Landmine Survivors Network
search   Give to LSN
Created by and for survivors, LSN empowers individuals and communities affected by landmines to recover from trauma, reclaim their lives and fulfill their rights.
Who We Are What We Do Where We Work Survior Stories News Inside LSN




HOW YOU CAN HELP


World Landmine News
Mine Enemy - South China Morning Post

August 12, 2005

Mine enemy

As insurgents employ explosive new tactics, fears are growing that the US will redeploy landmines - this time making them more destructive than ever, writes Peter Kammerer

For all the hi-tech military gadgetry the US has at its disposal in Iraq, a shift in tactics by insurgents seems to be pushing it towards using a simpler weapon that three-quarters of the world\'s countries have banned - landmines. That is a worrying prospect for anti-mine activists, who fear the consequences would roll back gains so far made in ridding the world of an armament they have termed \"evil\" and \"inhumane\".

Since the enactment of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty in 1999, 152 of the world\'s 191 nations have agreed to abide by its conditions and in the process destroyed 62 million of the known 260 million stockpiled landmines. The US, although not a signatory, has nonetheless not produced the weapons since 1997 or used them in combat since the Gulf war in 1991.

In an era where laser-guided missiles and smart bombs have become everyday weapons, landmines have seemed outdated. That is the view of Washington\'s partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and dozens of other nations such as Australia and Japan, which have consigned their stockpiles to history.

Of the estimated 200 million still in arsenals, 90 per cent are in the hands of just five nations, none of which have signed up to the treaty: China, with 110 million; Russia, 50 million; the US, 10.4 million; Pakistan, six million; and India, about five million.

Developments in Iraq appear to be pushing the US to again deploy the weapon and perhaps to put new designs into production, bucking the global trend.

That may already have happened, as the Pentagon has yet to confirm or deny media reports that the US army in May began sending to Iraq a new remote -controlled landmine system called Matrix, which relies on technology developed for another device spoken of in Pentagon circles - Spider.

Mounting casualties among US soldiers in Iraq in the past few months have been blamed by the Pentagon on a new breed of landmine being used by insurgents. More powerful than devices which have killed hundreds of soldiers in roadside bombings in the past two years, these devices can penetrate the armour of US military vehicles.

The latest attack was on Wednesday, when four soldiers were killed and five wounded in a blast near Baiji, an oil-refining town 180km north of Baghdad. A large crater was left in the road where the incident occurred.

But the attack which has drawn the most concern came on August 3, when a landmine killed 14 Marines in an armoured amphibious vehicle near Haditha, northwest of Baghdad. Washington\'s most senior general, Richard Myers, hinted at the US response in a Pentagon briefing on Wednesday, saying: \"Clearly, improvised explosive devices ... some with newer technologies these days, are going to change our tactics.\"

The Pentagon has been secretive about plans to resume landmine production, but the New York-based Human Rights Watch revealed what it had gleaned from studying statements and reports in a briefing paper issued last week. It concluded that the US would make a decision in December on whether to begin production of Spider, an anti-personnel mine.

Another production decision would be made in 2008 on a more sophisticated anti -personnel mine, the Intelligent Munitions System, for which the Pentagon had requested US$ 1.3 billion for development and manufacture.

The director of Human Rights Watch\'s armaments division, Steve Goose, said on Tuesday the developments were the result of a US announcement in February last year of its landmine policy, under which it abandoned long-held aims to join the Mine Ban Treaty. Under the pact, member states promise not to use, produce or trade in the weapons, and to eliminate their stockpiles within four years of signing.

Mr Goose said the US wanted to produce landmines which self-destructed after they were no longer useful and would in theory pose no danger to civilians. This, he claimed, would be used by US President George W. Bush\'s administration as justification to produce new devices. \"It is ready to get rid of the so-called dumb mines that sit in the ground for decades, but wants to be able to use these so-called smart mines instead,\" he said.

Civilian casualties from landmines, usually long after a conflict has ended, are the main impetus for nations opting to destroy stockpiles and clear minefields. Action groups claim between 15,000 and 20,000 people are killed or injured in 83 mine-affected countries each year. They estimate 85 per cent of the victims are civilians and a quarter are children.

More than 1,100-square kilometres of land has been cleared since the treaty was enacted in 1999, destroying more than four million anti-personnel mines, one million anti-vehicle mines and millions of other pieces of unexploded ordinance. Donors provided US$ 1.35 billion for anti-mine action in the four years to 2003.

Mr Goose described the progress that had been made as \"huge\". Twice-yearly meetings on the Mine Ban Treaty were highly productive, and while the US and Russia were increasingly less interested in participating, China had started attending. A second track of international action, the 1980 Convention on Conventional Weapons, was also making inroads on landmines and booby traps, although less proactively.

\"The parties have destroyed 38 million landmines and there are just 10 that have not finished destroying their stockpiles. Even some of the states which haven\'t joined have been getting rid of their stocks,\" Mr Goose said.

Over time, mines become unstable and dangerous, and have to be destroyed. Russia claims to have destroyed 17 million since the mid-1990s, China has eliminated an unspecified number, and the US got rid of two million because it said they were old and no longer of any use.

Mr Goose said most of the world\'s militaries had determined landmines were no longer useful, even those in some of the poorest countries.

His assertions were backed by the executive director of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Anne Capella. The organisation won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 for its work.

\"Warfare today does not require these sorts of weapons,\" Ms Capella said from her office in Brussels.

\"Often, these weapons turn back on their own people - as happened in the Vietnam war, when American soldiers stepped on their own mines.\"

If the US put new landmines into production, it would be going against the global spirit of ridding the world of the dangerous weapons, she said.

The coalition, in its annual Landmine Monitor report, last year cited what it called \"compelling evidence\" of landmine use in the previous 12 months by four nations - Russia, Myanmar, Nepal and Georgia.

In its first report in 1999, it said anti-personnel mines had been used by 15 nations.

While the countries accused of still using landmines are said to be deploying old and dangerous weapons - at least 53 civilians were killed in Nepal in June when their bus ran over a mine allegedly planted by Maoist rebels - American officials claim that theirs are not a problem.

American landmine expert Thomas Houlahan, the director of James Madison University\'s military assessment programme, said modern landmines as deployed by the US were not dangerous to civilians. Instead, the question should be about the safety of unexploded ordinance, he suggested.

\"We use batteries on our mines, which means the munitions self-disable over time,\" he said. \"The overwhelming majority of people walking around with missing limbs did not lose them as a result of any mine that we\'re using now.

\"Whatever this government\'s faults, it\'s gone to great lengths to make sure that civilians are not getting blown up,\" Mr Houlahan said.

Rarely in warfare were landmines used because of the difficulty in laying them while moving or under attack, the former soldier with the US army\'s 82nd Airborne Division said. Only in extreme situations would they be needed, perhaps to prevent a position from being over-run.

An insurgency such as that being experienced in Iraq was an exception, though - and laying landmines was a perfect solution.

\"As an area of denial method, in many instances, it may be the only effective solution,\" Mr Houlahan said from Washington. \"When it has been determined where insurgents are getting supplies from and their infiltration routes, landmines can be used very effectively. It\'s an important weapon in anti -insurgency.\"

Military operations analyst with Jane\'s Strategic Advisory Services, Charles Heyman agreed.

\"Landmines are very effective weapons against anyone that\'s walking around,\" he said from the United Arab Emirates. \"If the insurgents in Iraq were laying mines down, it would deter the coalition troops - there\'s no doubt about that.\"

The US, perhaps, has come to that conclusion and has gone against the global trend by fighting fire with fire.

Whatever the hopes of anti-mine activists, it would seem to be some time yet before the world scraps its final landmine.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2005



Landmine Survivors Network Contact Us Site Map Home

© Copyright 2005 Landmine Survivors Network. All Rights Reserved.
Questions? Comments? Contact Us!

Bobby WorldWide Approved 508    Bobby WorldWide Approved A