Contamination and Impact

Mines

Germany reported for the first time in 2011 that it might be contaminated with antipersonnel mines.

Compliance with Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty

Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty, Germany was required to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible, but not later than 1 March 1999.

Germany’s initial Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report, submitted on 31 August 1999, declared no confirmed or suspected mined areas under its jurisdiction or control. Its Article 7 report for calendar year 2010 made a similar declaration. In June 2011, however, at the Standing Committee on Mine Clearance, Germany announced that it suspected that a former Soviet military training facility in the former East Germany contains antipersonnel mines.[1] Germany has thus provided clear information to the other States Parties on its newly discovered mined area.

This discovery raises some important issues relating to Article 5 given that Germany’s Article 5 deadline has already expired without an extension being requested. As is well known, under Article 5, paragraph 1, each State Party “undertakes to destroy or ensure the destruction of all anti-personnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control, as soon as possible but not later than ten years” after becoming a State Party. Under paragraph 3 of the same article: “If a State Party believes that it will be unable to destroy or ensure the destruction of all anti-personnel mines referred to in paragraph 1 within that time period, it may submit a request to a Meeting of the States Parties or a Review Conference for an extension of the deadline for completing the destruction of such anti-personnel mines, for a period of up to ten years.”

The use of the word “will” clearly limits the treaty’s permissive regime for the request of an extension to cases where a State Party identifies contamination prior to the expiry of its Article 5 deadline. Thus, the treaty does not address directly the scenario of newly discovered mined areas in a State Party whose Article 5 deadline has expired, although on a prima facie reading of the text it appears that such an affected State is in violation of the convention’s primary obligations in Article 5 to conduct survey and clearance.

Under the Cartagena Action Plan, adopted by the States Parties at the Second Review Conference: “All States Parties will … [w]hen previously unknown mined areas are discovered after reporting compliance with Article 5 (1), report such discoveries in accordance with their obligations under Article 7, take advantage of other informal means to share such information and destroy the anti-personnel mines in these areas as a matter of urgent priority.”[2]

This might seem to imply an interpretation of the treaty by States Parties whereby there is no obligation to request an extension for a State Party that has not only declared full compliance with Article 5 but whose Article 5 deadline has expired. Alternatively, such an interpretation could be limited to those States Parties that have declared full compliance with Article 5 but whose Article 5 deadline has yet to expire. There are solid legal reasons for preferring a more limitative approach in a situation where either the extent of the contamination is unknown or it is known to be extensive.

If Germany requests an extension from the next Meeting of States Parties this would ensure that it is in conformity with the letter and spirit of Article 5. It would also establish a clear legal deadline for its full compliance with those provisions under the oversight of the treaty’s institutions and mechanisms.

Since the extent of contamination in Germany is unclear, a short extension to permit the necessary survey to be conducted would be appropriate, akin to the approach that has become standard for other States Parties requesting an extension in advance of the expiration of their Article 5 deadline, but which do not yet know the full extent of antipersonnel mine contamination.

Cluster munition remnants

Germany is also contaminated with cluster munition remnants. In its initial Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 report, Germany had declared no confirmed or suspected cluster munition contaminated areas.[3] In June 2011, however, at the Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee meetings, Germany declared for the first time that it suspected it had areas containing cluster munition remnants at a former Soviet military training range at Wittstock in Brandenburg.[4] It repeated the information at the Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meeting a week later, noting that the remnants were “principally found within the confines of a target range,” located at the south of the training area. The suspected hazardous area was some 4km² in size.[5] Germany reported the suspected contamination in its second Article 7 report, submitted in 2012.[6]

Compliance with Article 4 of the Convention on Cluster Munitions

Under Article 4 of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, Germany is required to destroy all cluster munition remnants in areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible, but not later than 1 August 2020.

Germany has not yet reported the clearance of any cluster munition remnants. All of the training range is marked and a security company monitors and controls the area to prevent unauthorized entry.[7] In April 2012, Germany announced plans to conduct technical survey and if necessary clearing during 2012 of a 40km-long and 50-meter wide tract of land to ensure fire prevention and environment protection. During the same period it would also clear a network of paths and tracks to enable emergency management.[8]