Policy

Ecuador signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 4 December 1997 and ratified it on 29 April 1999, becoming a State Party on 1 October 1999.  Ecuador initiated a process in 2008 to adopt national implementation measures, including penal sanctions as required by Article 9.[1]

Ecuador submitted its 16^th Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report on 29 June 2011.

Ecuador attended the Tenth Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in Geneva in November–December 2010, as well as the intersessional Standing Committee meetings in June 2011.

Ecuador is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons and its Amended Protocol II on landmines and Protocol V on explosive remnants of war, but has not submitted an Article 13 report for Amended Protocol II since 2008.

Production, transfer, stockpiling, and retention

Ecuador did not produce or export antipersonnel mines in the past. Ecuador completed destruction of its stockpile of antipersonnel mines in January 2002, destroying a total of 260,302 mines.[2]

According to its June 2011 Article 7 report, Ecuador has a total of 910 mines retained for training, after destroying 90 mines during training in 2010.[3] Ecuador reported that the mines it retains under Article 3 are used for “training and research” but did not provide further details about their purpose.

Use

The Monitor knows of no government use of antipersonnel mines in Ecuador since the Cenepa border war with Peru concluded in 1998.[4] 

Commitment to the Convention on Cluster Munitions

Policy

The Republic of Ecuador signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions on 3 December 2008, ratified on 11 May 2010, and the convention entered into force for the country on 1 November 2010.

Ecuador amended its penal code on 19 May 2010 to enforce the Convention on Cluster Munitions by providing penal sanctions of up to 16 years imprisonment for activities relating to cluster munitions.[1]

Ecuador submitted its initial Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 report on 23 June 2011.[2] As of 27 June 2014, it has yet to provide the latest annual updated Article 7 report due by 30 April 2014.

Ecuador participated fully in the Oslo Process that produced the Convention on Cluster Munitions and hosted a regional meeting in Quito in November 2008 to promote signature.[3]

Since 2008, Ecuador has continued to show strong support for the convention. It participated in the convention’s Meeting of States Parties held in 2010, 2011, and the Fourth Meeting of States Parties in Lusaka, Zambia in September 2013, where it made a statement.[4] Ecuador attended the convention’s intersessional meetings in Geneva in 2012, 2013, and April 2014, where it made statements on national implementation measures and universalization.[5]

Ecuador participated in a regional workshop on cluster munitions held in Santiago, Chile in December 2013.

In October 2013, Ecuador reiterated its commitment to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[6] In April 2014, Ecuador welcomed the engagement of observer countries in the work of the ban convention and urged these nations to accede to the convention. It also proposed that the convention consider appointing a special envoy to promote its universalization as has been done by the Mine Ban Treaty.[7]

Ecuador has not condemned the Syrian’s government’s use of cluster munitions.

Ecuador is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty. It is also party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

Interpretive issues

In November 2008, Ecuador provided a detailed statement on its views concerning some key issues of interpretation and implementation. It stated that transit of cluster munitions should be prohibited; the number of units retained for training should not be greater than 1,000 and should reduce with time; Article 21 (on interoperability) should never be used to justify any derogation from the convention’s core prohibitions; and the article should not be interpreted as suspending other obligations under the convention. It said the spirit of Article 21 is to promote universalization of the convention.[8]

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

Ecuador has stated several times that it has not used, produced, or transferred cluster munitions.[9]

In the Article 7 report, Ecuador declared that it destroyed a stockpile of 117 BL-755 cluster bombs in October 2004 and now has no stockpiled cluster munitions.[10]

Ecuador has declared that it is not retaining any cluster munitions for training or research purposes.[11]

Contamination and Impact

Overall Mine Action Performance: POOR[1]

Three provinces in the south of the Republic of Ecuador (Morona Santiago, Pastaza, and Zamora Chinchipe) remain contaminated with antipersonnel mines and, to a much smaller extent, antivehicle mines and unexploded ordnance (UXO), resulting from the 1995 conflict with Peru. The most heavily mined section of the border is the Condor Mountain Range (Cordillera del Cóndor), which was at the center of the conflict.[2]

In its 2008 Article 5 deadline extension request, Ecuador reported 128 suspected hazardous areas (SHAs) covering an estimated 0.5km².[3] In 2010, Ecuador and Peru exchanged information on mined areas located on and across their shared border. As a result, Ecuador inherited 13 SHAs covering almost 1.5km², tripling its 2008 estimated contaminated area across the five provinces of El Oro, Loja, Morona Santiago, Pastaza, and Zamora Chinchipe with 11,524 antipersonnel mines.[4] As of December 2013, Ecuador reported that remaining mine contamination covered almost 0.3km² and contained 12,363 recorded mines in 27 mined areas.[5] Morona Santiago is the most mine-affected province both in terms of the number of mined areas and the number of mines.

Mined areas reportedly remaining as of December 2013[6]

Orellana province has been declared clear of mines based on results of survey in the province while Loja and El Oro provinces were declared cleared of mines in 2012 following clearance operations.[7]

The true extent of Ecuador’s contamination problem remains somewhat fluid due to the continued process of information exchange between Ecuador and Peru on mined areas. Peru is said to have handed over the last of its mined areas in January 2014, but new areas may be found and exchanged between Ecuador and Peru due to topography and terrain.[8]

Mine Action Program

The Ecuadorian Demining Center (CENDESMI) is an interministerial body responsible for coordinating mine action operations, which are conducted by the Army’s Demining General Command. CENDESMI is chaired by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Until October 2013, the Organization of American States (OAS) provided technical oversight and quality assurance of clearance. OAS monitoring of demining was conducted by military personnel through the OAS Inter-American Defense Board.[9] OAS activities in Ecuador were scaled down across all aspects throughout 2013 as it focused on strengthening national capacity in preparation for full national ownership of the mine action program. An extensive risk education program coordinated by OAS with the Army’s Demining General Command concluded in June 2013 with a final workshop in Morona Santiago province to train local authorities and teachers from 13 Shuar indigenous communities.[10] By October, the OAS’s monitoring support structure at the military base in Morona Santiago province had been dismantled.[11]

Under the Binational Cooperation Program (Programa Binacional de Cooperación) established in 2000, Ecuador and Peru adopted in April 2013 a Binational Manual for Humanitarian Demining (Manual Binacional de Desminado Humanitario) with a view to unifying the demining procedures of both countries in accordance with the International Mine Action Standards (IMAS).[12] In December 2013, the joint Ecuador-Peru Binational Humanitarian Demining Unit of 30 deminers conducted its first demining exercise in Morona Santiago on the Ecuadorian side of the border. A second exercise was planned for the Peruvian side of the border for April 2014.[13]

Land Release

In 2013, land release in Ecuador continued at a slow pace with reported release of a total of 19,163m² of contaminated area through cancellation of 6,832m² as well as through technical survey and clearance of 12,331m². Three mined areas were released through cancellation and clearance; 175 antipersonnel mines were destroyed.[14] This equates to roughly a third of the 57,000m² reported released in 2012 and 40% of the 47,757m² reported for the previous year.[15] The rate of release in 2010–12 can be attributed to the fact that areas subject to mechanical clearance in Loja and El Oro provinces proved not to be mined, having already been excavated by commercial companies seeking construction materials.[16]

The significantly lower rate in 2013 may be due to Ecuadorian demining personnel being able to work just 42% of its planned 180 work days between January and end September 2013, losing 105 work days to a combination of weather, helicopter unavailability, holidays, and other unspecified factors.[17] In addition, Ecuador conducted an impact study in Morona Santiago and Zamora Chinchipe provinces in May–July 2013 that resulted in a temporary increase of 80 SHAs until it was determined that they were outside Ecuadorian national borders.[18]

Land release in 2009–13[19]

Article 5 Compliance

Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty (and in accordance with the eight-year extension granted by States Parties in 2008), Ecuador is required to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible but not later than 1 October 2017.

At the June 2011 Standing Committee meeting on mine clearance, Ecuador reiterated its commitment to the goals of the Mine Ban Treaty, noting that clearance was occurring in accordance with the timeline set out in its Article 5 deadline extension request and that it had increased the number of deminers from 60 to around 100 as planned.[20]

In its Article 7 report for 2013, Ecuador reported that an area of 298,974m² (0.299km²) remained to be released.[21] Ecuador has planned to release approximately 35% of the remaining contamination by December 2016, totaling some 0.1km², leaving 65% or 0.2km² to be released within 10 months until October 2017.[22] Ecuador claimed in April 2014 to be on track to meet its extended clearance deadline.[23] But given low annual clearance rates and total release of less than 265,000m² since demining operations began[24]—less than the total estimate of remaining contamination—this is open to doubt. Indeed, Ecuador questioned its own ability to meet its deadline in 2012 when a Ministry of Defense brochure disseminated at the Standing Committee meetings in Geneva stated that Ecuador expected to complete clearance by 2023.[25] With the possibility of discovery of new SHAs and more canceled workdays, Ecuador’s release projections for the next few years appear optimistic at best and unrealistic at worst.

Support for Mine Action

No information is available for Ecuador’s national contributions for 2013. In 2012, Ecuador reported contributing US$2 million to its own mine action program, the same as in 2011.[26]

Recommendations

·         Ecuador should review and, if necessary, revise its clearance plan to account for additional mined areas found on the Ecuador/Peru border.

·         Ecuador should consider how it can increase its slow clearance rate and provide a detailed explanation to States Parties on how it intends to release the remainder of its mined areas by its Article 5 deadline.

·         Ecuador should ensure all reporting is consistent and should provide clear and regular explanations for data fluctuations.

·         Ecuador should seek assistance for external monitoring and auditing of its mine action program.

In 2012, the Republic of Ecuador reported contributing US$2 million to its own mine action program, the same amount as in 2011.[1]

In 2012, international contributions from Norway and Belgium towards mine action in Ecuador totaled $332,827. All these contributions were sent through the Organization of American States (OAS). The United States (US) has discontinued its support to the Ecuador mine action program.[2]

International contributions: 2012[3]

Summary of contributions: 2008–2012[4]

N/R = not reported