A. Points of View on Banning Landmines
The United States said again today that the only way to ban landmines worldwide was to begin negotiations for a UN agreement which would bring in major producers like China and Russia. China and Russia, major users and producers of the deadly weapons, are not among the more than 100 countries taking part in the Canadian-sponsored "Ottawa Process" towards the total ban of landmines.
President Bill Clinton announced a major US policy decision to send a delegation to the Oslo meeting in September, 1997. The Clinton Administration has been accused by critics at home and abroad of dragging its feet on the landmines ban, which has been opposed by military commanders wishing to retain the weapons in the US arsenal. US officials in Washington predicted tough negotiations as the administration insists on an exception for the Korean peninsula, where it has 37,000 troops in South Korea facing the threat of a possible invasion from communist North Korea. It also wants to delay a ban on "smart land mines, which self-destruct after a set time period, until it has developed alternative weapons. The Conference on Disarmament has been hamstrung all year by disputes between the five known nuclear weapons states (Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States) and developing countries over priorities. The major powers have refused a demand by developing countries, led by India, to launch wider talks aimed at the total elimination of nuclear weapons.
The International Committee of the Red Cross appealed to more than 100 countries supporting speedy efforts to draft a treaty on landmines to insist on a total ban. "The ICRC maintains that a total and immediate prohibition on the use of all anti-personnel mines is essential for the effectiveness and credibility of the treaty," a statement said. The organization also appealed for a "no reservations" clause to be inserted in the final version of the treaty. Non-governmental organizations have publicly voiced their fears that US reservations could tempt other countries to follow suit, which could end up weakening a treaty. The world's biggest landmines exporters, Russia and China, are participating in the Conference on Disarmament but do not back the Ottawa agenda.
About 100 countries began crucial talks on a treaty for a global ban on anti-personnel Land mines amid concern that the United States may seek to water down such an initiative. The plan is for the convention to be signed in Ottawa, Canada in December. Washington has been accused by critics at home and abroad of dragging its feet. The United States reversed itself and decided to throw its weight behind the Ottawa process on August 18th. But the US is demanding several exceptions, including that their "smart" or self-destructing mines should be excluded from the ban. The International Campaign to Ban Landmines, which coordinates the work against landmines by more than 1,000 non -governmental organizations, said countries must be vigilant in opposing efforts to weaken a global ban.
Questions and Activities
B. International Community Urged to Make Landmines "A Weapon of the Past and a Symbol of Same"
Secretary-General Kofi Annan - Conference on Landmines, Oslo, Norway, September 1997
It gives me great pleasure to address your meeting at this vital point in our efforts to achieve a world wide ban on anti-personnel mines. The Ottawa Conference will be a historic event in the peacemaking efforts of our time, and I am proud to say I will be attending the signing ceremony in Ottawa on behalf of the United Nations. The Conference will be attended by symbolic representatives of the voiceless, the victims and the maimed. The memory of those who have died will be honored.
The elimination of landmines has become a truly global cause, propelled by the demands of citizens everywhere and promoted tirelessly by regional and non-governmental agencies. The tragic accident that last Sunday took the life of Diana, Princess of Wales, has robbed our global cause of one of its most compelling voices. She showed the world that one voice speaking as part of a global grass-roots movement can truly make a difference.
... I believe we stand at the edge of a new age of disarmament. With the threats and fears of the Cold War behind us, the international community must seize the moment to turn the tide on the production of arms.
There is it new and growing consensus that the proliferation of anus of all kinds - whether they be weapons of mass destruction or small arms - inherently constitutes a threat to peace. Only three months ago, representatives of more than 165 nations gathered in the Hague to take a landmark step in the history of disarmament: the adoption of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
By ending the use, production an stockpiling of chemical weapons, States signing this convention did more than divest themselves of a wicked weapon. They declared to this and all succeeding generations that chemical weapons are instruments of no State with any respect for itself, and no people with any sense of dignity would use in conflicts whether domestic or international. Now we must bring to the struggle against landmines the same determination and the same sense of mission that brought an end to chemical weapons. We must make landmines, too, a weapon of the past and a symbol of shame.
Over the next three weeks, your negotiations will examine the provisions and language for a comprehensive ban on anti-Personnel mines, under the Ottawa Process. The foundation that was built at the June Conference is a solid one. Ninety-seven countries announced their support for the Ottawa Process and agreed to negotiate the terms of an international treaty to be signed in December.
The treaty will serve not only as a complement but also as an inspiration for greater and swifter progress in the Conference on Disarmament's own deliberations towards a total ban on landmines. Together, the two avenues can truly lead to a worldwide prohibition, including both the countries affected by landmines and those which produce and export them ... I urge that we seize the opportunity to eradicate this invisible enemy. I pledge the support and commitment of the United Nations towards a total ban. I do so because the use of a weapon whose victims are overwhelmingly women and children is fundamentally immoral. I pledge our support because the curse of landmines affects every aspect of the work of the United Nations - from peace and security, to health and development.
A total ban on anti-personnel landmines will mark the end of only one aspect of our fight against landmines. No less important is the removal of millions of mines which have already been laid. Each mine cleared may mean a life saved. But we know that for every one hundred thousand mines cleared each year, between two and five million mines are laid at the same time. The presence - or even the fear of the presence - of just one landmine can prevent the cultivation of an entire field, robbing a family or perhaps an entire village of its livelihood.
... Whether it is the rebuilding of infrastructure, the repair of homes or, most importantly, the return of refugees, landmines are enemy number one. In countries as diverse as Angola, Cambodia and Bosnia, we have seen how the long and hard work of post-conflict rehabilitation is marred many years into the future by the presence of land-mines.
Though civilians, of course, are the first and foremost victims of mines, we should not forget that every work of peace-keeping and peace-building is imperiled by landmines. Last month, I encouraged the Security Council in its decision to institute a Dag Hammerskjold Medal honoring fallen peace-keepers. The very first peacekeeper to sacrifice his life in the cause of the United Nations was killed by a landmine in the Middle East. Since then, far too many peace-keepers have lost their lives to mines, and continue to do so, more recently in Bosnia. To honor the memory of that first Blue Helmet, and those that followed, we must eradicate the use and production of mines.
... Even within military circles, there is a growing conviction that landmines are as a great threat to those who plant them as to anyone else. There a widening consensus that the strategic utility of antipersonnel mine is marginal, and that in the growing number of conflicts with fluid frontiers, defensive minefields limit operational actions rather than enable them.
Finally, it is development itself that is held hostage to the curse of landmines. Developing countries are two often twice cursed - with poverty and with war - landmines being the most permanent, destructive wound of war. Without their elimination, refugees will be far less able to return, idle fields will be far less accessible, and peace itself will be elusive.
Questions and Activities
Use the information from these pages to help each side develop an argument for their case.
C. A Course of Action
1. Voluntary Trust Fund:
The Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine Clearance was established in 1994 in order to assist in financing mine clearance and other mine-related activities. Accordingly, the Fund is being used in support of:
As of April, 1997, approximately $31.21 million have been received and $6.57 million pledged by almost 40 Member States and various organizations. From these contributions, $29.24 million has been spent or committed for expenditure.
Given the growing needs of recently established programs (in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in Croatia in particular), an additional minimum of $14.8 million in 1997 and $35.4 million in 1998 is required to keep up current activities. However, in order to carry out its program as well as expand operations, the Trust Fund would need an additional $5 1.1 million in 1997 and $68.4 million in 1998.
2. What Can You Do?
Questions and Activities
Return to the main document.
Return
to the American Forum's On-line Curriculum Material Index Page.