Belgium

Last Updated: 11 October 2012

Mine Ban Policy

The Kingdom of Belgium signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997 and ratified it on 4 September 1998, becoming a State Party on 1 March 1999. Production of antipersonnel mines ceased in 1990 and was banned in 1995. Transfer was banned in 1993. In 1995, Belgium became the first country in the world to pass domestic legislation comprehensively banning antipersonnel mines, and subsequently amended this legislation to ensure full compliance with the Mine Ban Treaty. On 30 April 2012, Belgium submitted its 14th Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report.

Belgium destroyed its stockpile of approximately 433,441 antipersonnel mines in September 1997.[1] By the end of 2011, Belgium retained 3,041 antipersonnel mines for training.[2]

Belgium served as co-rapporteur and then co-chair of the Standing Committees on the General Status and Operation of the Convention (1999–2001; 2004–2006), Mine Clearance (2001–2003), and Victim Assistance (2007–2009) and was president of the Fourth Meeting of States Parties in 2002.

Belgium initiated and continued to coordinate the Article 7 Contact Group in 2011 and 2012. Since June 2011, Belgium also served as coordinator of the Universalization Contact Group, taking over from Canada.

At the Eleventh Meeting of States Parties in Phnom Penh, Cambodia in November-December 2011 and the intersessional meetings of the treaty in Geneva in May 2012, Belgium reported on progress made to promote the universality of the treaty, including in particular in Cambodia and Southeast Asia, Libya, Sri Lanka, Tonga, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands; for this report, Belgium worked in cooperation with Prince Mired of Jordan, Ambassador Gazmend Turdiu of Albania (president of the Tenth Meeting of States Parties), the ICRC, and campaigners from the ICBL. Belgium reaffirmed that it used all opportunities to actively inform states not parties of the importance of joining the convention.[3]

Belgium also called attention to the importance of declarations condemning any use of antipersonnel mines, such as the two instances of use by states not party in 2011.[4] Belgium emphasized that “[u]sing landmines today is subject to immediate broad public condemnation. Countries outside of the Convention are becoming aware of the consequences of acting against an almost universal instrument of international humanitarian law.” Belgium further urged that “[w]e should seize every opportunity, for instance by calling upon newly installed governments to correct a negative public image that may have resulted from action undertaken under the previous regimes.”[5]

Belgium has continued in its national capacity to promote the universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty. In February 2012, the Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Didier Reynders, stated in parliament that general instructions had been issued for all Belgian diplomatic posts worldwide, including in producer countries Russia, China, and the United States, to support bilateral diplomacy and (where appropriate) to participate in any promotion of the Mine Ban Treaty and Convention on Cluster Munitions.[6] In 2011 through the first half of 2012, Belgium promoted the treaties in the frameworks of the Organization for Security Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Working Party on Global Disarmament and Arms Control within the European Union (CODUN), and through regional and bilateral initiatives.[7] 

At both the meetings of States Parties and the intersessional meetings, Belgium reported back on the work of the Article 7 Contact Group and on the status of submissions of transparency reports. At the intersessional meetings, Belgium noted with disappointment that as of 20 May 2012, only 61 out of 157 States Parties – or 38.8% – had submitted their annual reports, the lowest number since the treaty’s entry into force.[8]

In 2011 and 2012, Belgian civil society has been continuing its active support for the Mine Ban Treaty and strengthening its efforts on implementation, in particular with regards to victim assistance, disinvestment, funding, and transit of illegal weapons.[9]

Belgium is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons and its Amended Protocol II on landmines and Protocol V on explosive remnants of war.

Belgium has no known mined areas, though mines and unexploded ordnance from World War I and World War II are still found occasionally.



[1] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2010.

[2] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2012. Belgium reported that 59 antipersonnel mines were consumed for training purposes by their armed forces in 2011.

[3] Statement by Werner Bauwens, Ambassador and Special Envoy for Disarmament, Mine Ban Treaty Eleventh Meeting of States Parties, Phnom Penh, 26 November 2011; Statement of Belgium, Mine Ban Treaty Eleventh Meeting of States Parties, Phnom Penh, 1 December 2011, and Statement of Belgium, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention, Geneva, 21 May 2012.

[4] Statement of Belgium, Mine Ban Treaty, Eleventh Meeting of States Parties, Phnom Penh, 1 December 2011; and Statement of Belgium, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention, Geneva, 21 May 2012.

[5] Statement of Belgium, Mine Ban Treaty Eleventh Meeting of States Parties, Phnom Penh, 1 December 2011. In December 2011, a written question was resubmitted by a member of parliament to the deputy prime minister and foreign minister on the issue of Israel’s recent use of new landmines on the Golan Heights along the Syrian border. Written question no.5-4600, submitted by Bert Anciaux, member of the Senate, to the deputy prime minister and minister of foreign affairs, trade, and European affairs, Belgian Senate, 23 December 2011, http://www.senate.be/www/?MIval=/Vragen/SVPrintNLFR&LEG=5&NR=4600&LANG=fr.

[6] Response of Didier Reynders, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Trade, and European Affairs, to written question no.0028, submitted by Philippe Blanchart, Member of the House of Representatives, on 28 December 2011, Belgian Senate, 6 February 2012, http://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/showpage.cfm?section=qrva&language=fr&cfm=qrvaxml.cfm?legislat=53&dossierID=53-B051-662-0028-2011201205849.xml.

[7] Email to Handicap International (HI) Belgium from Frank Meeussen, M5 Non-proliferatie, Wapenbeheersing en Ontwapening, FOD Buitenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingssamenwerking, Department of Foreign Affairs, Brussels, 2 May 2012.

[8] Statement of Belgium, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention, Geneva, 21 May 2012.

[9] See for example HI Belgium, www.handicapinternational.be; and FairFin (formerly Netwerk Vlaanderen), http://www.fairfin.be/en/; together with Dutch NGO IKV Pax Christi, http://www.ikvpaxchristi.nl/. A number of other Belgian NGOs continue to be active in support of the Mine Ban Treaty. See http://www.icbl.org/index.php/icbl/Campaigns/List.


Last Updated: 17 December 2012

Cluster Munition Ban Policy

Commitment to the Convention on Cluster Munitions

Convention on Cluster Munitions status

State Party

National implementation legislation

Law regulating economic activities and individuals with weapons (2006)

Stockpile destruction

Completed stockpile destruction on 6 August 2010

Participation in Convention on Cluster Munitions meetings

Attended Second Meeting of States Parties in Beirut, Lebanon in September 2011 and intersessional meetings in Geneva in April 2012

Key developments

Provided updated Article 7 report on 30 April 2012

Policy

The Kingdom of Belgium signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions on 3 December 2008 and ratified on 22 December 2009. It was among the first 30 countries to ratify, triggering entry into force of the convention on 1 August 2010.

In 2006, Belgium became the first country to enact a national law prohibiting cluster munitions.[1] Belgium reports that its armed forces have military officers in each unit who are available to advise military commanders on the application of the law of armed conflict, including “obligations and restrictions” of the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[2]

Belgium submitted its annual updated Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 report on 30 April 2012, covering calendar year 2011.[3]

Belgium participated actively throughout the Oslo Process that produced the convention, hosting a regional conference on cluster munitions in October 2007.[4] Belgium continued to play a leadership role in the work of the convention in 2011 and the first half of 2012.

At the convention’s Second Meeting of States Parties in Beirut, Lebanon in September 2011, Belgium was made coordinator on transparency measures. It made several statements at the meeting, including on universalization and on the convention’s draft 2012 work plan. Belgium attended the convention’s intersessional meetings in Geneva in April 2012, where it coordinated the session on transparency measures and made a statement on stockpile destruction and retention.

Throughout 2011 and the first half of 2012, Belgium engaged with stakeholders on Article 7 transparency reporting in its capacity as co-coordinator.[5] In April 2012, Belgium said that it intends to produce a guide to transparency reporting to encourage accurate and timely reporting. A consolidated version with input from other States Parties is scheduled to be presented at the convention’s Third Meeting of States Parties in September 2012.

In 2011, Belgium cooperated with Japan to promote universalization of the Convention on Cluster Munitions in Europe.[6] According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, during 2011, Belgium urged Estonia, Finland, Greece, Poland, Latvia, Romania and Slovakia to cooperate.[7] Belgium has instructed its embassies and consulates to report on any national or regional activity where it could promote the Convention on Cluster Munitions with states not party.[8] In September 2011, Belgium said that initiatives were being undertaken to contact states not party that are members of the EU, NATO, the Council of Europe, and the OSCE concerning the ban convention.[9] In December 2011, Belgium’s Minister of Foreign Affairs said that it is working through the “European working group on disarmament” to “convince states to adhere as soon as possible” to the Convention on Cluster Munitions and noted, “This is obviously an action that takes some time to produce results.”[10]

Belgian civil society has continued its active support for the Convention on Cluster Munitions and has strengthened its implementation efforts, in particular with respect to victim assistance and funding, as well as disinvestment.[11]

Interpretive issues

Belgium has stated its views on a number of issues important to the interpretation and implementation of the convention.

Belgium has expressed its understanding that Article 21 of the convention, dealing with relations with states not party, prohibits States Parties from assisting others with use of cluster munitions during joint military operations. In a 2009 memorandum, Belgium stated, “In the case where a State Party engages in cooperation or military operations with States non-parties [sic], a series of guaranties are provided: the cooperation or the military operation must be in conformity with international law; each State Party must notify non-states parties of its obligations under the Convention; it must promote the norms established by the Convention and discourage non-states parties from using cluster munitions. Similarly, paragraph 4 affirms the primacy of the fundamental obligations of the Convention, which cannot be derogated from, even in the framework of cooperative activities or military operations with States-non-party.” Belgium has also affirmed the importance of the positive obligations of Article 21 to promote the convention, noting “the emphasis is placed on the engagement of each State Party to encourage non-states parties to ratify, accede, approve or adhere to the Convention.”[12]

Similarly, in 2009 Belgium stated, “Each State Party will encourage other states to ratify, accept and approve or to join the treaty. The goal is the involvement of all countries. Each State Party will communicate that it will promote the standards imposed by the treaty, and that it will make every effort to discourage other states to use cluster munitions. States Parties, their military personnel or their residents can participate in military cooperation and operations with States not Parties, but they have by no means the permission to develop, produce, acquire, stockpile, transfer and use cluster munitions.” [13]

In October 2009, the Minister of Foreign Affairs told the Belgian Senate that “military cooperation with third countries is possible, particularly international military operations, but the responsibilities are clearly delineated. In the case of Belgium and for other signatories, the rule is that we will not use cluster munitions and we will not assist States with a view to use them.” [14]

In April 2011, the Department of Foreign Affairs informed the Monitor that Belgian authorities would be prohibited from granting import, export, or transit licenses for arms that are prohibited under Belgium’s national legislation of 2006, which bans cluster munitions. According to the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Convention on Cluster Munitions definition “covers the notion of transfer as involving, in addition to the physical movement of cluster munitions into or from a national, the transfer of title to and control over cluster munitions […]. In accordance to this definition, there has been no transfer registered [in] 2010.”[15]

In September 2011, Belgium’s Minister of Finance stated that “the Belgian customs are not always aware of the exact content of the transport” in response to a parliamentary question about NATO transfers of military goods.[16] In November 2011, the Minister of Finance stated that Belgium’s commitment to international agreements prohibiting certain weapons “cannot block compliance with our country’s obligations to NATO allies,” and said, “These laws apply only to the Belgian forces, not to armed forces of other NATO member countries, whose troops and military equipment move in accordance with NATO rules. We apply the principle that international law prevails over domestic law and that the Belgian commitments to the NATO are valid… weapons banned in Belgium, are not always banned for other NATO forces. Belgium cannot impose rules on other NATO countries.[17]

The United States, Belgium’s NATO ally, has discussed its interoperability concerns with respect to the Convention on Cluster Munitions with Belgium.[18]

Belgium has stated that, in its view, live submunitions are necessary for training in destruction techniques.[19]

Disinvestment

Belgium became the first country to ban investment in cluster munition producers when they passed the Belgian Act Prohibiting the Finance of the Production, Use and Possession of Anti-personnel Mines and Submunitions in March 2007.[20] The law prohibits direct and indirect financing.

As of July 2012, the Belgian government had yet to publish a list of companies producing prohibited weapons, as required by the law, originally by a deadline of May 2008. In July 2011, the Minister of Finance stated that the Minister of Justice is responsible for publication of the list, but said both the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Justice lacked the necessary information.[21] In April 2012, the Foreign Ministry said that the Minister of Justice, Annemie Turtelboom, was responsible for publication of the list.[22] 

In a June 2012 parliamentary question to the Minister of Justice, a member of the Belgian House of Representatives said that the 2007 disinvestment law “seems to have been forgotten” and asked “who will be in charge of drawing up the blacklist of cluster munitions producers, when it will be published and when the law will finally be applied.” The Minister responded that “the clauses of the law from 20 March 2007 are part of the economic and financial legislation. The law on weapons, on the other hand, is part of administrative and criminal law and the organs it establishes are unable, due to a lack of finances and expertise, to gather the necessary information that could lead to the drafting of a reliable list.” The minister advised the member to “speak to my colleagues who have authority in economic and financial matters” as “the application, even partial, of this aspect of the law does not come under the jurisdiction of my administration.”[23]

Convention on Conventional Weapons

Belgium is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW).

At the CCW’s Fourth Review Conference in November 2011, Belgium said that it had “provided moral support” to the effort to conclude a new CCW protocol on cluster munitions, but noted there are “ unfortunately a great deal of divergent views” on the chair’s draft text and commented that “hopes are dwindling.” Belgium expressed hope that “humanitarian considerations will prevail” and encouraged all states to do what is necessary to join the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[24]

Belgium was not one of 50 countries that endorsed a joint statement on the final day of the Review Conference declaring that there was no consensus for adopting the proposed CCW protocol that would permit continued use of cluster munitions.

The Review Conference ended without reaching agreement on the draft protocol, thus concluding the CCW’s work on cluster munitions.

Use, production, and transfer

Belgium is not known to have ever used or exported cluster munitions, though it has produced, imported, and stockpiled the weapon.

The Poudreries Reunies de Belgique (PRB), now defunct, manufactured the NR 269 155mm artillery projectile with dual purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) submunitions prior to 1990. This production was reportedly assumed by Giat Industries in France.[25] Mecar SA and Forges de Zeebrugge (FZ) also had cluster munitions under development.[26]

Stockpile destruction

On 6 August 2010, Belgium completed the destruction of its stockpile of 115,210 155mm M483A1 artillery projectile cluster munitions containing 10,138,480 M42/M46 DPICM submunitions. The stockpile was destroyed in Italy by Esplodenti Sabino (ITA) under a NATO Maintenance and Supply Agency (NAMSA) contract.[27]

Prior to adopting its ban law and the creation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, in 2005, Belgium destroyed its stockpile of 765 BL-755 cluster bombs, each containing 147 submunitions, that it had imported from the United Kingdom.[28]

Retention

In April 2012, Belgium declared that it was retaining 271 155mm M483A1 projectiles and 23,848 submunitions. It reported that five projectiles and 440 submunitions were consumed during 2011.[29]

In its initial Article 7 report (January 2011), Belgium declared that it was retaining 276 155mm M483A1 artillery projectiles and 24,328 submunitions. It declared that 24 projectiles and 2,112 submunitions were consumed in 2009–2010.[30]

The original stockpile retained by Belgium for training purposes was 300 M483A1 projectiles, each containing 88 M42/46 submunitions, for a total of 26,400 submunitions.[31]

Belgium has reported that it plans to use approximately 25 cluster munitions per year for the training of explosive ordnance disposal personnel.

 



[1] Loi réglant des activités économiques et individuelles avec des armes” (“Law regulating economic activities and individuals with weapons”), Staatsblad Moniteur, 9 June 2006, www.staatsbladclip.zita.be. The law, which bans the production, stockpiling, and trade of cluster munitions, took effect on 9 June 2006, with an additional amendment requiring that “within three years after the publication of the law, the State and public administrations destroy the existing stock of submunitions or devices of similar nature.” For more information, see Human Rights Watch and Landmine Action, Banning Cluster Munitions: Government Policy and Practice (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, May 2009), p. 39; and Handicap International Belgium (HI-B), “The Belgian Campaign to Ban Cluster Munitions, A Brief History,” version 28, June 2006.

[2] Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munition Article 7 Report, Form A, 27 January 2011.

[3] Belgium submitted its initial Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 report on 27 January 2011, for the period 2009/2010.

[4] For more details on Belgium’s cluster munition policy and practice through early 2009, see Human Rights Watch and Landmine Action, Banning Cluster Munitions: Government Policy and Practice (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, May 2009), pp. 39–42.

[5] Belgium organized an informal meeting on reporting on the Convention on Cluster Munitions at the Eleventh Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in November-December 2011 in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. In April 2012, Belgium’s Permanent Mission to the UN in Geneva distributed letters to the States Parties reminding them that their annual Article 7 reports were due by 30 April 2011 and to offer, if needed, assistance in the submission of the annual Art. 7 reports. On 29 February and 28 March, Belgium held preparatory meeting with other thematic coordinators for of the April 2012 CCM Intersessional meetings. Presentation of the Chair, Convention on Cluster Munitions, Intersessional meeting, session on Transparency Measures, Geneva, 18 April 2012, http://bit.ly/N4grmF.

[6] Statement of Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munitions, Intersessional meeting, Session on Universalization, Geneva, 27 June 2011, http://bit.ly/LTJZpB.

[7] Email to HI-B from Frank Meeussen, M5 Non-proliferatie, Wapenbeheersing en Ontwapening, FOD Buitenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingssamenwerking, Department of Foreign Affairs, Brussels, 2 May 2012.

[8] Statement of Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munitions, Intersessional meeting, Session on Universalization, Geneva, 27 June 2011, http://bit.ly/LTJZpB.

[9] General Statement of Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munitions Second Meeting of States Parties, Beirut, Lebanon, 13 September 2011.

[10] House of Representatives, written question by Philippe Blanchart, 28 December 2011 to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade, and European Affairs on the Convention on Cluster Munitions; answer published on 6 February 2012. (Nr. 0028 – Legislation 53), http://bit.ly/MaQBOF.

[11] Handicap International-Belgium continued to support the work of the Ban Advocates group of cluster munition survivors with events in Geneva, Nis, Serbia, and Vientiane during 2011 and 2012, http://www.handicapinternational.be/en/what-we-do/banadvocates. Belgian NGO Fairfin (formerly Netwerk Vlaanderen) together with IKV Pax Christi (Netherlands) launched an updated version of their disinvestment report in June 2012. See IKV Pax Christi and Fairfin, “Worldwide Investments in Cluster Munitions: A shared responsibility,” June 2012, http://www.stopexplosiveinvestments.org/report.

[12] This is contained in an explanatory memorandum to the decree approving the convention adopted by the Parliament of Brussels and to the draft law in the Senate. Parliament of Brussels, “Ontwerp van ordonnantie houdende instemming met: het Verdrag inzake clustermunitie, gedaan te Dublin op 30 mei 2008 en ondertekend te Oslo op 3 december 2008” (“Draft decree approving the Convention on Cluster Munitions, adopted in Dublin on 30 May 2008 and signed in Oslo on 3 December 2008”), 13 October 2009, Legislative document A–14/1–G.Z. 2009, http://www.parlbruparl.irisnet.be/; and Belgian Senate, “Wetsontwerp houdende instemming met het Verdrag inzake clustermunitie, gedaan te Dublin op 30 mei 2008” (“Bill approving the Convention on Cluster Munitions, adopted in Dublin on 30 May 2008 and signed in Oslo on 3 December 2008”), Legislative documents 4–1419/1–3, Session of 2008–2009, 15 September 2009, www.senate.be.

[13] This is contained in an explanatory memorandum to the decree approving the convention adopted by the Parliament of Flanders. Parliament of Flanders, “Ontwerp van decreet houdende instemming met het Verdrag inzake clustermunitie, opgemaakt in Dublin op 30 mei 2008” (“Draft decree approving the Convention on Cluster Munitions, adopted in Dublin on 30 May 2008 and signed in Oslo on 3 December 2008”), Legislative document Stuk 2250 (2008–2009)–Nr. 1, Session of 2008–2009, 30 April 2009, http://www.vlaamsparlement.be/vp/engels.html.

[14] Belgian Senate, “Inleidende uiteenzetting door de heer Yves Leterme, Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, Wetsontwerp houdende instemming met het Verdrag inzake clustermunitie, gedaan te Dublin op 30 mei 2008, Verslag namens de commissie voor de buitenlandse betrekkeningen en voor de landsverdediging uitgebracht door mevrouw de Bethune en de heer Mahoux” (“Opening address by Yves Leterme, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bill approving the Convention on Cluster Munitions, adopted at Dublin on May 30, 2008, Report on behalf of the committee on foreign relations and defence, presented by Mrs. de Bethune and Mr. Mahoux”), Legislative document 4–1419/2, Session of 2009–2010, 28 October 2009, www.senate.be.

[15] Document provided by the Department of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, in email from Henri Vantiegham, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, to HI-B, 13 April 2011.

[16] Belgian Senate, Written question nr. 5-3000 by Bert Anciaux, 24 August 2011 to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and Institutional Reforms on the transport of military goods by the NATO, answered on 21 September 2011, www.senate.be

[17] Belgian Senate, Committee for Finance and Economic Affairs, Acts, 9 November 2011, morning meeting, request for an explanation of Mr Bert Anciaux to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and Institutional Reforms on “the transit of prohibited weapons in Belgium and customs control”, No. 5-1294, www.senate.be. Translation by the Monitor

[18] According to a US diplomatic cable made public by Wikileaks, on 2 December 2008, US officials discussed the Convention on Cluster Munitions with Werner Bauwens, Director of the Office of Non-Proliferation and Export Controls of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The cable states that, “Bauwens insisted that the negotiation and signature of the CCM has had no actual negative effects on NATO…. Interoperability will be no more affected, he said, than it was when the convention prohibiting anti-personnel mines was signed by a number of countries, including Belgium. He promised that if ever any issue of interoperability with NATO arises, the GOB and NATO will find a way to deal with it. He said that use of cluster munitions by non-signatories is not a "Belgian matter,” and Belgium could accept their use during a joint mission. See “Belgium signs Convention on Cluster Munitions,” US Department of State cable 08BRUSSELS1828 dated 4 December 2008, released by Wikileaks on 1 September 2011, http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=08BRUSSELS1828&q=cluster%20munitions.

[19] It said that each trainee needs to destroy 10 M42/46 submunitions during his instruction and training period and that each group of three trainees needs to destroy one complete M483 projectile. Presentation by Lt.-Col Eric Carette, Ministry of Defense, “Training with submunitions … Belgian approach,” Berlin Conference on the Destruction of Cluster Munitions, 26 June 2009.

[20] See, House of Representatives, “Projet de loi: interdisant le financement de la fabrication, de l’utilisation ou de la détention de mines antipersonnel et de sous-munitions” (“Bill: Prohibiting the Finance of the Production, Use and Possession of Anti-personnel Mines and Submunitions”), Legislative document DOC 51 2833/002, Session of 2006–2007, 1 March 2007, www.dekamer.be. For a commentary on the Bill, see IKV Pax Christi and Netwerk Vlaanderen, “Worldwide investments in cluster munitions; a shared responsibility,” April 2010, pp. 107–108.

[21] Belgian Chamber of Representatives, Question of explanation by Mrs. Meyrem Almaci to the vice-Premier and Minister of Finance and Institutional Reform on “financing the production of cluster munitions”, Afternoon Session, 7 July 2011, www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/choose_language.cfm.

[22] Email to Handicap International from Frank Meeussen, M5 Non-proliferatie, Wapenbeheersing en Ontwapening, FOD Buitenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingssamenwerking, 2 May 2012.

[23] Record of the Chamber Commission of Justice, pp. 14-15, 19 June 2012, http://bit.ly/PI0fxn.

[24] Statement of Belgium, CCW Fourth Review Conference, 24 November 2011. Notes by HRW.

[25] Terry J. Gander and Charles Q. Cutshaw, eds., Jane’s Ammunition Handbook 2001–2002 (Surrey, UK: Jane’s Information Group Limited, 2001), p. 353.

[26] See, Human Rights Watch and Landmine Action, Banning Cluster Munitions: Government Policy and Practice (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, May 2009), p. 41.

[27] Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munition Article 7 Report, Form B, 27 January 2011.

[28] The stockpile was destroyed by the German company Buck through NAMSA. Presentation by Lt.-Col Eric Carette, Ministry of Defense, “Training with submunitions … Belgian approach,” Berlin Conference on the Destruction of Cluster Munitions, 26 June 2009. See also, House of Representatives, “Compte Rendu Intégral Avec Compte Rendu Analytique Traduit des Interventions, Commission de le Defense National” (“Full Report with Summary Record of Translated Interventions, Committee of National Defense”), Legislative document CRIV 51 COM 616, Session of 2004–2005, 25 May 2005, www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/choose_language.cfm; and House of Representatives, “Schriftelijke vragen en antwoorden: Vraag nr. 7 van de heer Dirk Van der Maelen van 15 januari 2008 (N.) aan de minister van Landsverdediging: Vernietiging van stocks van clustermunitie; Antwoord van de minister van Landsverdediging van 15 februari 2008” (“Questions and written responses: Question No. 7 by Mr Dirk Van der Maelen, of 15 January 2008 to the Minister of Defense: Destruction of stocks of cluster munitions; and response of the Minister of Defense of 15 February 2008”), Legislative document QRVA 52 009 18–2–2008, Session of 2007–2008, 18 February 2008, www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/choose_language.cfm.

[29] In the report, Belgium stated that following the consumption of these munitions the “remaining quantity” is 271 projectiles. Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form C, 30 April 2012.

[30] In the report, Belgium stated that following the consumption of these munitions the “remaining quantity” is 276 projectiles. Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form C, 27 January 2011.

[31] Email from Major Lode Dewaegheneire, Military Advisor for Arms Control, Belgian Defense Staff, 24 July 2012; and Belgium, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form C, 27 January 2011.


Last Updated: 30 July 2012

Support for Mine Action

In 2011, Belgium contributed €5,843,386 (US$8,140,422) in mine action funding to 12 states and other areas, the Geneva International Centre for Demining, and the ICRC.[1] As in 2010, Belgium’s largest contribution went to the ICRC (€2 million/$2,786,200). Belgium’s contribution in 2011 decreased in equivalent dollar terms by 35% compared to its contribution in 2010 and was its lowest since 2006.

Belgium provided funding to the Geneva Call in the Philippines in support of engaging non-state actors in the universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty. In addition, Belgium provided financial support to a variety of research projects. Since 1997, it has funded APOPO in support of the use of rats in mine detection. The Ministry of Defense and the Federal Office for Scientific, Technical and Cultural Affairs have funded the PARADIS project, which studies the use of satellite imagery in demining. Belgium also supports research through the Centre Europeen de Normalisation to define new standards for characterizing soil in electromagnetic mine detection sensors.[2]

Contributions by recipient: 2011[3]

Recipient

Sector

Amount (€)

Amount ($)

ICRC

VA

2,000,000

2,786,200

Mozambique

Clearance

1,191,927

1,660,474

Angola

Clearance

600,000

835,860

DRC

Clearance, Risk Education

550,000

766,205

GICHD

Advocacy

300,000

417,930

Colombia

Risk Education

300,000

417,930

Iraq

Clearance

240,000

334,344

Cambodia

Clearance

214,360

298,625

Handicap International, ICBL, UNDP

Advocacy

175,000

243,793

Jordan

Clearance

106,972

149,023

Somaliland

Clearance

90,000

125,379

Lao PDR

Clearance

50,000

69,655

Afghanistan

Clearance

10,000

13,931

Philippines

Clearance

8,250

11,493

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Clearance

6,877

9,580

Totals

5,843,386

8,140,422

Belgium contributed just over half of its support to clearance while its contributions to advocacy included €50,000 (US$69,655) for support to the Second Meeting of States Parties of the Convention on Cluster Munitions in Beirut in September 2011.

Contributions by thematic sector: 2011

Sector

Amount (€)

 Amount ($)

% of funding

Clearance

3,058,386

4,260,638

52.34

Victim assistance

2,000,000

2,786,200

34.23

Advocacy

475,000

661,723

8.13

Risk education

310,000

431,861

5.30

Totals

5,843,386

8,140,422

100

In 2007–2011 Belgium’s contribution for mine action totaled €37.3 million ($51.8 million), with an average annual contribution of some €7.46 million (almost $10.4 million).

Summary of contributions: 2007–2011[4]

Year

Amount (€)

Amount ($)

2011

5,843,386

8,140,422

2010

9,006,972

11,944,150

2009

7,444,646

10,374,110

2008

7,145,951

10,523,130

2007

7,881,710

10,806,610

Totals

37,322,665

51,788,422

 

 



[1] Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) Amended Protocol II Article 13 Report, Form E, 31 March 2012.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Average exchange rate for 2011: €1 = US$1.3931. US Federal Reserve, “List of Exchange Rates (Annual),” 3 January 2012.

[4] See previous editions of Landmine Monitor; and ICBL-CMC, “Country Profile: Belgium: Support for Mine Action,” www.the-monitor.org, 11 August 2011. Amounts in US$ have been rounded up or down to the nearest ten. Average exchange rate for 2011: €1=US$1.3931; 2010: €1=US$1.3261; 2009: €1=US$ 1.3935; 2008: €1=US$1.4726; and 2007: €1=US$1.3711. US Federal Reserve, “List of Exchange Rates (Annual),” 3 January 2012.