Key
developments since May 2001: Mine action funding for 2001/2002 totaled
GB£12 million, a decrease from GB£16 million in 2000/2001. In April
2002, the UK company PW Defence Ltd is alleged to have offered to supply 500
antipersonnel mines in contravention of national law and the Mine Ban Treaty.
The same month, the State-owned Pakistan Ordnance Factories is alleged to have
offered two types of antipersonnel mines for sale in the UK. In January 2002,
the UK Ministry of Defence simulated a Mine Ban Treaty Article 8 investigation
into hypothetical breaches of the treaty in the UK.
MINE BAN POLICY
The United Kingdom signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3
December 1997 and ratified it on 31 July 1998, becoming a State Party on 1 March
1999.[1]
The UK participated in the Third Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban
Treaty in September 2001, in Managua, Nicaragua. The UK reported in detail on
its exercises in preparation for fact-finding missions under Article 8 of the
Mine Ban Treaty, and recommended that States Parties either engage in such
preparations or provide a single point of
contact.[2]
On 29 November 2001, the UK cosponsored and voted in favor of United Nations
General Assembly Resolution 56/24M in support of the Mine Ban Treaty. The UK
attended the intersessional Standing Committee meetings in January and May 2002.
The UK submitted its annual Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 transparency report on
21 March 2002, covering calendar year 2001.
In February 2002, Parliament was told that the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office (FCO) takes the lead in promoting the Mine Ban Treaty, “including
taking suitable opportunities to lobby States non-party to the convention about
the desirability of ratification or
accession.”[3] It has
conducted one global and one targeted lobbying campaign by its overseas posts
since UK ratification of the Mine Ban Treaty in July
1998.[4] However, the issues of
ratification and accession were not raised during intensive British diplomacy
focused on Cyprus, Greece, and Turkey in
2001-2002.[5]Asked why,
the FCO responded that it intends to increase lobbying of other countries in the
build-up to the Fourth Meeting of States Parties in September
2002.[6]
In addition to FCO activities, “DFID [Department for International
Development] helps developing countries implement their obligations under the
Ottawa Convention...and works to strengthen the international community’s
capacity...to provide a more coherent, timely and cost-effective
response.”[7]
The UK is a party to Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Conventional
Weapons (CCW), and submitted the annual report required by Article 13 of the
protocol in October 2001.[8] The
UK attended the Third Annual Conference of States Parties to Amended Protocol II
in December 2001, and also attended the Second CCW Review Conference in December
2001. At a preparatory meeting in September 2001, the UK co-sponsored a
proposal to increase the technical regulation of antivehicle mines. Regarding
proposals within the CCW to deal with “explosive remnants of war,”
the UK position as announced in Parliament in January 2002, is to
“continue to seek to minimize the post-conflict risk to civilians at the
same time as maintaining essential capability for our forces. To this end, we
will play an active and positive role in the discussions of the GGE [Group of
Governmental Experts] and any subsequent
negotiations.”[9]
Parliamentary Early Day Motion (EDM) No. 424, signed by 50 Members of
Parliament (MPs) in November 2001, called for a moratorium on the use of cluster
bombs until an international agreement on their use and clearance has been
achieved. In January 2001, 51 MPs signed EDM No. 251 calling for the
“government to improve both the level and the consistency of long-term
funding” for British charities working with communities affected by
unexploded ordnance.[10] EDM
No. 1078 on explosive remnants of war was tabled in March 2002, and had received
110 signatures by late June. This called for comprehensive international law
requiring, among other things, users of explosive munitions to be responsible
for the clearance of unexploded ordnance.
In May 2002, EDM No. 1330 was tabled, relating to the alleged offer for sale
of antipersonnel mines by a UK company (see next section). The EDM calls for
better implementation of national legislation banning antipersonnel mines. By
late June, the EDM had received 89 signatures.
PRODUCTION AND TRANSFER
Previously a major producer and exporter of
antipersonnel mines, the UK reported on 26 August 1999 that it had completed
conversion or decommissioning of production
facilities.[11] British
companies continue to cooperate internationally in the development and
production of antivehicle mines. Some of these mines may have fuzes enabling
them to be activated by a person, and thus have the effect of an antipersonnel
mine.[12]
In April 2002, a senior representative of the UK company PW Defence Ltd was
recorded offering to supply 500 landmines to a BBC journalist, in contravention
of national legislation (the Landmines Act 1998) and the Mine Ban
Treaty.[13] Researchers from
the UK NGO Landmine Action found PW Defence Ltd (formerly Paines Wessex)
promoting the mines at arms fairs in Greece and South Africa. The company is a
subsidiary of UK-based Chemring Group plc. Local police launched an
investigation and David Howell, PW Defence’s Overseas Sales Manager, was
“withdrawn from duties” and has since been
arrested.[14] The police,
Customs and Excise, and the Health and Safety Executive, which are responsible
for investigating alleged breaches of the legislation, were continuing their
enquiries and by the end of June 2002 had not announced any decision to
instigate a prosecution.[15]
The UK delegation and Landmine Action made interventions in reference to the
PW Defence allegations at the Standing Committee meetings in May 2002. The UK
stated that it was barred from commenting directly on the case because criminal
charges had not yet been brought, but the actions taken in response to this
incident “clearly demonstrates how seriously the UK takes its Article 9
obligations.” It also urged States Parties “to ensure Article 9
national implementation measures are in place and promptly brought to bear if
necessary.”[16] Landmine
Action praised the positive efforts to implement the UK Landmines Act and
suggested a number of improvements, in particular by making a single authority
responsible for investigating allegations. It also suggested that it is
advisable for national legislation to clearly define an antipersonnel mine, and
for there to be proactive dissemination of the legal prohibition, and some form
of monitoring.[17]
A second similar incident occurred in April 2002, when the State-owned
Pakistan Ordnance Factories (POF) allegedly offered two types of antipersonnel
mines for sale to a journalist from Channel 4 TV, who posed as a representative
of a private company seeking to purchase a variety of weapons. The mines
appeared in a brochure, which the POF Director of Exports later claimed was out
of date. He stated that “all our current brochures do not at all have any
data/reference to mines of any
sort.”[sic].[18]
A similar incident involving POF occurred in 1999, and in the same year the
Romanian arms company Romtechnica offered for sale several types of
antipersonnel mines at an arms fair in the
UK.[19] Government and police
forces have not made public the progress of investigations into these two
incidents.
In January 2002, the UK Ministry of Defence simulated an investigation, based
on Mine Ban Treaty Article 8 compliance processes, into hypothetical breaches of
the treaty inthe UK, such as alleged stockpiling or use of antipersonnel
mines. The three-day exercise, Operation Partlett, was intended to present an
opportunity for different parties to learn about the processes of both
conducting and hosting an investigation. The main parties involved were a Fact
Finding Mission, NationalAuthority representatives, the Joint Arms
Control Implementation Group, staff at the Defence Munitions depot in Plymouth,
and a number of observers, including NGOs. The hypothetical breach being
investigated was a claim that the UK had allowed transshipment by the United
States of antipersonnel mines through UK bases during mobilization for the
conflict in Afghanistan.[20]
This was the third such exercise to be undertaken at different military premises
in the UK.
STOCKPILING AND DESTRUCTION
Destruction of the UK’s stockpile of more
than two million antipersonnel mines was completed in October
1999.[21] In April 1998 the UK
announced that it would “retain about 4,000 anti-personnel landmines, less
than half of one per cent of current stocks, in order to be able to carry out
training in demining.”[22]
At the end of 2001, the number of antipersonnel mines retained for purposes
permitted by the Mine Ban Treaty Article 3 had increased to 4,949, with new
mines obtained and apparently all of the mines originally retained still
remaining in stock.[23]The number of Ranger
(2,088)[24] and C3 Elsie (1,056)
mines retained has remained the same, but the number of unidentified
“foreign” mines has increased from 859 (as of 1 August 1999), to
1,375 (as of 1 April 2000), to 1,775 (as of 31 December 2000), to 1,805 (as of
December 2001).[25]
The Article 7 Report submitted in March 2002 describes these mines as being
retained “for the development of and training in mine detection, mine
clearance, or mine destruction
techniques.”[26] Asked
why the numbers of mines retained were not gradually being reduced as a result
of permitted training and development, the Ministry of Defence replied that
“it is important when conducting work related to mine clearance, detection
and destruction to be as familiar as possible with a wide range of
mines.”[27]
The Ministry of Defence stated on 8 March 2002 that it retained 4,775 live
mines,[28] which may indicate
that 174 were expended since 31 December 2001. However, the Ministry declined
to give a breakdown of the foreign mines retained, nor to explain the planned
purposes and rates of usage of the mines
retained.[29]
The UK also possesses inert antipersonnel mines, which are used for training
in mine detection and
clearance.[30] In its 1999
Article 7 Report, the UK noted 434 “inert training shapes” were
kept.[31] In its subsequent
Article 7 Report, the UK noted that that Mine Ban Treaty did not require
reporting on inert
munitions.[32]
Antivehicle Mines
During discussion of antivehicle mines with
personnel-sensitive fuzes or antihandling devices at the Third Meeting of States
Parties in September 2001, the UK delegation intervened to state that, in their
view, antivehicle mines are not covered by the treaty and that Amended Protocol
II of the CCW is the appropriate forum for discussion of antivehicle mines. The
UK has previously made known its view that mines designated as antivehicle or
antitank, but which may be detonated by the unintentional act of a person, are
not to be considered to be antipersonnel and hence are not prohibited by the
Mine Ban Treaty.[33]
At the Standing Committee meetings in May 2002, the UK intervened to state
its agreement that the intersessional work should re-focus on the “broad
humanitarian aims” of the treaty, and “in this spirit” the
delegation reiterated the UK position “that antivehicle mines and
antivehicle mines with antihandling devices, do not fall within the Ottawa
Convention.” The UK view is that antivehicle mines with antihandling
devices do not become antipersonnel mines “if unintentionally, they are
detonated by the presence of a person. For us, it is the design of the mine
that is the key.... The definition of what constitutes an antipersonnel mine in
the Ottawa Convention does not turn on any unintended effects the mine might
have when deployed.” Finally, the UK delegation urged States Parties to
“move beyond the definitional
stand-off.”[34] With
regard to antivehicle mines, the UK is “engaged in the [CCW]
process...[and is] taking action with our EU partners and others to reach...a
satisfactory outcome at the end of this
year.”[35]
Last year Landmine Monitor reported that two types of antivehicle mine, the
Mk.7 and L3A1, were due to be withdrawn from stocks in October 2001. The
Ministry of Defence stated in March 2002 that this has not yet happened:
“At present there is still a continuing requirement to retain the Mk.7
variants and L3A1 mines.” A decision on disposal is
“expected.”[36]
Foreign Stockpiles on UK territory
Landmine Monitor has previously reported that U.S.
antipersonnel mines have been stored on ships offshore the British Indian Ocean
Territory of Diego Garcia. The UK government has stated that “US stocks
do not fall under our national jurisdiction or control,” and therefore the
UK has no obligation to have them removed or
destroyed.[37]
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office stated in March 2002 that U.S.
antipersonnel mines were not transited, stockpiled or maintained on British
Indian Ocean Territory during the conduct of operations in
Afghanistan.[38] Secondary
legislation under the Landmines Act extended its provisions in 2001 to British
Overseas Territories.[39]
Regarding transit across UK territory of antipersonnel mines by States not
party to the Mine Ban Treaty, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office reported to
Parliament in March 2002 that it had received legal advice that such transit
would be contrary to the UK’s obligations under the
Treaty.[40]
MINE ACTION FUNDING
The government announced in October 2001 that
future funding for demining will be channeled through United Nations bodies, the
United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) and the United Nations Development
Program (UNDP).[41] The report
for 2002 of the Department for International Development states that “a
coordinated international framework for effective humanitarian mines action is
crucial, and the UN is the central player here. We have agreed our mine action
strategy, including multi-year funding, with the Geneva International Centre for
Humanitarian Demining, the United Nations Development Program and the United
Nations Mine Action Service. The channeling of funds through UN agencies is
leading to a more systematic approach to the prioritization and coordination of
mine action programs, as well as the adoption of common standards and
practices.”[42]
DFID contributed GB£12 million (US$17.28 million) to humanitarian mine
clearance, mine awareness education, and research and development in the
financial year 2001-2002.[43]
This included an “allocated 3 million [US$4.32 million] through UNMAS for
future humanitarian action interventions in Afghanistan” to cover mine
clearance operations focusing on “clearance of communication routes,
airports and high priority areas near to civilian
populations.”[44]
The GB£12 million in mine action funding for 2001/2002 represents a
decrease from GB£16 million (US$22.88 million) in 2000/2001. Funding
budgeted for 2002/2003 represents a further decrease, to GB£10 million
(US$14.4 million). The following tables summarize mine action spending by
activity and country or program.
Mine Action Spending by Activity for Financial Years 1997-2002 in GB£
(US$)[45]
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
Mine clearance
4,349,642
($6,219,988)
4,570,468
($6,535,770)
12,335,000
($17,639,050)
14,500,000
($20,735,000)
10,200,000
($14,688,000)
Mine awareness
250,000
($357,500)
Nil
1,292,339
($1,848,045)
500,000
($715,000)
500,000
($720,000)
Research and development
376,673
($538,642)
548,343
($784,131)
500,000
($715,000)
1,000,000
($1,430,000)
1,300,000
($1,872,000)
TOTALS:
4,976,315
($7,116,130)
5,118,811
($7,371,088
14,127,339
($20,202,095)
16,000,000
($22,880,000)
12,000,000
($17,280,000)
Funding for Mine Action by Country for Financial Years 1996-2002 in GB£
(US$)[46]
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2001-2002
Afghanistan
1,050,000
($1,514,100)
2,106,500
($3,037,573)
920,000
($1,326,640)
1,900,000
($2,739,800)
Nil
3,150,000
($4,536,000)
Albania
Nil
Nil
Nil
50,070
($72,201)
369,648
($532,293)
694,540
($1,000,138)
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
Nil
Nil
Nil
500,000
($721,000)
Nil
500,000
($720,000)
Cambodia
1,058,700
($1,526,645)
689,686
($994,527)
693,000
($999,306)
2,274,000
($3,279,108)
1,430,571
($2,060,022)
1,000,000
($1,440,000)
Chad
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
270,000
($388,800)
Croatia
Nil
Nil
Nil
100,000
($144,200)
150,000
($216,000)
326,529
($470,202)
Egypt
500,000
($721,000)
87,308
($125,898)
Nil
Nil
Nil
Eritrea/
Ethiopia
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
544,151
($783,577)
Georgia
Nil
Nil
220,781
($318,366)
340,000
($490,280)
452,259
($651,253)
500,000
($720,000)
Guinea-Bissau
Nil
Nil
Nil
138,860
($200,236)
120,000
($172,800)
Northern Iraq
785,000
($1,131,970)
658,972
($950,237)
740,000
($1,067,080)
451,764
($651,444)
616,100
($887,184)
206,137
($296,837)
Jordan
Nil
Nil
Nil
587,156
($846,679)
270,000
($388,800)
197,402
($284,259)
Laos
148,307
($213,859)
101,250
($146,003)
500,000
($721,000)
833,351
($1,201,692)
616,100
($887,184)
300,000
($432,000)
Lebanon
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
387,297
($557,708)
FYR of Macedonia
Nil
Nil
Nil
52,000
($74,984)
Nil
Mozambique
408,900
($589,634)
487,500
($702,975)
362,500
($522,725)
403,000
($581,126)
Nil
Nicaragua
Nil
Nil
Nil
283,000
($408,086)
283,000
($407,520)
189,000
($272,160)
Sierra Leone
Nil
Nil
Nil
4,500
($6,489)
Nil
Thailand
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
300,000
($432,000)
Yemen
47,772
($68,887)
Nil
Nil
Nil
FRY (Kosovo)
275,000
($396,550)
Nil
Nil
5,664,339
($8,167,977)
7,899,020
($11,374,588)
2,000,000
($2,880,000)
Mine Action Expenditure in Financial Years 2000-2002 by Implementing
Organization, in GB£ (US$)[47]
Implementing Organization
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003 (budgeted)
HALO Trust
1,863,304
($2,683,158)
1,150,000
($1,656,000)
Mines Advisory Group (for Northern Iraq)
1,164,015
($1,676,181)
1,000,000
($1,440,000)
500,000
($720,000)
Cambodian Mine Action Center via UNDP
214,285
($308,570)
500,000
($720,000)
Croatian Mine Action Center
150,000
($216,000)
Government of Jordan
270,000
($388,800)
Organization of American States
283,000
($407,520)
189,000
($272,160)
UNMAS (for Kosovo)
390,364
($562,124)
Battle Area Clearance Training Equipment Consultants (BACTEC)
1,100,616
($1,584,887)
15,000
($21,600)
Defense Systems Ltd.
3,118,404
($4,490,501)
750,000
($1,080,000)
European Landmine Solutions
2,550,632
($3,672,910)
22,000
($31,680)
QinetiQ
Nil
100,000
($144,000)
UN Mine Action Service
600,000
($864,000)
5,000,000
($7,200,000)
UNDP
600,000
($864,000)
2,100,000
($3,024,000)
Global contribution to UNMAS and UNDP
4.6 million
($6.6 million)*
UNICEF
500,000
($720,000)
500,000
($720,000)
300,000 ($432,000)
Geneva International Center for Humanitarian Demining
790,000
($1,137,600)
1,000,000
($1,440,000)
1 million
($1.44 million)
UNMAS (for Afghanistan)
1.85 million
($2,664,000)
Cranfield Mine Action
162,182
($233,542)
221,000
($318,240)
Landmine Monitor
157,000
($226,080)
30,000
($43,200)
Defense Evaluation and Research Establishment (DERA)
306,060
($440,726)
Explosive Ordnance Disposal
23,105
($33,271)
Aardvark
52,613
($75,763)
MineLifta
45,952
($66,171)
International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victims Assistance
Nil
500,000
($720,000)
DISARMCO (Research and Development)
Nil
61,000
($87,840)
ERA (Research and Development)
Nil
117,000
($168,480)
International Test & Evaluation Program
400,000
($576,000)
200,000
($288,000)
Mine Action Research program
200,000
($288,000)
“Mines Advice and programme monitoring”
150,000
($216,000)
To be allocated later
700,000 (1,008,000)
TOTAL
14,341,532
($20,651,806)
12,605,000
($18,151,200)
10,000,000
($14,400,000)
*This total is composed of GB£1 million described as for UNMAS central
capacity, GB£600,000 for UNDP central capacity, GB£1 million for other
UNMAS field programs, GB£2 million for UNDP field programs.
In addition to the above spending, the Ministry of Defence bears the costs of
the Mine Information and Training Center (MITC). It was established in November
1997 at a reported annual cost of GB£125,000 (US$203,750). The Center had
provided mine awareness training to over 50,000 people by March
2002.[48] The Ministry of
Defence is “currently reviewing the terms of reference for the MITC, with
a view to possibly enhancing their mines awareness training role, for
humanitarian mine
action.”[49]
Research and Development
The UK is part of the International Test and
Evaluation Program for Humanitarian Demining (ITEP), under which the Defense
Evaluation and Research Agency evaluates new equipment including mine detection
technology for humanitarian demining. ITEP received GB£400,000
(US$576,000) from the UK government during the financial year
2001-2002.50[50] In
2002-2003 the UK donation to ITEP is budgeted as GB£200,000
(US$288,000).[51]
The Ministry of Defence mine detection research program is currently
assessing the following technologies for military use: ground-penetrating radar,
metal detection, polarized thermal imaging, ultra wide-band radar, and
quadrupole resonance. Research is also under way on a portable humanitarian
mine detector. It was intended that 2000 units of a pyrotechnic torch for
destroying mines, developed in partnership with QinetiQ, would come into
military service by early 2002. The Defence Procurement Agency placed contracts
in October 2001 for the competitive assessment phase of the Mine Detection,
Neutralization and Route Marking System (MINDER) program, with an initial
capability to enter service by 2005. The Ministry spent GB£5.8 million
(US$8,352,000) in the financial year 2001-2002 on this program. Investigations
into individual mine neutralization are also taking
place.[52]
The Ministry of Defence reports expenditure on these programs as: GB£3
million (US$4,329,000) from the Treasury Capital Development Fund for work on
the portable humanitarian mine detector, and GB£1.55 million (US$2,232,000)
from DFID, with the majority of this funding going to GICHD and
QinetiQ.[53] The period to
which these costs refer has not been
clarified.[54]
Survivor Assistance
DFID does not specify funding allocated for mine
survivors, instead providing support for “health care and community-based
rehabilitation
assistance.”[55] The
Article 7 Report submitted in March 2002 did not include the voluntary Form J,
on which other matters of interest such as survivor assistance may be
reported.
Several British NGOs support survivor assistance programs in mine-affected
countries, some of whom receive funding from DFID. These NGOs include Action on
Disability and Development, Africa Educational Trust, The Cambodia Trust,
Handicap International UK, Heather Mills Health Trust, Hope for Children, Jaipur
Limb Campaign UK, Jesuit Refugee Service, Mercy Corps Scotland, Motivation,
POWER, and Sandy Gall’s Afghanistan Appeal.
On 7 November 2001, the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund announced
another round of grants which included assistance for people injured by
landmines and other persons with disabilities. Total funding of £547,768
(US$788,786) over three years will support programs run by British NGOs in
Guinea-Bissau (Handicap International UK), Somalia (Africa Educational Trust)
and Sudan (Action on Disability and Development). Funds have also been
earmarked for mine clearance in
Afghanistan.[56]
Previously, on 11 October 2000 the Fund had announced a round of grants for
mine clearance, mine risk education, and survivor assistance programs totaling
£1,189,593 (US$1,716,106) over three years. The grants support programs in
Afghanistan (Sandy Gall’s Afghanistan Appeal), Afghanistan/Pakistan border
(Action for Disability and Mercy Corps Scotland), Angola (Mines Advisory Group),
Laos (POWER), and Sri Lanka (Hope for
Children).[57] Other
beneficiaries of the Fund include the Jaipur Foot Campaign UK programs in Angola
and Mozambique.
LANDMINE/UXO CASUALTIES
In 2001, one British national was killed and four
others injured in landmine or UXO accidents while overseas engaged in military,
peacekeeping or demining activities. In April, one soldier was killed and two
others injured when their armored vehicle hit a landmine in southwestern Kosovo.
The soldiers were part of the KFOR peacekeeping
mission.[58] In August, a
British mine clearance technical adviser lost his thumb when a grenade detonator
exploded during a training session in the Democratic Republic of
Congo.[59] In December, a
British soldier was injured in a landmine explosion at Bagram airbase in
Afghanistan.[60]
On 20 July 2002, a British deminer lost his leg in a landmine incident in
southern Lebanon.[61]
[1] For national legislation, especially
regarding interpretations of “assistance,” see Landmine Monitor
Report 2001, pp. 813-814. [2] Landmine
Monitor notes, Third Meeting of States Parties, Managua, Nicaragua, 18-21
September 2001. [3] Hansard
(parliamentary record), 1 February 2002, col.
583W. [4] Fax from United Nations
Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, 20 March 2002.
[5] Email from United Nations
Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, 22 May 2002.
[6]
Ibid. [7] Hansard, 1 February 2002, col.
583W. [8] Amended Protocol II Article 13
Report, October 2001 (day not
given). [9] Hansard, 30 January 2002,
col. WA39. [10] Early Day Motions are
not binding on government; they are used as an expression of parliamentary
opinion. EDMs can be accessed at:
dem.ais.co.uk/weblink/html/printable.html/EDM. [11]
Article 7 Report, Form E, submitted on 26 August 1999 for the period 1 March-1
August 1999. [12] See Landmine Monitor
Report 2000, pp. 746-749, and 2001, pp.
815-818. [13] BBC Radio 4, “Today
Programme,” 10 May 2002. [14]
Simon Goodley, “Landmine group chief lost for words,” Daily
Telegraph (daily newspaper), 14 May
2002. [15] Hansard, 24 May 2002, col.
709W. [16] Statement by the UK on
Article 9 (dated 30 May 2002), SC on the General Status and Operation of the
Convention, Geneva, 31 May 2002. [17]
Statement by Landmine Action on Article 9, SC on the General Status and
Operation of the Convention, Geneva, 31 May
2002. [18] Letter from Pakistan Ordnance
Factory to Channel 4 (television company), 1 May
2002. [19] See Landmine Monitor Report
2000, pp. 746-749. [20] An observer
from Landmine Action was present for Day 2 of the exercise. Richard Moyes,
“Operation Partlett: UK Ottawa Treaty Verification Exercise,” p.
1. [21] As noted in the previous
Landmine Monitor Report, the UK’s Article 7 Reports have provided no
information on the technical characteristics of several types of British
antipersonnel mine (most of which are found in minefields in Africa), nor other
antipersonnel mines still possessed by the UK that were manufactured overseas.
No information is provided on the Projector Area Defense (PJRAD) fragmentation
mine (not considered an antipersonnel mine by the Ministry of Defense), or on
Claymore-type directional fragmentation mines (prohibited by the Mine Ban Treaty
when activated by tripwire). The Ministry stated in May 2001 that the tripwires
had been destroyed and that changes to drill, resulting from the Mine Ban Treaty
and national legislation, make physical modification of these mines unnecessary.
See Landmine Monitor Report 2001, pp. 815-816. In February 2002, the Ministry
of Defence told Parliament that Claymore-type mines “are used only in the
command detonated mode of operation, which requires a soldier to initiate the
munition.” Hansard, 25 February 2002, col.
693W. [22] Letter from the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office to UK Working Group on Landmines, 27 April
1998. [23] Article 7 Report, submitted
on 21 March 2002 for calendar year 2001, Form
D. [24] According to the Article 7
Report submitted on 21 March 2002, the Ranger mines retained have a “Shelf
Life expiry date” of 1 August
2002. [25] Article 7 Report, Form D, 26
August 1999; 17 April 2000; 25 April 2001; and 21 March
2002. [26] Article 7 Report, Form
D. [27] Fax from Proliferation and Arms
Control Secretariat, Ministry of Defense, 8 March
2002. [28]
Ibid. [29] Fax from Proliferation and
Arms Control Secretariat, Ministry of Defense, 19 April 2002, in reply to
researcher’s faxed enquiry on 11 April
2002. [30] Fax from Proliferation and
Arms Control Secretariat, Ministry of Defense, 8 March
2002. [31] Article 7 Report, Form D, 26
August 1999. [32] Article 7 Report, Form
D, 17 April 2000. [33] Landmine Monitor
notes, Third Meeting of States Parties, Managua, Nicaragua, 18-21 September
2001. For details of the UK position on AV mines and AV mines in UK stockpiles,
see Landmine Monitor Report 2000, p. 751, and 2001, pp.
816-818. [34] Statement by the UK on
Article 2 (dated 30 May 2002), SC on the General Status and Operation of the
Convention, Geneva, 31 May 2002. [35]
Ibid. [36] Fax from Proliferation and
Arms Control Secretariat, Ministry of Defense, 22 March
2002. [37] See, Landmine Monitor Report
2001, p. 818. [38] Hansard, 15 March
2002, col. 1298W. [39] Hansard, 26
February 2002, col. 1155W. British Overseas Territories were listed in Landmine
Monitor Report 2001, p. 818. [40]
Hansard, 26 March 2002, col. 812W. [41]
Amended Protocol II Article 13 report, October 2001, Form E, which referred
specifically to “demining,” and correspondence between the
Secretary of State for International Development, Clare Short, and Frank Cook
MP, 29 March 2001. [42]
“Departmental Report 2002,” Department for International
Development, Chapter 2, para 36, pp. 28-29, available at: www.dfid.gov.uk,
accessed on 30 June 2002. [43] Hansard,
21 March 2002, col. 471W. Exchange rate at 5 April 2002: GBP1 = $1.44, used
throughout. [44] Hansard, 23 January
2002, col. 893W. [45] Hansard, 29 March
2001, col. 721W and Hansard, 21 March 2002, col. 471W.
[46] Table compiled from several
sources: Hansard, 29 March 2001, col. 723W, and 21 March 2002, col. 471W;
Department for International Development, Humanitarian mine action, second
progress report (London: DFID, September 2000); and fax from DFID to the Mines
Advisory Group, undated but received in May 2002. The data leaves a small
discrepancy in the total funding for 2001-2002 (GB£12 million or
GB£11,663,608) and other years, and a larger discrepancy in the total
funding for 2000-2001 (GB£16 million or GB£13,708,146).
[47] Hansard, 11 July 2001, col. 531W
and 21 March 2002, col. 471W, and fax from DFID to the Mines Advisory Group,
undated but received in May 2002. [48]
Amended Protocol II Article 13 report, October 2001, Form E, and Fax from
Proliferation and Arms Control Secretariat, Ministry of Defense, 8 March
2002. [49] Fax from Proliferation and
Arms Control Secretariat, Ministry of Defense, 22 March
2002. [50] Hansard, 18 December 2001,
col. 193W. [51] Fax from DFID to the
Mines Advisory Group, undated but received in May
2002. [52] Hansard, 26 November 2001,
col. 662W. [53] Fax from the
Proliferation and Arms Control Secretariat, Ministry of Defense, 22 March
2002. [54] Request to Ministry of
Defence for clarification sent on 17 June
2002. [55] Hansard, 25 October 1999,
col. 709. [56] “Over £2
million earmarked for war-torn communities in latest grants round”, The
Diana Princess of Wales Memorial Fund – Press Release 008/2000, 7 November
2001, accessed at
www.theworkcontinues.org. [57]
“The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund announces latest grant
awards," Press Release, 11 October 2000, accessed at
www.theworkcontinues.org. [58] Stefan
Racin, ”British soldier dies in Kosovo mine blast,” UPI, 14 April
2001. [59] “Mine-clearance: an
activity that is always fraught with danger,” Handicap International
Belgium Press Release, 7 August
2001. [60] “Second U.S. Serviceman
Loses Foot in Mine Blast,” Reuters, 19 December
2001. [61] Rodeina Kenaan,
“British sapper loses leg in southern Lebanon land mine explosion,”
AP, 20 July 2002.
About Us
Our Research Products