The Republic of Serbia has not yet acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, even though it played an important role in the Oslo Process that produced the convention.

Serbia has expressed support for the humanitarian objectives of the convention, but the Ministry of Defense has expressed a number of concerns with respect to the question of Serbia’s accession to the convention.

In a 15 August 2013 letter to Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC) member Assistance Advocacy Access–Serbia, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that Serbia “will continue to be engaged” on the matter because “[a]s representatives of a state whose citizens had been injured and killed by cluster munitions in the course of the armed conflict – with the tragic consequences of this use still present – this presents not just an international legal obligation for us, but also our moral duty.” The letter emphasized the convention’s importance in introducing “new international values and standards in regard of the development, production, possession, use, and stockpiling of this inhumane and dangerous weapon” but did not articulate Serbia’s views on accession.[1]

In a 19 August 2013 letter to the CMC and Assistance Advocacy Access–Serbia, the Ministry of Defense affirmed that cluster munitions are “a part of the weaponry and the equipment necessary for the execution of the missions and tasks” and said the army “has no replacement for this type of munition. Therefore it is not acceptable to risk a reduction of the level of operational capacity of the army, which would be an imminent consequence of the decision to accede to the convention.” The Ministry of Defense said that “long-term modernization plans” include “the acquisition of modern weapons systems and equipment which would replace cluster munitions” but said procurement “has been significantly slowed down” by “the negative effects of the financial crisis.” The letter also expressed concern that a number of countries remain outside the convention.[2] Previously in 2012, senior Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials informed the CMC that the ministry remains supportive of Serbia’s accession to the convention.[3] In 2011, a Ministry of Foreign Affairs representative informed the CMC that Serbia’s accession to the convention was being considered and said that Serbia would join “sooner than expected.”[4]

Serbia played a leadership role throughout the Oslo Process that created the Convention on Cluster Munitions, most notably by hosting a conference for states affected by cluster munitions in Belgrade in October 2007.[5] It actively participated in the formal negotiations in Dublin in May 2008 and joined in the consensus adoption of the convention text at the conclusion. However, Serbia attended the Convention on Cluster Munitions Signing Conference in Oslo in December 2008 only as an observer, and, at the time, did not provide an explanation for not signing. In 2009, local media reported that the General Staff of the Serbian Army had made a recommendation to the National Security Council that Serbia not sign the Convention on Cluster Munitions, thus stopping all further actions directed toward joining the convention.[6]

Despite not acceding, Serbia has continued to engage in the work of the Convention on Cluster Munitions. It participated as an observer in the convention’s Meetings of States Parties in 2011 and 2012, but did not attend the Fourth Meeting of States Parties in Lusaka, Zambia in September 2013. Serbia participated in the convention’s intersessional meetings in Geneva in 2013 and April 2014, but did not make any statements. Serbia was the only non-signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions to participate in a Regional Arms Control Verification and Implementation Assistance Centre (RACVIAC) Centre for Security Cooperation workshop on the Convention on Cluster Munitions held during a mine action symposium in Zadar, Croatia on 22-26 April 2014.[7]

Civil society from Serbia, including cluster munition survivors continue to participate in the convention’s meetings and advocate for Serbia to accede to the Convention on Cluster Munitions without delay.

Serbia voted in favor of recent UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolutions condemning the Syrian government’s use of cluster munitions, including Resolution 68/182 on 18 December 2013, which expressed “outrage” at “continued widespread and systematic gross violations of human rights…including those involving the use of…cluster munitions.”[8]

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

Use

Cluster munitions were used by the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) as well as ethnic militias and secessionist forces during the conflicts resulting from the breakup of Yugoslavia starting in 1991.

During the 1998–1999 conflict in Kosovo, aircraft from the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States (US) dropped cluster bombs in Serbia and Kosovo during the NATO air campaign.[9] During the Kosovo conflict, forces of the SFRY also launched several cluster rocket attacks into border regions controlled by Albania.

In 2007, Minister of Foreign Affairs Vuk Jeremić stated that Serbia was considering enacting a unilateral moratorium on the use of cluster munitions.[10] In 2011, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated the proposed moratorium was no longer being discussed as it falls under general discussions on joining the convention.[11]

Production, transfer, and stockpiling

In 2011, the Ministry of Defense stated that the “Republic of Serbia is not a producer of cluster munitions.”[12] In 2009, Serbia stated that it does not have the capacity to produce cluster munitions and has not produced cluster munitions since the dissolution of the SFRY.[13] According to standard reference works, Serbia was thought to have inherited some of those production capabilities.[14] A number of Serbian companies have advertised surface-to-surface rocket launchers, rockets, and artillery that could be used with either unitary warheads or submunitions.[15]

In 2011, the Ministry of Economy and Regional Development informed the Monitor that it has no records in its database of any foreign trade involving cluster munitions in the period from 2005 to 2010.[16]

The precise size and composition of Serbia’s stockpile of cluster munitions is not known, but it is thought to be a large stockpile including air-delivered cluster bombs, ground-launched rockets, and artillery projectiles. Jane’s Information Group lists Serbia as possessing BL755 cluster bombs.[17] Assuming Serbia’s stockpile contains cluster munitions that were produced by the SFRY, it may also possess 120mm M93 mortar projectiles (containing 23 KB-2 submunitions), 152mm 3-O-23 artillery projectiles (containing 63 KB-2 submunitions), and 262mm M87 Orkan surface-to-surface rockets (containing 288 KB-1 submunitions). KB submunitions are the dual-purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) type. It may also possess RAB-120 and KPT-150 cluster bombs.[18]

In August 2013, the Ministry of Defense stated that “the Army of Serbia has taken steps to recall from operational use a part of its cluster munitions stockpile and initiate its disposal” after “taking into consideration the ban on use, the shelf life of cluster munitions, and the limited capacity of the military industry overhaul facilities for repairs and enhancement.”[19]

(Profile last updated August 2014)

Contamination and Impact

The Republic of Serbia’s mine and explosive remnants of war (ERW) problem is a legacy of the armed conflict associated with the break-up of the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s. Serbia’s mine problem is confined to its southern border with Kosovo.

Mines

Serbia reported that as of the end of 2013 mine contamination was limited to the municipalities of Bujanovac and Preševo, which had a total of 1.2km² of confirmed mined area and 2km² of suspected hazardous area (SHA).[1]

The affected areas are mainly hilly, are close to populated areas, and are important to local communities as grazing land for cattle, tobacco cultivation, and for access to forest products.[2]

Cluster munitions

Serbia’s cluster munition contamination results from NATO air strikes in 1999. According to Serbia, NATO cluster munitions struck 16 municipalities: Brus, Bujanovac, Čačak, Gadžin Han, Kraljevo, Knić, Kuršumlija, Leposavić, Niš city-Crveni Krst, Niš city-Medijana, Preševo, Raška, Sjenica, Sopot, Stara Pazova, and Vladimirci.[3] By the end of 2013, Serbia reported eight municipalities still affected[4] by confirmed hazardous areas totaling 592,824m² and SHAs totaling 5.64km².[5]

Mine Action Program

Serbia does not have an interministerial national mine action authority. The Serbian Mine Action Centre (SMAC) was established on 7 March 2002. A 2004 law made it responsible for coordination of demining, collection and management of mine action information (including casualty data), and survey of SHAs. It also has a mandate to plan demining projects, conduct quality control and monitor operations, ensure implementation of international standards, license demining organizations, and conduct risk education.[6]

SMAC does not carry out demining or employ deminers but does conduct survey of areas suspected to contain mines, cluster munition remnants, or other explosive remnants of war (ERW). Demining is conducted by commercial companies and NGOs, which are selected through public tender procedures executed by the ITF Enhancing Human Security.[7] Only Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) personnel seconded to SMAC have conducted survey in Serbia as well as undertaking clearance, but its operations ended in 2013 and all staff were laid off at the end of the year.[8]

Strategic planning

Serbia conducts mine action according to annual plans that are approved by the government and determined largely by availability of donor funding.[9] In 2013, Serbia was granted a five-year extension of its Article 5 clearance deadline until March 2019. The extension request assessed confirmed and suspected mine contamination of 3.3km². It set out plans for survey of 2.1km² and clearance of 2.28km² at a projected cost of €2.5 million (US$3.3 million[10]) but says 1km² of this “will be cancelled.” The projected survey was expected to lead to cancellation of about half the suspected area. It foresaw state funding of €150,000 a year to cover the costs of survey and SMAC activities, and expected donors to cover all the clearance costs.[11]

Land Release

Serbia released half a square kilometer of suspected mined area in Preševo in 2013 as a result of non-technical survey by NPA staff seconded to SMAC. Operations confirmed another 110,000m² of mined area.[12]

Mine clearance in 2013

In 2013, as in three of the last four years, Serbia conducted no mine clearance. SMAC had hoped to clear a small amount of mined area in 2013 funded through the ITF and had reported that Russia’s Emercom Demining would start under a three-year 2013−2015 humanitarian demining program, funded by Russia.[13] In the end, however, SMAC said it received no funding for mine clearance from donors, who had requested resources be allocated to clearance of cluster munition remnants and other unexploded ordnance (UXO).[14]

Five-year summary of clearance

Article 5 Compliance

Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty, and in accordance with the five-year extension granted in 2013, Serbia is required to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible, but not later than 1 March 2019.

With confirmed and suspected mine contamination estimated at less than 5km² outside Kosovo, Serbia as late as May 2012 still held out hope of meeting its deadline,[15] but in March 2013 it applied for a five-year extension to its Article 5 deadline to complete the task.

In granting the request, the Thirteenth Meeting of States Parties noted that Serbia “could benefit from developing a resource mobilization strategy as soon as possible” and that this “could benefit from Serbia covering part of the demining cost and that demonstrating national ownership in this manner could help facility cooperation and assistance efforts.” The States Parties further noted that the plan presented by Serbia was “workable but lacks ambition.”

Serbia’s claim to continued jurisdiction over Kosovo entails legal responsibility for remaining mined areas under Article 5 of the treaty. But Serbia did not include such areas in its Article 5 extension request estimate of remaining contamination or plans for the extension period.

Clearance of cluster munitions and UXO in 2013

Eight operators conducted clearance in 2013, compared with four the previous year, and released 70% more cluster-affected land—but four of the operators destroyed just six or less items and the total number of submunition remnants destroyed was barely half the level of 2013.[16] NPA surveyors seconded to SMAC cancelled 2.16km² through non-technical survey and released 1.36km² through full clearance. In the process Norway ended its funding for NPA’s Serbia operations at the end of 2013 and it stood down its teams.[17] Civil Defense conducted technical survey on an area of 421,368m² of Užice but cleared only 20,375m² and cancelled the remaining area.[18]

Russian operator Emercom also cleared 0.4km² of battle area destroying 1,286 items of UXO.[19]

Cluster munitions clearance in 2013[20]

Note: APM = anti-personnel mine; AVM = anti-vehicle mine; U-SUB = unexploded submunition; UXO = unexploded ordnance other than unexploded submunition

Recommendations

·         Serbia should take ownership of its small mine contamination problem and commit more national resources towards the annual cost of meeting its Article 5 obligations, including for clearance.

Action points based on findings

·         Support the efforts of the Ministry of Labor, Employment, Veteran’s and Social Affairs (MLEVSA) to establish a working group on victim assistance empowered to develop and implement a plan to improve access to assistance for mine/explosive remnants of war (ERW) survivors.

·         Pass and begin to implement the draft Law on the Protection of Veterans with Disabilities without delay.

·         Simplify the bureaucratic procedures that prevent mine/ERW survivors from accessing benefits to which they are entitled.

Victim assistance commitments

The Republic of Serbia is responsible for significant numbers of landmine survivors, cluster munition victims, and survivors of other ERW who are in need. Serbia has made commitments to provide victim assistance through the Mine Ban Treaty.

Casualties Overview

In 2013, two casualties from ERW were identified in Serbia.[1] Two men were killed after finding the explosive at a military testing ground; it was assumed that they were collecting scrap metal.[2]

In 2012, the Monitor identified 12 casualties in three separate incidents, including two clearance accidents that killed three deminers involving cluster submunitions on Mt. Kopaonik, close to a popular ski resort.[3]

The last confirmed mine casualties in Serbia were reported in 2005. Annual mine/ERW casualty figures have declined in recent years, following a peak in 1999 and 2000.[4]

The total number of mine/ERW casualties in Serbia is not known. In 2004, 1,360 casualties (24 killed; 1,336 injured) were reported between 1992 and 2000 by Serbia and Montenegro.[5]

Cluster munition casualties

At least 78 casualties occurred during NATO cluster munitions strikes in Serbia. A further 19 casualties were caused by unexploded submunitions between 1999 and 2013. Cluster munitions are estimated to have caused more than 100 unreported casualties in Serbia during strikes on Nis. In addition, unexploded submunitions are known to have caused casualties in several regions, which were not reported to the authorities.[6] A survey by Norwegian Peoples Aid (NPA) identified 191 cluster munitions casualties (31 killed; 160 injured) for the period between 1999 and 2008, but details were not provided and the report did not differentiate between casualties during strikes and those caused by unexploded submunitions.[7] In 2012, three casualties from cluster submunitions were reported by the Ministry of the Interior.[8]

Victim Assistance

The total number of survivors in Serbia is not known, but it has been estimated to be between 1,300 and 8,000.[9] As of June 2014, Serbia reported a total of 1,316 civilian (921 men and 395 women) war victims with disabilities; it was not known how many were victims of landmines and ERW versus other conflict-related causes.[10] In 2013, Serbia had reported a total of 2,198 civilian war victims with disabilities registered with the government.[11]

Victim assistance since 1999

Since Monitor reporting began in 1999, progress on victim assistance in Serbia has been extremely limited. First planned in 2004 and cited as a priority for several years thereafter, a comprehensive government database of mine/ERW casualties and the needs of survivors had not been developed as of early 2013.[12] In 2012, Assistance Advocacy Access Serbia (AAAS), the national survivors’ association founded in 2010, completed a national survivor needs assessment.

Although a state victim assistance committee was formed on paper, through the end of 2013 Serbia lacked effective coordination among governmental bodies responsible for the provision of victim assistance as well as a national victim assistance plan. In late 2011, Serbia announced plans to begin developing a national victim assistance plan though work on this was stalled throughout much of 2012; efforts to coordinate resumed at the end of 2013.

From 1999, the quality of medical and physical rehabilitation services deteriorated while government social and economic reintegration programs for survivors ended. Survivors groups reported that bureaucratic procedures over this period made it increasingly difficult to access rehabilitation services. At the same time, pensions for disabled veterans were significantly reduced. Despite equal opportunity laws, unemployment among survivors and other persons with disabilities remained high through 2013.

For several years, the local association of survivors Goodwill (Dobra Volja) provided psychosocial support and other services until its closure in 2009 due to a lack of both funds and state support. Numerous local survivor associations exist to provide peer support and advocate for members rights, though they have limited financial resources or none at all. Since 2010, AAAS worked with local survivor associations to strengthen their capacity to carry out national advocacy and work for improved victim assistance.

Victim assistance in 2013

When Serbia changed the government victim assistance focal point from the Special Hospital of Rehabilitation (SHROP) to the Sector for Protection of Veterans with Disabilities within the MLEVSA in 2012, it marked an important shift from a medical focus for victim assistance to a social approach. However, national elections in 2013 stalled progress for much of the year. In December 2013, the MLEVSA began establishing a working group on victim assistance.

Few changes were identified in the availability of or access to services and programs by mine/ERW survivors in 2013. The May 2014 floods caused both the state and many local NGOs to re-prioritize their programming to focus on relief for flood victims. This caused a general reduction in services and programs for mine/ERW survivors as funds were diverted for emergency relief.

Assessing victim assistance needs

In June 2014, the MLEVSA announced plans to establish a database of persons with disabilities by October of 2014 with the intention of improving regulations for providing assistive devices. The database was to be updated regularly on the current needs of individuals. According to information released by the MLEVSA, inclusion in the database would be limited to members of disabled persons’ organizations.[13] In 2011, the MLEVSA began testing a centralized database of veterans with disabilities, including civilian victims of armed conflict, established in 2009.[14] As of June 2014, data was disaggregated by sex and civilian versus military veteran status but work had not yet been done to disaggregate by the cause of the disability.[15]

Throughout 2013 and the first half of 2014, AAAS continued to share data collected through its national needs assessment of over 500 mine/ERW survivors and their family members with relevant government ministries. Data shared with the MLEVSA was used by the Ministry to draft plans and policies.[16] AAAS member groups used the results of the survey in planning 2013 program activities and in applying for project funding from local authorities.[17]

The association of war victims in Loznica collected data on the needs of mine/ERW survivors and other victims of armed conflict on an ongoing basis.[18]

Victim assistance coordination

In December 2013, the MLEVSA began setting up a working group on victim assistance. While no meetings had been held by June 2014, members of the working group were reported to represent various units within the MLEVSA, including protection of persons with disabilities, employment, and gender equality as well as the ministries of defense, foreign affairs, education, and civil society.[19] The stated purpose of the working group was to “enable monitoring of the progress made in providing assistance to victims within broader national plans and legal framework” and to “support the actions, under the relevant conventions, taken by experts in the areas of health, rehabilitation, social services, education, employment, and gender equality.”[20]

During 2013 and the first half of 2014, the MLEVSA, as the victim assistance focal point, consulted regularly with associations of mine survivors to share information and discuss the establishment of the victim assistance working group.[21]

On 10 May 2013, the National Association of Veterans with Disabilities of War and Peace (URMVI) convened a national meeting on “Current issues and difficulties of the veterans with disabilities in the area of prosthetics and orthopedics” that brought together representatives of all relevant ministries, including the Ministry of Health and the MLEVSA as well as all associations of disabled veterans and private prosthetic companies. Participants developed a set of recommendations on how to improve access to and quality of prosthetics and other rehabilitation aids. The representative of MLEVSA committed to work on the implementation of regulations.[22]

In June 2014, Serbia announced plans to resume the development of a national victim assistance plan as part of the planned activities of the working group on victim assistance.[23] In December 2011, the Ministry of Health had taken initial steps to draft a national victim assistance plan[24] but efforts were suspended following elections and changes in administration in 2012.[25]

Serbia reported on progress and challenges in responding to the need of mine/ERW victims at the Third Review Conference of the Mine Ban Treaty in June 2014. It called for the exchange of experiences and best practices in this area with other states.[26] Serbia did not make a statement at the Thirteenth Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in Geneva in December 2013 nor did not include an update on victim assistance in its Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report for calendar year 2013.[27]

Survivor inclusion and participation

In 2013, there were no official coordination meetings on victim assistance in which survivors could participate; survivor organizations were represented in consultations with MLEVSA on the establishment of the victim assistance working group.[28]

Survivors participated in drafting the Law on the Protection of Veterans with Disabilities and provided input on the draft law through the first half of 2014.[29] In April 2013, the Serbian Parliament held a public hearing on the situation of war veterans in which representatives of survivor associations participated. The hearing resulted in a set of recommendations including efficient processing of the draft law on veterans with disabilities, simplified procedures to access physical rehabilitation, and increased availability of psychological support.[30] As of August 2014, no updates were available on the implementation of recommendations. Mine survivors and their representative organizations, coordinated by AAAS, participated in a national dialogue on accessibility regulations held by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; reformed accessibility regulations were passed in May 2013.[31]

The Disabled Veteran’s Association of Krusevac participated in a local planning committee in their municipality;[32] the Krusevac Association and the Vlasotince Association participated in regional peacebuilding meetings in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Macedonia.[33]

Survivors participated in psychological support programs including peer support groups and in the provision of legal aid through local and national networks of survivors.[34] There was no inclusion of survivors in the design or implementation of government-administered programs, such as healthcare or rehabilitation, which might benefit survivors.[35] Survivors also participated in relief efforts, including by distributing food and water, following the May 2014 floods in Serbia.[36]

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities[37]

Medical care

All civilian victims of armed conflict in Serbia, including mine/ERW survivors, are entitled to healthcare and financial benefits related to the provision of healthcare.[38] No changes were identified in the quality or availability of medical care in 2013; survivor associations continued to report that available care was insufficient to meet the needs of survivors, citing bureaucracy as a major obstacle to accessing care, especially specialized services.[39] Only basic services were available through local health centers.[40]

Physical rehabilitation

In 2013, no changes were identified in access to physical rehabilitation and prosthetics at the government-run SHROP; these services remained extremely limited for civilian mine survivors. Although most were injured years or decades ago, several survivors and their representative organizations found it nearly impossible to get replacement devices, except immediately following surgery on amputated limbs.[41] One association of armed conflict victims reported wait times of more than six months before even receiving any response at all to applications for replacement prosthetics.[42] Some members of local associations of veterans with disabilities received rehabilitation services that were organized and funded through the associations.[43]

Psychological support and social inclusion

SHROP provided psychological support to patients receiving physical rehabilitation services.[44] Survivor associations found professional psychological support through the public health sector to be completely insufficient, reporting several cases of untreated psychological illness that ended in suicide.[45] Several local survivor associations continued to provide psychological and peer support to mine victims and family members through home visits and group therapy.[46]

There was generally seen to be increase in inclusive sports activities in 2013, which was believed to be related to a new law requiring equal opportunities in sports.[47] However, AAAS reported decreased funding to support inclusive supporting events while URMVI Krusevac contributed to the establishment of a sports association for persons with disabilities in December 2013.[48]

In 2013, the Office of the Ombudsperson found Serbia to lack clear rules and regulating procedures to ensure that children with disabilities were able to access inclusive education.[49] Barriers to such access included a lack of teacher training, a lack of appropriate education materials, uncooperative school administrators, and discrimination from other parents.[50]

Economic inclusion

All registered mine/ERW survivors, as civilian war victims, are entitled to a monthly pension based on the medically assessed degree of their disability as well as subsidized transportation;[51] however, bureaucratic procedures prevented some survivors from accessing these benefits.[52] In Loznica, survivors obtained the right to the additional benefits of free transportation and a 15% discount on basic utilities in 2013.[53]

Unemployment and discrimination in hiring remained a serious problem for persons with disabilities.[54] Projects promoting small businesses or access to employment were rare or non-existent in most regions. Survivor associations reported that members had difficulties in accessing loans.[55]

The national ombudsman found that the MLEVSA failed to implement official policies to stimulate professional rehabilitation and employment of persons with disabilities.[56]

Laws and policies

Little progress was seen in 2013 to implement accessibility regulations passed in 2012; improvements in accessibility were completely nonexistent in rural areas.[57] Isolated improvements were generally considered to be the result of lobbying efforts by veterans groups and disabled persons’ organizations.[58]

A government audit in 2013 of accessibility of some public buildings in Belgrade found that just seven of the 21 examined were inaccessible.[59] However, an audit of those public facilities that persons with disabilities were most likely to use carried out by AAAS and its members found that at least two of the buildings found to be accessible in the government audit could not be accessed by AAAS members. MLEVSA’s office working with disabled veterans and war victims was one of those two buildings found to be inaccessible.[60]

Serbia’s Strategy for Promoting the Equal Status of Persons with Disabilities 2007 to 2015 recognizes the equal rights of all persons with disabilities, including all victims of armed conflict.[61] However, throughout 2013 civilian war victims and other persons with disabilities continued to have less access to assistance as compared with military victims.[62] Military victims were entitled to receive higher quality prosthetics.[63] There was a lack of age and gender appropriate victim assistance overall.[64] The association of disabled war victims in Loznica saw some improvements in gender differentiation in 2013.[65]

Public opinion research conducted in November 2013 found that persons with disabilities remained one of the most discriminated groups in Serbia.[66] In 2013, complaints were filed with the Commissioner for Protection of Equality by persons with disabilities as a result of discrimination in interactions with government officials, in employment, provision of public services, and use or access to public facilities and spaces. Serbia also lacked a standardized process, based on a social model of disability, to review the eligibility of persons with disabilities to drive motor vehicles. The commissioner’s report indicated that many more incidents of discrimination likely occurred during the year but many persons with disabilities were unable to file a complaint.[67]

Serbia ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) on 31 July 2009.

In 2012, Germany, Norway, and the United States (US) contributed US$2,580,127 to mine action in the Republic of Serbia, a decline of $500,000 from 2011.[1]

Serbia reported, for the first time, that it supported its mine action program in 2012 through a contribution of €150,000 ($192,885).[2]

International contributions: 2012[3]

From 2008 to 2012, international contributions towards mine action in Serbia averaged $2.6 million per year.

Summary of contributions: 2008–2012[4]