ICBL Intervention on the
Five-Year Review Document--Opening Session
Mr. President,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a global
overview of implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty during the past five years.
At the outset, we wish to congratulate you and all the States Parties on the
very good documents, especially the excellent review document. It is thorough
in perhaps an unprecedented way. This will allow States Parties the luxury of
not having to go through the convention article by article and instead focus on
concrete plans for the future. This was a wise decision in keeping with the
unique character of this convention.
We thank President Petritsch and the Friends of the
President for giving the ICBL the opportunity for extensive input into the
Review process and all the documents. While we have some disappointments at
things still left out, and will have some suggested changes, we are mainly
concerned that the documents do not get weakened or watered down or overloaded
with non-essential text in the next few days.
One of my favorite observations about the Oslo
negotiations in September 1997 is that the treaty actually got stronger during
three weeks of negotiations, that it was not picked apart by narrow national
positions and concerns, that States kept their eyes focused on the bigger goal
of a truly comprehensive ban that would become the framework for global mine
clearance and victim assistance. Let us match that performance this week.
I would like to present some of the highlights of this
yearfs Landmine Monitor Report?highlights since the last report and highlights
since 1999. This report is a special edition with a five-year review from
1999-2003, including a global review and a review for every country in the
world. We thank the many donors that made this special 1,300 page edition
possible.
There is simply no question that the Convention is
working. States Party compliance with the requirements is impressive, the
benchmarks of progress are positive across the board, and the treaty is making
a difference in the lives of those in mine-affected communities. Very
importantly, even among those not party to the treaty, the new international
norm rejecting the antipersonnel mine is taking hold, as more and more nations
embrace the humanitarian and disarmament objectives of the treaty, including a
widespread reluctance to use the weapon even among non-State Parties.
Since the treaty took effect five years ago, use of the
weapon around the world has fallen dramatically, global funding for mine action
programs has increased more than 80 percent, more than 1,100 square kilometers
of land has been cleared, and the number of new mine victims each year has
decreased markedly.
Landmine Monitor Report 2004cites compelling evidence of use of
antipersonnel mines by four governments since May 2003: Georgia, Myanmar
(Burma), Nepal, and Russia. In contrast, the first Landmine Monitor Report
1999 identified 15 governments using antipersonnel mines in the previous
year. A total of 21 governments have used antipersonnel mines since 1999. It is
noteworthy that only Russia and Myanmar have used them regularly, each and
every year of the period.
Though not reflected in the Review Document, many current
States Parties have used antipersonnel mines in the recent past. Three current
States Parties have admitted use since 1999, but prior to acceding to the
treaty. One current State Party has admitted using AP mines after signing the
treaty but before ratifying. There are serious and credible allegations that
four other signatories that are now States Parties used AP mines since 1999,
and that one State Party used AP mines even after entry into force. I mention
these not to cast blame or shame at this point, but to indicate the growing strength
of the norm against antipersonnel mines in that even recent users of the weapon
have now foresworn it forever.
One of the greatest success stories of the Mine Ban
Treaty is that sixty-five States Parties have completed the destruction of
their stockpiles, collectively destroying more than 37 million antipersonnel
mines, including four million mines in the last year. Every State Party so far
has met its treaty-mandated four-year deadline for stockpile destruction,
except for Guinea and Turkmenistan, both of which have subsequently completed
stockpile destruction.
The power of the mine ban movement is reflected in the
fact that a de facto global ban on the trade of antipersonnel mines has been in
effect since the mid-1990s, with only a very low level of illicit trafficking
and unacknowledged trade taking place. Moreover, of the more than 50 countries
known to have produced antipersonnel mines, all but 15 have formally renounced
production.
From 1999 to 2003, more than 1,100 square kilometers of
land?equivalent to about 125,000 football fields?were cleared, resulting in the
destruction of more than four million antipersonnel mines, nearly one million
antivehicle mines, and many more millions of pieces of unexploded ordnance. The
past five years have witnessed the initiation and expansion of many mine action
programs, and ever-greater amounts of land being returned to communities for
productive use.
Some form of mine clearance was reported in 2003 and 2004
in a total of 65 countries, including the first humanitarian mine clearance
operations in Armenia, Chile, Senegal, and Tajikistan. In 2003 alone, a
combined total of more than 149 million square meters of land was cleared.
According to Landmine Monitor Report 2004, 83
countries are mine-affected, including 52 States Parties to the Mine Ban
Treaty. States Parties that have declared completion of mine clearance since
1999 include Bulgaria (October 1999), Moldova (August 2000), Costa Rica
(December 2002), CzechRepublic (April 2003), Djibouti (January 2004), and, most
recently, Honduras (June 2004). However, in 2003 and 2004, no mine clearance or
mine risk education activities were recorded in 13 States Parties.
Landmine Monitor has identified about $2.1 billion in
donor mine action contributions from 1992-2003. Of that 12-year total, 65
percent ($1.35 billion) was provided in the past five years. For 2003, Landmine
Monitor has identified $339 million in mine action funding by more than 24
donors. This is an increase of $25 million, or 8 percent, from 2002, and an
increase of $102 million, or 43 percent, from 2001.
However, in 2003, Afghanistan and Iraq received 38
percent of global mine action funding, while an unusually large number of
mine-affected countries experienced a decline in donor contributions to mine
action, including States Parties Cambodia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Eritrea.
The number of reported new mine casualties declined in
the majority of mine-affected countries since 1999 and in 2003. Landmine
Monitor identified 8,065 new casualties caused by landmines and unexploded
ordnance in 2003. However, many casualties go unreported and Landmine Monitor
estimates there are now between 15,000 and 20,000 new casualties annually
around the world?far fewer than the 26,000 per year estimated in the 1990s.
According to Landmine Monitor, in 2003, new landmine and
UXO casualties were recorded in 65 countries. A total of 86 percent of reported
new casualties were identified as civilians and 23 percent were children.
The major progress in the past five years in preventing
antipersonnel mines from being laid and in clearing existing minefields has not
been matched in the area of victim assistance. Landmine Monitor reports that
while global mine action funding has increased greatly since 1999, identifiable
resources for mine victim assistance have actually declined ($29.8 million in
1999 compared to $28.2 million in 2003). Resources for victim assistance as a
percentage of total mine action funding have decreased significantly and
steadily from 14.9 percent in 1999 to 8.3 percent in 2003.
In many mine-affected countries the assistance available
to rehabilitate and reintegrate landmine survivors back into society remains
desperately inadequate. Landmine Monitor identified only 35 countries receiving
resources from other States for mine victim assistance programs in 2003.
Landmine Monitor estimates that there are somewhere
between 300,000 and 400,000 mine survivors in at least 121 countries today.
From 1999 to September 2004, Landmine Monitor recorded more than 42,500 new
landmine and UXO casualties from incidents in at least 75 countries; but the
true numbers are likely to be twice that many.
I have presented an overwhelmingly positive picture of
the past five years. But we should not be lulled into a false sense of
complacency or satisfaction. Many problems remain, and the challenges of the
next five years may be greater than those of the past five years. We face the
key challenges of universalization, of expanded mine clearance, and of adequate
victim assistance. But it is also the case that State Party compliance has NOT
been absolute or uniform, even regarding core obligations prohibiting use and
requiring destruction of stocks within four years. OngoingState Party
disagreements about fundamental matters such as what landmines are banned, and
what acts are banned under the prohibition on assistance, undercut the
credibility of the treaty.
We would like to intervene later in more detail on the
challenges still facing us. Thank you.