+   *    +     +     
About Us 
The Issues 
Our Research Products 
Order Publications 
Press Room 
Resources for Monitor Researchers 
Table of Contents
Country Reports
Sweden, Landmine Monitor Report 2003


Key developments since May 2002: Sweden’s funding for mine action decreased significantly in 2002, to about SEK71 million (US$7.3 million). The government presented a new strategy on mine action in May 2002. In March 2003, the Bofors Company revealed to Landmine Monitor that it held 7,069 antipersonnel mines, not 4,000 as previously reported by the government. Sweden subsequently reported that this increased the number of mines retained for training and development to 16,015. The Swedish Rescue Service Agency in 2002 and 2003 provided mine action assistance, mainly quality assurance, in five countries. Sweden continued to invest significantly in research and development on mine detection and clearance technologies.

Mine Ban Policy

Sweden signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997 and ratified it on 25 November 1998, becoming a State Party on 1 May 1999. National implementation was achieved by additions to existing legislation, entering into force at the same time.

Sweden has not produced or exported antipersonnel mines since 1974.[1] Sweden announced in December 2001 that its stockpile of antipersonnel mines had been destroyed, including 2,348,149 mines since entry into force. Landmine Monitor has estimated that the stockpile contained 3.2 million antipersonnel mines in 1998, when stockpile destruction began.[2]

Sweden participated in the Fourth Meeting of States Parties in September 2002, and the Standing Committee meetings in February and May 2003. It is expected to be named co-rapporteur of the Standing Committee on Mine Clearance at the Fifth Meeting of States Parties in September 2003.

On 30 April 2003, Sweden submitted its annual Article 7 transparency report for calendar year 2002. The report includes the voluntary Form J, reporting details of mine action funding, and updated information on mines retained. This is Sweden’s fifth Article 7 report.[3]

In November 2002, Sweden voted in favor of pro-mine ban UN General Assembly Resolution 57/74 and was also the chief sponsor of UNGA Resolution 57/98, calling on States to adhere to Amended Protocol II of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) without delay.

Sweden is a State Party to Amended Protocol II of the CCW, and submitted the annual report required by Article 13 on 6 November 2002. Sweden attended the Fourth Annual Conference of States Parties to the Protocol in December 2002.

On 23 May 2002, the government presented a new integrated strategy on mine action, including humanitarian and military demining, mine awareness, and assistance to other States in the destruction of stockpiles of antipersonnel mines (the strategy does not cover victim assistance). The aim is to assure that all state agencies work toward the same goals, with better coordination, and to give support and guidance in their practical work. The strategy recommends that the government prepare an annual report on Swedish mine action as a basis for reporting to parliament and international agencies.[4]

The strategy states that: “Initiatives will be taken to promote a global accession to and an effective implementation of the Ottawa Convention.”[5] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirms that the issue of accession to the treaty is on the agenda when dialogue is planned with countries not party to the treaty.[6] One example of this was given – a Nordic meeting on disarmament, including the Baltic States, in Stockholm in December 2002.[7] This includes support for the sponsorship program for the Standing Committee meetings, which enables the least developed countries to participate. [8]

On 22 May 2003, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense gave a joint presentation to the parliamentary Committees on Foreign Affairs and on Defense. They reported that Sweden intends to participate in Norway’s initiative on resource mobilization for mine action. Sweden also “encourages and actively participates in” discussions on the interpretation of the Mine Ban Treaty, and believes that this “contributes to the strengthening of the convention's norm and purpose.”[9]

Joint military operations and transit

The issue of participation in joint military operations with countries not party to the Mine Ban Treaty was addressed in a Ministry of Foreign Affairs document in September 2001 and by Foreign Minister Anna Lindh in February 2002.[10] The integrated strategy on mine action released in May 2002 states: “Since Sweden is Party to the Ottawa Convention it is prohibited for Swedish personnel participating in international missions to have anything to do with antipersonnel mines with the exception of activities relating to detection and clearance... Swedish participation in an international mission in which any of the participating states uses antipersonnel mines could be regarded as violating the spirit of the Ottawa Convention unless Sweden [has] not in all ways counteracted the use.”[11]

On 25 March 2003, the Minister of Foreign Affairs stated in parliament that antipersonnel mines “shall not be used in any of the exercises or any of the engagements that we can have regarding peacekeeping troops, joint exercises, or the like.”[12] Foreign Minister Lindh also said, “Of course we presume that antipersonnel mines are not used in any of the military activities that we take part in. However, we can participate in activities together with countries that are not parties to the Ottawa Convention. But they can not use antipersonnel mines in these activities.”[13]

The government has not taken a public position on the issue of transit of foreign antipersonnel mines over Swedish territory. The Foreign Minister stated, “Transit of foreign antipersonnel mines over our territory is another of those questions that has not been sufficiently discussed and analyzed.... Therefore it is important that we have a national evaluation of this and also a discussion with other parties to the Ottawa Convention.”[14] A policy position on the transit of antipersonnel mines across Swedish territory by a country not party to the treaty is being prepared.[15]

Mines Retained Under Article 3

In its April 2002 Article 7 report, Sweden reported that it was retaining 13,948 antipersonnel mines.[16] This included 4,000 mines not reported in 2001 as being retained.[17] At the Fourth Meeting of States Parties in September 2002, Sweden explained that it was retaining a significant quantity because “it is very valuable if personnel, involved in mine clearance, have detected and cleared live mines already during training under controlled conditions, before entering live minefields.” Live mines are also considered necessary for final quality tests of mine clearance equipment and technologies.

During 2002, the Swedish Armed Forces consumed 1,002 antipersonnel mines: 908 in training of mine clearance personnel and 94 in testing and development of mine clearance and detection equipment. In addition, 3,200 fuzes for Truppmina 49B were used for testing and development of mine clearance equipment. The April 2003 Article 7 report gives details of the use made of each type of mine.[18]

In its April 2002 Article 7 report, Sweden reported that the total of 13,948 mines retained included 4,000 mines held by Bofors Defense/Saab Bofors Test Center for development of mine clearance equipment. However, in March 2003 Bofors revealed to Landmine Monitor that it held 7,069 antipersonnel mines (4,869 Truppmina 10 and 2,200 Truppmina 49B).[19]

Sweden’s April 2003 Article 7 report includes this higher number from Bofors, bringing to 16,015 the total of retained mines at the end of 2002. The report states that these mines held by Bofors will be used for development of mine clearance equipment or will be “destroyed in the next couple of years. During 2003 it will be further examined how the amount of mines should be reduced.”[20] At the Standing Committee meetings in May 2003, Sweden’s delegation confirmed that discussions were underway with Bofors on how to reduce the quantity of mines retained.[21]

Bofors claims that it needs the antipersonnel mines for testing and development of mine clearance equipment, such as the demining machine Mine-Guzzler. Bofors also plans to use antipersonnel mines for commercial purposes, performing tests for other companies developing mine clearance equipment. During the first half of 2003, the Saab Bofors Test Center was due to test mine clearance equipment from Switzerland.[22]

In March 2003, Member of Parliament Lars Ångström asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs a question on what measures she would take to ensure that Bofors reports on how many antipersonnel mines the company needs and to ensure that surplus mines are destroyed.[23] Foreign Minister Lindh replied, “Contact will be made with Bofors Defense regarding reporting of the mines kept for the development of mine clearance technology.” She added, “If it is the case that Bofors Defense... decides to terminate its activities so that there is no longer a need for mines in mine clearance tests it is obvious that the mines shall be destroyed under controlled forms.”[24]

Antivehicle mines with sensitive fuzes and antihandling devices

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated in March 2003, “Even though you can’t generally say that [antivehicle mines with sensitive fuzes or antihandling devices] are comparable to antipersonnel mines, it is also clear that these mines pose great risks to civilians.”[25] Sweden confirmed that it does not intend to review its antivehicle mines with antihandling devices for reporting to the meetings of States Parties.[26] The new Swedish strategy on mine action presented in May 2002 states that work within the treaty framework should focus on antipersonnel mines, and other types of mines should be dealt with in other fora, preferably the CCW.

Sweden is in favor of further regulation: “Antivehicle and antitank mines render difficult or prevent relief consignments and the return to normal life after the ending of armed conflicts... A regulation should be made comprehensive and should include an effective compliance mechanism.”[27]

Mine Action Funding and Assistance

Sweden’s report to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in December 2002 stated, “Supporting international humanitarian mine clearance efforts and making them more efficient and assisting the mine victims and the countries concerned, are matters of high priority for the Swedish Government. Swedish assistance for these purposes, initiated in 1991, is channeled mainly through the Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency (SIDA) to the United Nations and a few demining NGOs. It currently amounts to a total of approximately SEK736 million (approximately US$81.2 million), excluding substantial contributions for rehabilitation of mine survivors as part of our general contributions to ICRC, and to mine awareness as part of our contribution to UNICEF.”[28]

Sweden reports that disbursement of mine action funds in 2002 totaled approximately SEK71 million (US$7.3 million),[29] of which SEK64.8 million (US$6.67 million) was disbursed by SIDA. The 2002 total is a significant decrease from previous years. In 2001, SEK95.9 million was disbursed, and in 2000, SEK107.9 million was disbursed.[30] Thus, funding in 2002 was about 26 percent less than in 2001, and about 34 percent less than in 2000.

Mine action funding by SIDA in 2002[31]

  • Afghanistan – SEK2.8 million ($288,000) to the Danish Demining Group (DDG) for quality control;
  • Angola - SEK8 million ($823,000) to Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) for mine clearance, mine risk education (MRE), and capacity building;
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina - SEK4 million ($412,000) to the International Trust Fund (ITF) for Demining and Mine Victims Assistance[32] for mine clearance, MRE and capacity building;
  • Cambodia - SEK15 million ($1.54 million) to the UN Development Program (UNDP) and Cambodian Mine Action Center;
  • Eritrea - SEK3 million ($309,000) to DDG for mine clearance, MRE and capacity building (including personnel from SRSA);
  • Mozambique - SEK5 million ($514,000) to NPA for mine clearance, MRE, and capacity building, and SEK4 million ($412,000) to UNDP for mine clearance and capacity building;
  • Nicaragua - SEK3.2 million ($329,000) to the Organization of American States (OAS) for mine clearance, capacity building, technical assistance, monitoring and logistical support;
  • Northern Iraq - SEK11.8 million ($1.21 million) to the Mines Advisory Group (MAG) for mine clearance, MRE and capacity building;
  • Somalia - SEK8.1 million ($833,000) to DDG for survey, mine clearance and capacity building;
  • Sri Lanka - SEK500,000 ($51,450) to MAG for capacity building and logistic support; this is the first Swedish contribution to mine action in Sri Lanka;
  • Other – SEK250,000 ($25,720) for the treaty sponsorship program, SEK140,000 ($14,400) for an EU project to develop standards, and SEK10,000 ($1,030) for the evaluation of SIDA’s mine action program.

Mine action funding by Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 2002[33]

  • UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) - SEK3 million ($309,000)
  • Geneva International Center for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) - SEK3 million ($309,000)
  • International Campaign to Ban Landmines - $15,000 for the Landmine Monitor Report 2002.

Sweden also contributed SEK220 million ($24.9 million) to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in 2002, part of which goes to mine victims and MRE.[34]

SIDA has made commitments of continued funding to Angola 2002-2004, Bosnia and Herzegovina 2001-2003, Cambodia 2001-2003, Mozambique 2002-2003, Nicaragua 2002-2005, and northern Iraq 2003.[35]

Mine Action Funding Policy

The government’s strategy on mine action presented in May 2002 reiterated the main policy directions outlined by SIDA in November 2001.[36] The goal is to support people affected by armed conflicts so that they can return to their home areas and establish an acceptable life under peaceful conditions. Activities supported by Sweden should have a worked-through strategy with clear goals as a foundation for result analysis, evaluation, and conclusion. From the outset there should be planning for hand-over to the government, local authorities or NGOs in the recipient country. Broad mine clearance programs should be reduced in favor of low-intensity, long-term activities in which mine clearance is coupled to the need for infrastructure and reconstruction.[37]

According to the new strategy, SIDA’s support is given primarily to countries with long-term and grave mine problems, and is to be characterized by flexibility and knowledge about specific contexts. The support should be long-term and aim at building local structures and competence. In the short-term, SIDA’s support should contribute to activities with humanitarian purposes. Regarding international capacity within humanitarian demining, support should be directed to analysis of the problem, to areas where Sweden has comparative advantages, and to mine clearance (which is expected to be the most comprehensive activity for a long time). Mine awareness will be supported independently or as part of mine clearance programs.[38]

Survivor assistance is not included in the new strategy, because this is supported within the framework of general health aid and through SIDA’s support to organizations such as the ICRC.[39] At the Standing Committee meetings in May 2003, Sweden’s delegation stated that it was not possible to separate funding of assistance for mine survivors from general support for people with disabilities and explained its policy for disability funding.[40]

Assistance for stockpile destruction is included, but only for countries that have signed, ratified, or explained their willingness to accede to the Mine Ban Treaty. Exceptions can be made in humanitarian emergency situations. If mines have been cleared from the ground and await destruction, support can be regarded as a part of a humanitarian demining operation and financed from development aid funding. If the mines are stockpiled with the original intention of being used, financing must come from other sources than development aid.[41] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs states that it is not yet clear what “other sources” could be used.[42] The Ministry of Defense says that the only funding available is the general, non-earmarked Swedish funding for UNMAS and UN Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine Action.[43]

Swedish Rescue Services Agency (SRSA)

The strategy on mine action concluded that the Swedish Rescue Service Agency (SRSA) is Sweden’s operational actor for humanitarian mine clearance. SRSA support primarily concerns management, quality control, and training.[44]

During 2002 and 2003, the SRSA has undertaken the following mine action projects:[45]

  • Democratic Republic of Congo - SRSA carried out quality assurance of demining operations during February and March 2003;
  • Ethiopia and Eritrea - three SRSA personnel (with financing from SIDA) have provided quality control of health care, IT support and mine clearance training at the UN mine action center since November 2001. The project was estimated to continue at least until April 2003;
  • Lebanon - SRSA has provided a Quality Assurance Officer for Mine Detection Dogs at the mine action center since April 2002;
  • Jenin (the West Bank) and Gaza - SRSA carried out bomb and ammunition clearance activities from May-October 2002. The total cost of the project was SEK3.8 million ($391,000).

The SRSA works in cooperation with SWEDEC (Swedish EOD and Demining Center), where it has three personnel stationed. It financially supported research on the movement of explosive materials in the ground and a study on different kinds of filter conducted by the Total Defense Research Establishment. SRSA support for these projects amounted to SEK3.1 million ($319,000) during 2001.[46]

During 2002, the SRSA continued its participation in two EU projects, the BIOSENS and the DEMAND projects.[47]

Swedish Armed Forces

The strategy identified the Armed Forces as Sweden’s operational actor for military mine clearance, but they should also be able to conduct humanitarian mine clearance and support other mine action, such as mine risk education.[48]

During 2002, Sweden contributed up to five people to the Cambodian Mine Action Center. The mine detection dog project, consisting of five teams and 30 dogs, was handed over to the Cambodian government at the end of December 2002. Support from SIDA is still needed, especially veterinary services.[49]

Sweden also provides support to humanitarian demining by the Baltic States, including naval demining.[50]

During 2000-2002, a unit was contributed for mine and ammunition clearance operations in Kosovo.[51] SWEDEC conducted ammunition and mine clearance training for the future members of the Kosovo ammunition clearance pool.[52]

At SWEDEC there are 120 ammunition clearance personnel, mainly from the Swedish Armed Forces, but also from the SRSA. SWEDEC will recruit and train at least 35 ammunition-seeking dog units within a period of five years. SWEDEC had fewer trained dogs by 1 January 2003 than planned, mainly due to a lack of appropriate dogs.[53]

In February 2003, Handicap International Belgium provided MRE training to SWEDEC staff.

Up to October 2002, Sweden provided staff to the Secretariat of the International Test and Evaluation Program (ITEP). Sweden chaired the ITEP Executive Committee from November 2002.[54]

Research and Development

Sweden has invested significantly in research and development (R&D) since 1994. There are R&D projects aimed at advanced mine detectors, mechanical mine clearance systems and new ways to use mine detection dogs.[55]

Sweden has constructed software for mine databases with global information system applications. Finland is currently using the software, which is available at no cost in some situations. It is planned to connect it to the Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA), in cooperation with the GICHD.[56]

During 2002 Sweden contributed SEK20 million ($2.06 million) to the Biosensor project, which aims to develop an artificial dog nose sensor for humanitarian demining. The SRSA is conducting extensive field trials of a prototype mine detector for the Biosensor system, in cooperation with NPA.[57]

Bofors’ development of the Mine-Guzzler demining vehicle for humanitarian operations started in 1995 and was concluded in 1998/1999. It was wholly financed by Bofors Defense, totaling SEK50-60 million ($5-6 million).[58] From 1999, Bofors spent approximately SEK3 million ($309,000) per year on marketing. However, since no orders had resulted, Bofors decided in December 2002 to terminate marketing efforts towards smaller humanitarian demining organizations and to concentrate on bigger organizations, including other countries’ armed forces. Bofors intends to continue to perform tests, demonstrations and development of mine clearance equipment in Sweden.[59]

During 2002, Countermine Technologies concluded four mine clearance projects totaling 237,000 square meters in Croatia. At the start of 2003, Countermine gained another demining contract in Croatia, to clear 175,000 square meters; the project was due to be concluded during March 2003. Countermine has three subsidiary companies involved in mine clearance and related equipment. A new demining machine is being developed.[60]

During 2002, the Scanjack 3500 demining machine, developed by the Scandinavian Demining Group, was tested in competition with Hydrema 910 and the Bofors Mine Guzzler by the Swedish Armed Forces at SWEDEC. The outcome was positive for the Scanjack 3500. Clearance was 100 percent for antivehicle mines and 98.2 percent for antipersonnel mines. This resulted in an order from the Swedish Armed Forces, with the first machine to be delivered at the end of March 2003. The order had a value of approximately SEK17 million ($1.75 million), with an option to buy one to six units for up to SEK64 million ($6.58 million).[61]

NGO Activities

During 2002, the Swedish Peace and Arbitration Society (SPAS) organized seminars and wrote articles to raise public awareness of the mine problem and its solutions. SPAS also did advocacy work with the Swedish government, parliamentarians and others involved in mine action, trying to ensure full implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty and continued support for humanitarian mine action programs.

With the release of Landmine Monitor Report 2002, SPAS took action to encourage Finland to join the Mine Ban Treaty. On 13 September 2002, SPAS published an Opinion Editorial in Helsingin Sanomat (the largest daily Finnish newspaper) asking Finland to accede to the treaty. SPAS also wrote to the Finnish Minister of Defense and parliamentary defense committee.

[1] Sweden continued to produce Claymore type mines. Sweden has reported that these have been “reconstructed and rendered useless as antipersonnel mines.” See Landmine Monitor Report 2002, p. 461.
[2] See Landmine Monitor Report 2001, p. 792; Landmine Monitor Report 2002, pp. 459-460.
[3] Article 7 Report, 29 October 1999 (for the period 1 May-30 September 1999); Article 7 Report, 14 June 2000 (for the period 1 September 1999-1 April 2000); Article 7 Report, 30 April 2001 (for the period 1 April 2000-1 April 2001); Article 7 Report, 25 April 2002 (for the period 1 April 2001-1 April 2002).
[4] Ministry of Defense, “Regeringens samlade syn på minhantering” (The Government’s integrated approach to mine action), Memorandum, 23 May 2002, p. 28. Translation by Landmine Monitor.
[5] Ibid, p. 3.
[6] Interview with Sara Uddenberg and Alexandra Tolstoy, Desk Officers, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Stockholm, 13 January 2003.
[7] Email from Sara Uddenberg, Desk Officer, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 28 March 2003.
[8] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, pp. 3, 10; interview with Sara Uddenberg and Alexandra Tolstoy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 13 January 2003.
[9] Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Information to the Committee on Defence and the Committee on Foreign Affairs,” Memorandum Fö2003/1340/MIL, 22 May 2003.
[10] See Landmine Monitor Report 2002, p. 459.
[11] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, p 19. Translation by Landmine Monitor.
[12] Anna Lindh, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Snabbprotokoll (Quick Protocol), 2002/03:78, 25 March 2003. Translated by Landmine Monitor.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Memorandum, 22 May 2003.
[16] Article 7 Report, Form B, 25 April 2002. Not included in the total are 1,590 Truppmina 11 mines that it counted in 2001 as retained mines. Sweden determined that since it is not keeping any mine fuzes that could be connected to Truppmina 11, the mine bodies should not be counted as retained mines. Email from Lieutenant-Colonel Olof Carelius, Armed Forces Headquarters, 20 March 2002.
[17] Article 7 Report, Form B, 30 April 2001.
[18] Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2003; email from Lt-Col. Olof Carelius, 18 February 2003.
[19] Telephone interview with Allan Carlsson, Sales Director, Saab Bofors Test Center, 25 March 2003.
[20] Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2003.
[21] Intervention by Sweden on Article 3, Standing Committee on General Status and Operation of the Convention, Geneva, 16 May 2003.
[22] Email from Allan Carlsson, Saab Bofors Test Center, 7 March 2003.
[23] Lars Ångström, Member of Parliament, Snabbprotokoll (Quick Protocol), 2002/03:224, 10 March 2003.
[24] Anna Lindh, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Quick Protocol, 25 March 2003.
[25] Anna Lindh, Minister of Foreign Affairs, answer to question (002/03:224) in Parliament, 25 March 2003.
[26] Email from Sara Uddenberg, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 January 2003; see Landmine Monitor Report 2002, p. 461.
[27] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, pp. 10-11.
[28] Response to Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) questionnaire, 18 December 2002, p. 2.
[29] Exchange rate US$1 = SEK9.72, used throughout this report unless official figures are given. Federal Reserve, “List of Exchange Rates (Annual),” 6 January 2003.
[30] Swedish International Development Agency Fact Sheet, “SIDA support to mine action 1990-2000,” October 2000. Previously, Sweden reported funding in the basis of allocation rather than actual disbursement of funds.
[31] Sources for funding data are: Table of SIDA disbursements of mine action funds, and “SIDA Support to Mine Action 2002.” Both the table and document were sent by email from Magnus Carlquist, Desk Officer, SIDA, 16 January 2003.
[32] The amount recorded by the ITF as received is US$372,449. See Slovenia report.
[33] Interview with Sara Uddenberg and Alexandra Tolstoy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 13 January 2003.
[34] Email from Magnus Carlquist, SIDA, 16 January 2003.
[35] Ibid.
[36] See Landmine Monitor Report 2002, pp. 463-464.
[37] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, pp. 12-13.
[38] Ibid, pp. 14-15.
[39] Ibid, pp. 9, 15.
[40] Intervention by Sweden, Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-Economic Reintegration, Geneva, 13 May 2003. (Landmine Monitor notes)
[41] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, pp. 20-21.
[42] Interview with Sara Uddenberg and Alexandra Tolstoy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 13 January 2003.
[43] Email from Richard Törnberg, Desk Officer, Ministry of Defense, 21 January 2003.
[44] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, p. 15.
[45] Response to OSCE questionnaire, 18 December 2002, p. 2; “SRSA Article for Journal of Mine Action issue 7.1”, sent by email from Pehr Lodhammar, SRSA, 12 February 2003; emails from Anders Berg, Swedish Rescue Services Agency, 17 December 2002 and 31 January 2003.
[46] Email from Anders Berg, Swedish Rescue Services Agency, 17 December 2002.
[47] Ibid.
[48] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, p. 16.
[49] Email from Claes Wolgast, SWEDEC, 29 January 2003; email from Louise Nordlund, SWEDEC, 15 February 2002.
[50] Response to OSCE questionnaire, 18 December 2002, p. 3.
[51] Amended Protocol II Article 13 Report, Form E, 31 October 2002.
[52] SWEDEC Draft Annual Report 2002; email from Lt-Col. Olof Carelius, 23 January 2002.
[53] Ministry of Defense, Memorandum, 23 May 2002, p. 16; email from Lt-Col. Olof Carelius, 23 January 2002.
[54] Amended Protocol II Article 13 Report, Form E, 31 October 2002; response to OSCE questionnaire, 18 December 2002, p. 4. See also Landmine Monitor Report 2002, p. 464.
[55] Response to OSCE questionnaire, 18 December 2002, p. 3.
[56] Ibid, p. 4.
[57] Email from Henrik Westander, Consultant for the Biosensor project, 22 January 2003.
[58] www.boforsdefence.com/eng/products/dem.htm, accessed on 13 December 2002.
[59] Email from Allan Carlsson, Saab Bofors Test Center, 7 March 2003.
[60] Countermine Technologies, “Annual report for the period 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2002,” 28 February 2003; email from Lars Nylin, Managing Director, Countermine Technologies, 8 February 2003.
[61] Ibid; “FMV orders development of new mine clearing system”, press release, Scandinavian Demining Group AB, 4 August 2002.