158 2 Azerbaijan 162 Progress in mine clearance 05 3 China 165 The remaining challenge 08 4 Cuba 166 The architecture of an effective and 10 Armenia efficient mine action program 5 Egypt 167 Bosnia and Herzegovina 6 Georgia 168 Sudan 7 India 169 Turkey THE TEN MOST CONTAMINATED Tajikistan Somalia Russia STATES PARTIES 8 Iran 170 United Kingdom 9 Israel 174 1 Afghanistan 14 Yemen Iran South Sudan 10 Kyrgyzstan 176 2 Angola 20 Afghanistan 11 Lao PDR 177 3 Bosnia and Herzegovina 26 Croatia Serbia 12 Lebanon 178 * 4 Cambodia 32 13 Libya 182 5 Chad 38 14 Morocco 184 6 Croatia 40 15 Myanmar 186 7 Iraq 46 16 North Korea 188 8 Thailand 50 17 Pakistan 189 9 Turkey 56 China 18 Palestine 190 Angola 10 Zimbabwe 62 19 Russia 192 Myanmar Morocco 20 South Korea 194 OTHER AFFECTED STATES PARTIES 21 Sri Lanka 196 Ecuador Vietnam 22 Syria 200 1 Algeria 67 Chad Kosovo Cambodia 23 Uzbekistan 202 2 Argentina 71 Eritrea Iraq 24 Vietnam 203 Algeria 3 Chile 72 Peru Sri Lanka 4 Colombia 76 5 Cyprus 80 AFFECTED OTHER AREAS Chile Colombia Zimbabwe 6 Democratic Republic of the Congo 82 1 Kosovo 206 Mozambique Somaliland 7 Ecuador 86 2 Nagorno-Karabakh 208 Israel 8 Eritrea 90 3 Western Sahara 210 Lebanon Democratic Republic of the Congo 9 Ethiopia 94 Libya Western Sahara 10 Jordan 98 Jordan Nagorno-Karabakh 11 Mauritania 102 Senegal Thailand 12 Mozambique 106 Mauritania 13 Niger 110 Palestine Ethiopia 14 Peru 114 Niger 15 Senegal 118 Azerbaijan 16 Serbia 124 17 Somalia 128 18 South Sudan 134 19 Sudan 138 20 Tajikistan 144 21 Yemen 150 22 United Kingdom 154 02 03 *Global contamination from mines ASSESSING 15 YEARS OF ARTICLE 5 IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSING 15 YEARSASSESSING 15 ARTICLE OF 5 IMPLEMENTATION INTRODUCTION ASSESSING 15 YEARS OF ARTICLE 5 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS IN MINE CLEARANCE The international mine action community has made Today, 56 states plus 3 ‘other areas’ still have an identified significant strides toward putting an end to the suffering threat from antipersonnel mines (see Table 1). In most caused by antipersonnel mines. A humanitarian crisis has, cases — 32 — contamination is on territory under the in the overwhelming majority of cases, been successfully jurisdiction or control of a State Party to the MBT, which reduced to a development problem. Clearance operations under Article 5 has specific international legal obligations over the past two decades, combined with a huge reduction to find, clear, and destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined in new use thanks to the MBT, have reduced casualties areas within a defined time period. In this, the MBT is from more than 10,000 annually in the early 1990s to under truly a landmark in disarmament and a model for effective 1,000 in 2012. Twenty-seven states and one other area have action in tackling weapons with indiscriminate effects. declared themselves cleared of mines since the treaty Thus far, however, implementation of Article 5 has been entered into force in 1999, and more do so with every a rocky road in far too many states, despite generous passing year. As such, Mike Croll’s doomsday prediction in support from donors, a generalized willingness to innovate 1998 that the antipersonnel landmine was ‘here to stay’1 and learn among demining practitioners, and a celebrated may be judged ill-founded. ‘toolbox’ promoted as offering a tool for every demining This report offers an assessment of the remaining threat be completed; whether clearance is effectively targeted challenge. from antipersonnel mines in mined areas around the to areas containing antipersonnel mines; whether that world. It is based on the best publicly available information clearance is efficient; whether national support, including Table 1. Affected States Parties, states not party, and other areas (as of May 2014)2 on contamination as of May 2014 and on efforts to clear and funding, is provided to the mine action program; whether destroy the mine threat, in particular in 2013. clearance is conducted in a timely fashion; whether an State Party State Party State Party State not party State not party Other area effective and efficient land release system is employed Following an overall summary of mine action progress by the program; whether national mine action standards Afghanistan Ecuador South Sudan Armenia Libya Kosovo since the entry into force of the 1997 Antipersonnel Mine have been elaborated and are followed; whether a Ban Treaty (MBT), profiles of the ten most affected States State reports accurately and meaningfully on progress, Algeria Eritrea Sudan Azerbaijan Morocco Nagorno-Karabakh Parties are included in Section B. Section C details the including through its legally binding obligation to provide situation in other affected States Parties. The two annexes transparency reports under Article 7 of the MBT; and Angola Ethiopia Tajikistan China Myanmar Western Sahara to the report contain profiles of each affected state not finally, whether it can be said that the performance of the party (Annex 1) and of three other areas not generally Argentina Iraq Thailand Cuba North Korea mine action program is improving. Each State Party report recognized as States (Annex 2). concludes with recommendations for action to improve Bosnia & Herzegovina Jordan Turkey Egypt Pakistan For each profile, the extent of antipersonnel mine mine action program performance. contamination and impact in each affected State or Cambodia Mauritania UK Georgia Palestine The report was compiled by the Mine Action Team other area is first described. The structure of the mine comprising Nick Cumming-Bruce, Marion Loddo, Kathryn action program is then explained, with a summary of the Chad Mozambique Yemen India Russia Millett, and Alberto Serra. The work of the team was international and national actors engaged in demining. overseen by Atle Karlsen, Deputy Head, Department for Chile Niger Zimbabwe Iran South Korea The third section, on land release, describes cancelation Humanitarian Disarmament, Norwegian People’s Aid. The of suspected mined area by non-technical survey, and report was edited by Stuart Casey-Maslen. Colombia Peru Israel Sri Lanka release by technical survey and clearance, in accordance with international mine action standards. The report and the views expressed in it are the work of Croatia Senegal Kyrgyzstan Syria the authors. The designation of armed non-state actors, Compliance with Article 5 of the MBT is assessed for each states, or territories does not imply any judgement by Cyprus Serbia Lao PDR Uzbekistan State Party. These are legally binding obligations the Norwegian People’s Aid or any other organization, body, or violation of which amounts to an internationally wrongful individual regarding the legal status of such actors, states, DR Congo Somalia Lebanon Vietnam act entailing state responsibility. Consonant with human or territories, or their authorities and institutions, or the rights obligations of protection, progress in clearance delimitation of their boundaries, or the status of any states of antipersonnel mines in mined areas is also reported Today, massive antipersonnel mine contamination contamination (more than 3km2 and up to 20km2) or light or territories that border them. for each state not party and for three other areas not (defined as more than 100km2) is believed to exist only in (up to 3km2). generally recognized as States. Support for mine action is two states, Afghanistan and Cambodia, and very probably Regrettably, tens of millions of dollars have been then set out, including international and national financial also in Iraq. Heavy antipersonnel mine contamination ploughed into unacceptably low quality survey, perhaps contributions to mine action in 2013. (more than 20 km2 and up to 100km2) is believed to the single biggest obstacle to faster and better targeted exist in several states: Angola, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and In a further innovation, mine action performance for each mine clearance. HALO Trust warned of the dangers of Herzegovina, Croatia, Thailand, and Zimbabwe. The State Party is assessed according to ten criteria: the poor survey from the early days of mine action but their situation in Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Vietnam is not known, extent to which the antipersonnel mine problem has been idiosyncratic style of advocacy saw the warnings go largely but may also be heavy. Other states have either medium assessed and understood; when clearance is expected to unheeded. Instead, demining experts and organizations 04 05 ASSESSING 15 YEARS OF ARTICLE 5 IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSING 15 YEARSASSESSING 15 ARTICLE OF 5 IMPLEMENTATION who should have known better poured donor dollars and poorly trained states in five years’ time (see overleaf, Five years of clearance operations have resulted in the destruction of more than personnel without demining experience into landmine impact surveys that The Remaining Challenge). Indeed, 1.48 million antipersonnel mines and 107,000 antivehicle mines (see Table 4), created the perception of, but did not ever accurately identify, massive mine we believe that the remaining as well as countless items of UXO. It is oversimplistic to assert that a mine contamination. By assuming a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ approach to mine antipersonnel mine threat can be cleared equates directly to a life or limb saved – such is not the nature of risk action, every square centimeter of land became a potential sanctuary for an removed in almost every nation in less – but each item destroyed assuredly helps make a country and its communities antipersonnel mine.