Key developments
since March 1999: Switzerland has served as co-chair of the SCE on Victim
Assistance. Switzerland will host the Second Meeting of States Parties to the
Mine Ban Treaty in September 2000. In 1999 Switzerland provided US$5.8 million
for mine action programs.
Mine Ban Policy
Switzerland signed the Mine Ban Treaty (MBT) on 3
December 1997 and ratified it on 24 March 1998. Before this, national
legislation banning antipersonnel landmines (AP mines) had already been enacted
by the Swiss Parliament on 13 December 1996, which entered into force on 1 April
1998.[1] This national
legislation concerns war material in general. One of the sections specific to
AP mines imposes penal sanctions (maximum imprisonment of ten years for
intentional violations, maximum imprisonment of one year or a fine of SF
500,000/US$290,000 for negligent
violations).[2] The section
dealing with AP mines is broader than the Mine Ban Treaty in that it also bans
devices adapted to function as AP
mines.[3] However, the Swiss
Campaign to Ban Landmines (Swiss CBL) remains concerned about two aspects of the
national law that are weaker than the MBT(see below) .
Switzerland submitted its initial report required under Article 7 of the
Treaty to the United Nations on time on 4 August 1999, covering the period 1
March 1999 to 20 August 1999. The report is brief, since Switzerland is not
mine-affected, had already destroyed its entire stock of AP mines, had no
production facilities, and is retaining no mines for training purposes. On 11
April 2000 Switzerland submitted its second annual report, covering calendar
year 1999, that simply indicated there were no changes in information from the
first report.
Switzerland took part in the First Meeting of States Parties (FMSP) of the
MBT in Maputo, Mozambique, in May 1999. The Swiss representatives expressed the
willingness of the government to host the Second Meeting in September 2000 and
also highlighted the work of the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian
Demining. The GICHD provides a computer network linking mine clearance centers,
provides a venue for the UN’s annual meetings on this activity, and serves
as an institution for the study of and training in mine clearance. Since the
FMSP in Maputo, the GICHD has also hosted the meetings of the Standing
Committees of Experts (SCEs), that are charged with facilitating the
implementation of the MBT.
Switzerland has co-chaired (with Mexico) the SCE on Victim Assistance,
Socio-economic Reintegration and Mine Awareness, that met in September 1999 and
March 2000. It has also been very active in other SCE meetings. At the first
SCE meeting on General Status and Operation of the Convention, held in January
2000, Switzerland was one of the governments that reiterated that antivehicle
mines with antihandling devices which function like AP mines, which may explode
from an unintentional act of a person, are banned under the
MBT.[4]
Switzerland is not a member of the United Nations, and therefore never
appears in the list of signatories of UN resolutions. However the Swiss
delegation stated at the FMSP in Maputo that the UN offers the most effective
means of executing mine action.
After the NATO intervention in Kosovo in early 1999, the Swiss CBL asked for
the government’s views on the fact the United States had reserved the
right of to use antipersonnel mines, despite the fact that all the other members
of NATO had signed the MBT except for Turkey. The official response was that
such questions were not relevant, since Switzerland is not a member of any
military alliance and allows no foreign military bases on her
territory.[5]
The Swiss authorities have welcomed the Landmine Monitor and the initiatives
on transparency regarding the implementation of the Treaty. However, in
response to the Landmine Monitor Report 1999, Switzerland indicated that
it believes “the report makes it difficult to distinguish factual
information provided by the governments of the Member states from the
evaluations of the authors.” The government notes that some member states
might feel wrongly discredited and some non-signatory states might be dissuaded
from joining the MBT.[6]
Switzerland is a party to Amended Protocol II of the Convention on
Conventional Weapons (CCW). Its annual report was submitted to the First
Conference of States Parties to Amended Protocol II in December 1999 as
required, and at that meeting Switzerland intervened to request that signatory
countries’ reports become public, as are those of the
MBT.[7]
Regarding the Conference on Disarmament (CD), Switzerland supports the
principle of negotiating a ban on mine transfers in the CD, provided that this
does not endanger the implementation or universality of the Mine Ban
Treaty.[8] The Swiss view of
the primacy of the MBT has been stated in clear terms: “Switzerland is
ready to discuss ways towards solving the problems caused by anti-personnel
mines in any appropriate forum. However, it would oppose the creation of new
international norms short of or contradicting the prohibitions ands obligations
imposed by the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production
and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their
Destruction.” [9]
Swiss Campaign to Ban Landmines
In March 2000, the Swiss CBL, in cooperation with a number of other national
landmine campaigns, hosted a conference to begin a dialogue seeking to engage
armed non-state actors (NSA) in the landmine
ban.[10] The first conference of
its kind, attended by representatives of armed opposition groups, government
observers and ban campaigners, it was an important step toward consistent work
in this area of critical importance to banning AP mines. The objectives of this
conference were to provide education about the problem of mines used by NSAs, to
increase understanding of how an antipersonnel mine ban can be achieved among
NSAs, and to build confidence in and strengthen the ICBL initiative to engage
NSAs in a ban on mines.
During the conference it was noted how crucial rebel participation is in
mine-clearing operations, from identifying mined areas to the actual removal or
destruction of mines. Legal experts explored the introduction of innovations to
international humanitarian and human rights law, that would allow armed
non-state actors to obligate themselves to a ban. Geneva Call, a
Swiss-registered international NGO, was put forward by anti-landmine campaigns
from several countries to receive such ban commitments from NSAs, and serve as a
basis for holding armed groups
accountable.[11]
The Swiss CBL has expressed concerns about two aspects of the national mine
ban law. First, the national law does not reflect the definition of an
antihandling device in the MBT. The Mine Ban Treaty defines antihandling
devices as those that activate when “an attempt is made to tamper with or
otherwise intentionally disturb the mine,” thus devices that may be
activated by an unintentional act of a person are considered to be AP mines and
thus banned by the MBT.[12] As
noted above, Swiss officials have recently reiterated that this is the Swiss
understanding. Moreover, inquiries by the Swiss CBL have established that the
antihandling devices on antitank mines currently stocked by Switzerland do
conform to the MBT. Despite this, and the fact that international treaties
prevail over national law, the Swiss CBL expects the authorities to specify in
the national law what types of antihandling devices are and are not
permitted.
Secondly, the Swiss law reserves the right to use antipersonnel mines
“as a protection or in order to fight their
effects.”[13] The need to
use mines for training dogs in mine detection is given as an example of what
this is intended to permit.[14]
However the Swiss Campaign considers this exemption to be so general as to allow
its misuse, along the lines of “if the enemy uses mines, then I am allowed
to use them so as to ensure my protection.” The Swiss CBL considers that
the national law should be amended in this respect also and have the same
definition as the Mine Ban Treaty. The MBT allows antipersonnel mines to be
retained only for the development of and training in mine detection, mine
clearance, or mine destruction
techniques.[15]
Production and Transfer
Switzerland produced bounding mines (type 64) and
stake mines (type 49) at a government controlled facility from 1967 to 1969;
other past production details are noted in the Landmine Monitor Report
1999.[16]
The legal sanctions against production of mine components are described in
the Landmine Monitor Report 1999 (see p. 669). The Swiss CBL has
identified a company that previously produced detonators for mines and is now
producing detonators for air
bags.[17] In case these
detonators could be used in the manufacture of antipersonnel mines, the Swiss
CBL wrote asking whether the company was keeping a watch on its exports, and
would research into modifying the detonators in order to prevent any possible
use in the manufacture of mines. The company replied that exports were watched
but that it is impossible to use the detonators for
mines.[18]
Switzerland does not produce antitank mines equipped with antihandling
devices and has no research programs on these weapons. There was research into
alternatives to antipersonnel mines, in the form of video monitors and various
technical sensors, but this has ceased for lack of worthwhile
result.[19]
The export of antipersonnel landmines and components was restricted in 1994
to other CCW signatories, then banned completely in December 1996. However, the
export of explosives does not require export authorization and does not appear
to be affected by the MBT as implemented in Switzerland by the 1996 law.
Imports of various AP mines were recorded up to 1965, as detailed in Landmine
Monitor Report 1999 (see p. 670).
Transit of AP mines through Switzerland is forbidden for any purpose,
including by any peacekeeping forces and the UN.
Stockpiling
Switzerland’s Article 7 report indicates
that destruction of stockpiled AP mines began following a 25 November 1995
decision of the Minister of Defense, and that destruction was completed by 15
March 1999.[20] It noted that
212 type Tretmine 59 antipersonnel mines were destroyed in March 1999, by
demolition charges at the Weapon Systems and Ammunition Test Centre of the
Defence Procurement Agency. The government had stated previously that all
stocks of AP mines were destroyed by the end of
1997.[21] In response to the
Swiss CBL’s questions, the authorities explained that these mines had been
forgotten in a warehouse.
The total number of AP mines destroyed from stockpiles is not provided in the
Article 7 report. However, at the December 1999 meeting of the SCE on Stockpile
Destruction, a Swiss representative cited a figure of 3.85 million. He noted
the work was done by government-owned factories and one private
firm.[22]
Despite a request by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), the
Swiss government has not included in its Article 7 reports any information about
Claymore-type mines.[23] When
these directional fragmentation mines are victim-activated by tripwire, they are
prohibited by the treaty; when command-detonated by the user, they are
permissible. The Department for Defence takes the position that Claymores are
no longer to be considered as antipersonnel mines because they have been altered
to prevent activation by tripwire. They are deemed essential for the military
security of the country.[24]
The Swiss CBL has confidence that these mines have indeed been adapted for
command-detonation only and that operational policy in Switzerland reflects
this. Nevertheless, the Swiss Campaign has called for a ban on Claymore mines,
due to its concern that if Claymores continue to be used in any form there is a
possibility that they will be used illegally. The Swiss CBL has provided the
government with two legal opinions on the legality of Claymore mines under Swiss
law, and is awaiting a response.
The Swiss government acknowledges owning antivehicle mines fitted with
antihandling devices (which may be the type VM88 imported from Austria from
Thomson Brandt Armament between 1991 and 1994, worth US$ 225
million),[25] and antitank mines
dating from the sixties that are not fitted with antihandling
devices.[26] The Swiss
authorities explain that, because three factors must be simultaneously combined
in order to make antivehicle mines fitted with antihandling devices explode,
theoretically they entail no risk for civilians. Also, antivehicle mines held
by Switzerland are said to meet criteria set out by the ICRC: they are
detectable, require 150 kg minimum pressure for detonation, and will not explode
if unintentionally
disturbed.[27]
Mine Action Funding
In 1999 Switzerland provided US$5.8 million of
support for mine action programs: $2.65 million for humanitarian mine clearance,
$1.3 million for victim assistance, $300,000 to help increase local capacity for
mine action, and $1.55 million for various projects including the GICHD,
strengthening the UN, supporting nongovernmental organizations and sponsoring
delegates from mine-affected countries to attend the FMSP in Maputo,
Mozambique.
Funds donated to mine clearance include $1.1 million for Kosovo (involving
projects carried out by Handicap International, Halo Trust and the Mine Action
Center), $1.2 million for Bosnia (Handicap International, Norwegian
People’s Aid, and the International War Crimes Court, to demine a mass
grave), $140,000 for Croatia (Swiss Federation for Humanitarian Demining) and
$180,000 for Mozambique (Halo Trust and others).
Mine action policy is based on Switzerland’s principle of peace
promotion. The most significant aspects of this guiding principle are: good
knowledge of the situation in the country concerned, appropriate choice of
experienced partners, integration of all stakeholders in both project design and
implementation, strengthening of local capacity, consideration of related
security, political and trade issues (with regard to the recipient country and
Switzerland), and coordination between donors and implementing agencies.
Applied to mine-related activities, these criteria favor the selection of:
the most mine-affected regions in the world and those engaged in reconstruction
and reconciliation; links between mine clearance projects with peace-promotion
initiatives; selection of mine clearance sites in participation with local
governments, local communities, the UN, Swiss embassies and bureaus of the Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation, other donors and experienced
international NGOs; the importance of local capacity building; assessment of
needs and impact on mine action programs. Coordination is provided by the
Department for Foreign Affairs.
The Swiss government is not involved in and does not support any research
program for mine clearance technologies; neither does it train bomb-disposal
experts.
Several NGOs within the Swiss CBL support mine clearance and victim
assistance programs: Co-operaid and Swiss Protestant Mutual Aid have programs in
Cambodia, Handicap International in various countries and the Swiss Foundation
For Landmine Victims Aid in Pakistan. In 1999 the Fondation Pro-Victimis
provided financial support to the Halo Trust for mine clearance in Abkhazia
($407,000), in Upper-Karabakh ($91,000), and in Kosovo ($780,000). Pro-Victimis
also financed ($70,000) publication of a book examining the extent of the
landmine problem
worldwide.[28]The Swiss
Federation for Mine Clearance operated mine clearance programs during 1999 in
Croatia and Kosovo, and mine awareness programs involving a theatrical troupe in
Bosnia. It also trained members of the Swiss army in mine clearance
supervision, and is designing a light machine for mine clearance.
In 1999, Handicap International (Switzerland) supported mine clearance
operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina ($355,000) and Kosovo ($275,000); mine
awareness in Bosnia-Herzegovina ($21,700) and Angola ($41,600); victim
assistance in Mozambique ($250,000), Albania ($26,700), Cambodia ($51,000),
Nicaragua ($43,300), Rwanda ($69,566), Senegal ($12,174) and Somaliland
($26,700). Handicap International (Switzerland) also supported a study,
“The use of mechanical means for humanitarian demining operations”
($19,300).
A Swiss company, SM Swiss Ammunition Enterprise Corp., is manufacturing a
system that it claims will allow mines and unexploded ordnance to be made safe
without having to touch or explode them. This involves a small hollow charge
that destroys the mine, ensuring much greater safety for the bomb-disposal
experts. This Swiss system (SM-EOD) is now being used increasingly in many mine
clearance tasks.
[1] La Loi Federale sur le Materiel de
Guerre, 13 December 1996. [2] Ibid,
Article 35. [3] La Loi Federale sur le
Materiel de Guerre, Article 8.3. [4]
Oral statement of the Swiss Delegation, Standing Committee of Experts on the
General Status and Operation of the Convention, Geneva, Switzerland, 10-11
January 2000. [5] Letter from the
Department for Foreign Affairs to the Swiss CBL, 30 November
1999. [6] Swiss government letters to
the Swiss CBL, 31 January 2000 and 5 May
2000. [7] During the 1999 CCW conference
Switzerland also suggested that states parties should develop a new protocol on
cluster bombs, including a preparatory conference on this subject involving
concerned countries. [8] Interview with
the Swiss Mission, May 1999. [9] Report
of the Swiss Delegation to the Organization for Cooperation and Security in
Europe, 19 February 1999, p. 2. [10] A
full report of the International Conference on Non-State Actors is available
from the Swiss CBL,
ereusse@worldcom.ch. [11] Information on
the Geneva Call deed is available from:
Geneva.Call@gkb.com. [12] Mine Ban
Treaty, Article 2.3 (emphasis
added). [13] La Loi Federale sur le
Materiel de Guerre, Article 8.2b. [14]
Interview with the Department for Defence, 5 May
2000. [15] Mine Ban Treaty, Article
3.1. [16] Landmine Monitor Report 1999,
pp. 668-669. [17] Letter to the Swiss
CBL from the Ems Company, 27 January 2000, and information given to the Swiss
Parliament, June 1996, in answer to questions from
parliamentarians. [18] Landmine Monitor
Report 1999, p. 669. [19] Interview with
the Department for Defence, 5 May
2000. [20] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7
Report, submitted 4 August 1999; available at:
http://domino.un.org/Ottawa.nsf. [21]
Report to the Organisation for Cooperation and Security in Europe, 19 February
1999, p. 2. [22] Oral statement to SCE
on Stockpile Destruction, Geneva, 9 December 1999. Human Rights Watch
subsequently incorporated this figure into its report, “Antipersonnel
Landmine Stockpiles and Their Destruction,” 14 December 1999. The Swiss
delegate indicated that some destruction took place as early as 1990. The mines
destroyed included 3 million Type 59; 620,000 Type 49; 171,000 Type 64; and,
59,000 Type 63. [23] ICBL letter to the
Foreign Minister, 20 December 1999, in preparation for the January 2000 meeting
of the SCE on General Operations and Status of the
Convention. [24] Interview with the
Department for Defence, 5 May 2000. [25]
Letter to the Swiss CBL from the Department for Defence, 22 January
1999. [26] Interview with the Department
for Defence, 5 May 2000. [27]
Ibid. [28] Ilaria Bottigliero, 120
million landmines deployed worldwide: fact or fiction? (Geneva: Pro Victimis,
2000); email: pro.victimis@iprolink.ch.
About Us
Our Research Products