A Treaty Under-mined?

Most of the world’s countries have agreed to eliminate landmines. Guess who’s holding out.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Five years ago, the majority of the world’s nations agreed to put an end to the use of landmines, signing the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty. Since then, millions of landmines have been destroyed, and 144 nations have ratified the treaty, with more in the process. However, in what’s become a recurring theme, one signature noticeably absent from this international treaty is that of the United States.

This week in Nairobi, nations are marking the treaty’s five-year anniversary with an international land mine conference, looking at the ban’s successes and its future. The former, highlighted in the 1,300-page Landmine Monitor report, include:

Of the more than 50 states known to have produced antipersonnel mines, 36 states have formally renounced and ceased production.

A de facto global ban on the transfer or export of antipersonnel mines has been in effect since 1996. The trade in antipersonnel mines has dwindled to a very low level of illicit trafficking and unacknowledged trade.

In this Landmine Monitor reporting period, some four million stockpiled antipersonnel mines were destroyed, bringing the global total to about 62 million antipersonnel mines destroyed in recent years. Sixty-five States Parties have completed the destruction of their stockpiles, collectively destroying more than 37.3 million antipersonnel mines.

Under the treaty’s terms, countries must destroy all their anti-personnel mines within four years of ratification, and clear all minefields within a decade. The study shows progress on that front, and nations becoming party to the treaty this year include Ethiopia and the landmine-ravaged states of Burundi and Sudan. However, as Kenyan president Mwai Kibaki said Monday, there is ample work left:

“It is estimated that there are still close to 200 million mines held by various states. I appeal to those states that are still not parties to join the convention and to destroy those landmine stockpiles.”

Roughly forty countries fit that category, with Russia, China, India, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia joining the United States among the holdouts. According to a government statement, the U.S. supports the ban in principle, but refuses to sign the treaty unless an exception is made for its mines on the Korean peninsula. While President Clinton had asked the Defense Department to look into alternatives to mines, the Bush administration argues it simply doesn’t have a ready replacement for the weapons in Korea.

At the Nairobi conference, which the U.S. declined to attend, its position drew this response from Stephen Goose of Human Rights Watch:

“The other countries (that) have done away with land mines have found that, through a combination of using other types of weapons, other types of censors, and changes in their doctrine and in their tactics, and in the way they arrange their forces, they can do away with anti-personnel land mines and not have a significant impact on their military operations. If all these other governments can do it, so can the U.S…

“There are states who like to maintain that they won’t join the convention until the U.S. joins. So it’s hurting our efforts to further universalize, to bring the rest of the world on board.”

Last February, the U.S. government instead proposed the development of so-called “smart mines” that would be timed to self-destruct and would, in theory, limit the number of civilian casualties (estimates put such casualties worldwide between 10,000-20,000 each year). At the time, Sen. Patrick Leahy called the plan a “deeply disturbing rollback” that would only encourage other nations to develop and use mines.

To the government’s credit, the landmine treaty is not another Kyoto Protocol, as the U.S. is at least taking some small, independent steps to reduce its estimated 10 million mines. Unlike Russia, for example, the United States hasn’t deployed new mines since the first Gulf War. In a statement released this week, the military did commit to stop using anti-personnel mines by 2010, and to eliminate all but the controversial “smart” mines from its arsenal.

President Bush has also continued Clinton’s financial support for worldwide minefield cleanup, with roughly $1 billion contributed since 1993. To Ken Rutherford of Landmine Survivors Network, that’s only a partial victory until the U.S. ratifies the treaty:

“Shame on the United States for not signing, but congratulations for everything that you’re doing to make the world more mine safe in terms of clearing the mines and helping land mine survivors recover from their accidents. And shame on those state parties that have signed the treaty but contribute zero to victim assistance or de-mining.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate