the european union mine actions in the...

2006

EN

European Commission

The European Unionmine actions in the world

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number:

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

The boundaries shown on these maps do not imply on the part of the European Commission any judgment on the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

For weekly news by e-mail from the Directorate General for External Relations, please visit this site: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/feedback/weekly.htm

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2006

ISBN 92-79-02094-3

ISSN 1683-6553

© European Communities, 2006Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Italy

PRINTED ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER

Cover photo credits: © ICBL (Tim Grant), © Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Pepe Diaz)

The European Commission would like to thank all those who have contributed towards this publication.

The sources of information for this edition are the EU Member States and the European Commission database and delegations, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and its Landmine Monitor (LMM) and the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD).

Photographs in the text have been provided courtesy of Ms Paula Sirkia (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland), Mr Henrik Markus (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Slovakia), Mr Luis Gomez Nogueira (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Spain), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland, the ICBL Image Library, Mr Mansour M. Al-Azi (General Director of Yemen national mine action programme), the Mines Advisory Group (MAG), Norwegian People’s Aid, Handicap International and Revista Española de Defensa.

Photographs have also been provided courtesy of Ms Ingeborg Thijn (European Commission — EuropeAid), Mr Henk Visser (European Commission — Enlargement DG), Mr Massimo Pronio (EC Delegation to Angola), Mr Joachim Roth (EC Delegation to Chile), Mr Alfons Peeters (EC Delegation to Croatia), Ms Penelope Andre- Eklund (EC Delegation to Jordan), Mr Islan Osmonaliev (EC Delegation to Kyrgystan), Mr Francesco Straniero (EC Delegation to Laos), Ms Carmen Garcia-Audi (EC Delegation to Peru) and Mr Achim Ladwig (EC Delegation to Sudan).

The European Commission would like to thank the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic and in particular Ms Petra Lustigova for her essential contribution to the preparation and elaboration of this brochure.

The European Union mine actions publication covers actionsundertaken and supported by the 2005 budget

3

Contents

Note to the reader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Message from Paula Lehtomäki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Message from Dr Benita Ferrero-Waldner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

List of commonly used acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

THE EUROPEAN UNION MINE ACTIONS IN THE WORLD — 2006

Saving lives, limbs and livelihoods: the role of the European Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Angola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Benin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Burundi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Chad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Democratic Republic of the Congo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Eritrea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Ethiopia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Guinea-Bissau. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Mauritania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Mozambique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Senegal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Somalia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Sudan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Tunisia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Uganda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Asia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Afghanistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Armenia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Azerbaijan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Cambodia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47Laos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Pakistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Philippines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Sri Lanka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Tajikistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54Vietnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Central/Latin America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Chile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57Colombia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58Nicaragua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60Peru. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62Albania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64Belarus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

4

Bosnia and Herzegovina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66Croatia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68Cyprus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Russia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75Ukraine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

The Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78Iraq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79Jordan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80Lebanon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Syria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83Yemen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Worldwide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

2002–05 yearly totals at a glance: APL and geographical budget lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

© M

AG

- EC

Delegation to A

ngola

5

Note to the Reader

‘Mine action’ is a generic term referring to any of the fol-lowing range of activities:

mine risk education, minefield surveys, assessment and marking, mine detection, clearance, stockpiles’ and landmines’ destruction, assistance to victims, as well as training in any of these areas.

The purpose of this publication is to provide an update of the resources devoted year on year by the EU (European Commission and Member States) to the fight against the misery caused by anti-personnel landmines as well as to the policy objectives guiding yearly or medium-term action.

The presentation of the assistance follows the methodol-ogy adopted by the Organisation for Economic Coopera-tion and Development (OECD): the bilateral contribution by EU Member States is complemented by the assist-ance channelled through the European Community (EC) budget and/or the European Development Fund sup-porting EC–ACP cooperation, both referred to by the acronym ‘EC’.

Thus the bilateral contribution by Member States can-not be considered in isolation from their contribution to the abovementioned budget and fund. In this regard, this brochure does not use the OECD breakdown of net aid per capita as this can be misleading.

The added value of the substantial financial sums de-voted to mine action by the EU lies in common strategies underpinned by a common vision and common objec-tives.

The text of the multiannual strategy 2005–07, under im-plementation, is to be found in the website links below.

Full text of the EC mine action strategy and multian-nual indicative programme:

http://europa.eu/comm/external_relations/mine/intro/ip02_1798.htm

More detailed information on EC activities in the fight against landmines:

http://europa.eu./comm/external_relations/mine/intro/index.htm

Information on programmes and projects:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/europeaid/projects/index_en.htm

A complete update of EU research activities in this field:

http://eu-mine-actions.jrc.cec.eu.int/demining.asp

Daniela Dicorrado-AndreoniChair of the

European Commission’sMine Action Coordination Group

6

Message from Paula Lehtomäki

Dear reader,

I am delighted to have this opportunity to share with you my thoughts on the European Community’s and EU Member States’ continuing commitment to the fight against the suffering caused by anti-personnel landmines and unexploded ordnance (UXO) of war. Since we are up against one of the most serious threats to human security, I am convinced that the best way to respond to the common challenges is to coordinate our actions. The publication of this brochure serves as one instrument of coordination. It provides the reader with an update of the EU’s common resources and efforts in humanitarian mine action in 2005.

The EU as a whole is fully aware of how anti-personnel landmines and UXO thwart the development of the affected communities. The accomplishment of the primary objective of the millennium development goals — the eradication of extreme poverty — is severely hampered by the threat of landmines and UXO to the lives and livelihoods of many people. Therefore, humanitarian mine action should be seen in a broader context of development, as an integral element on the development continuum in the affected countries. Shaping this continuum must be demand-driven, responding to the needs of local communities, and managed in accordance with the poverty reduction strategies and national development plans of the country in question. Thus, the linking of mine action and development cooperation is a crucial challenge to both the affected countries and the international donor community.

The Mine Ban Treaty was signed in 1997. Since then, the European Community and the EU Member States have jointly been a major donor. In the period from

1997 to 2005, the financial support from the European Community and the Member States reached a total of EUR 1.2 billion. Since the Ottawa Convention has been in force, the affected countries in cooperation with the international community have managed to decrease considerably the number of new landmine victims. However, too many victims and, sadly too often, children are killed or injured by mines.

The overall goal of the EU is to ensure that there will be no further anti-personnel landmine victims. We are confident that this target is achievable. But there is still a long way to go. We remain committed to further strengthening of the international assistance in mine action. The EU specifically focuses on the thematic objectives of reducing the anti-personnel landmine threat, alleviating mine victim suffering, aiding socioeconomic reintegration and enhancing local and regional mine action capacity.

As the EU Presidency in the latter half of 2006, Finland will continue to support the implementation of the European Community’s and EU Member States’ ambitious mine action strategy towards a zero-victim target. We will jointly continue to assist our partner countries in their endeavours to include mine action considerations in their national development plans.

Paula LehtomäkiMinister for Foreign Trade and Development

of Finland

7

Message from Dr Benita Ferrero-Waldner

One of the biggest threats to security and development in today’s

unstable world is the legacy of war: the illicit spread of firearms and the anti-personnel landmines and explosive remnants of war that litter many former trouble spots.

Dealing with this legacy is one of the greatest human security challenges we face. How can we help countries develop when people live in fear of death or serious injury with every step they take? How can societies heal their wounds when their citizens are being hurt on a daily basis? Without a minimum level of security, development assistance doesn’t work.

At their summit in September 2005, members of the United Nations agreed that states have a responsibility to protect not just their borders but also their people. This ‘responsibility to protect’ is a key principle of human security, and now one of the international community’s core commitments.

The UN summit also recognised that development and security are mutually reinforcing and interdependent. Without peace there is no development, without development no peace.

This is what has been at the heart of the European Community’s assistance programmes, and why we have integrated our anti-landmine work into every aspect of our strategies and programmes.

Mine clearance, stockpile destruction, victim assistance and other programmes tackling the legacies of war bring multiple benefits. Aside from removing the

obvious security threats, they can help build confidence between former combatants by bringing the two sides together in cross-border clearance projects. They promote reconciliation and peace, as well as good governance and capacity building. And above all, they pave the way for development projects which reduce the likelihood of future combat.

In 2005 alone, the EU and its Member States contributed a total of EUR 150 million, including EUR 54 million from the European Commission. That brings total EU spending since 1997 to over EUR 1.2 billion.

This brochure sets out some of the programmes we have funded: a joint cross-border demining project between Ecuador and Peru; confidence-building demining in Sudan; the total clearance of anti-personnel landmines from Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Abkhazia region in Georgia; and stockpile destruction in Afghanistan. In addition, the Commission has more than doubled the money we spend to help the victims of landmines.

But we know we must continue to work hard if we are to achieve our goal: zero landmine victims. Our citizens and partners should rest assured — our commitment is as strong as ever and our work will go on.

Benita Ferrero-WaldnerEuropean Commissioner

responsible for external relations

8

List of commonly used acronyms

AIDCO EuropeAid Cooperation Office (service of the European Commission in charge of implementing the mine action strategy and programming)

APL anti-personnel landmine CCW Convention on Certain Conventional WeaponsCSP country strategy paperCTA chief technical adviserDEV Development Directorate-General (service of the European Commission responsible for CSP/NIP of

developing countries) EC European CommunityECHO European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid OfficeEDF European Development FundEOD explosive ordnance disposalEOR explosive ordnance reconnaissanceERW explosive remnants of warEU European UnionGICHD Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian De-miningHI Handicap InternationalICBL International Campaign to Ban LandminesICRC International Committee of the Red CrossIDPS internally displaced personsIMSMA information management system for mine actionITEP international test and evaluation programme for humanitarian de-miningITF International Trust Fund LIS landmine impact surveyLMM Landmine MonitorMBT Mine Ban Treaty (Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of

Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction)MDD mine dog detectionMIP multiannual indicative programmingMRE mine-risk educationNGO non-governmental organisationNIP national indicative programmeRMAC Regional Mine Action CentreRRM rapid reaction mechanismSAC Survey Action CentreSIDA Swedish International Development Cooperation AgencyUNICEF United Nations Children’s FundUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNMACC United Nations Mine Action Coordination CentreUNMAS United Nations Mine Action Service MASG Mine Action Support GroupUS United States (of America)UXO unexploded ordnance

The European Union mine actions in the world — 2006

11

Saving lives, limbs and livelihoods: the role of the European Union

‘Anti-personnel landmines and unexploded ordnance of war are undoubtedly among the most challenging threats to human security’ — Ms Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Euro-pean Commissioner responsible for external relations

Every year, between 10 000 and 15 000 innocent people, many of whom are children, fall victim to another land-mine. Anti-personal landmines (APLs) and unexploded ordnance (UXO) are the lethal legacies of decades of war and internal conflict. An estimated 167 million stockpiled anti-personnel landmines continue to blight the daily lives of men, women and children in over 84 countries worldwide. In Afghanistan alone, one of the most heav-ily affected countries, some 70–100 people are killed or injured every month due to APLs and UXO. Afghanistan, a country that has never produced landmines, is infected with an estimated 56 different types of mines originating from 10 different countries. The personal cost of continu-ing to keep, manufacture and use these devices is un-doubtedly huge. They also have dire consequences for the political, social and economic stability of the coun-tries concerned. In addition to individual suffering, the mutilation of victims places a heavy burden on countries

© M

AG

already struggling to make ends meet in terms of lost workforce and increased medical care. In post-conflict societies, APLs and UXO impede the return of refugees or of displaced people and hinder reconciliation, stabili-sation, economic recovery and development.

The need for action

It is for these reasons that the international community, spurred on by the tireless efforts of civil society in rais-ing awareness of the problem, decided to take action to persuade countries to cease the production, transfer, stockpiling and use of APLs. To this end, the Mine Ban Treaty (MBT), known officially as the Convention on the Prohibition and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on their Destruction, was signed by 122 governments in Ot-tawa, Canada, in December 1997. This single agreement, which entered into force in March 1999, was a significant step and proof of the international consensus to end the legitimate trading in these weapons. The MBT sets out to ‘put an end to the suffering and casualties caused by anti-personnel landmines’.

The first review of the MBT, held in Nairobi in Decem-ber 2004, presented an opportunity to take stock of the progress made in the intervening years and to outline the challenges ahead.

At the time of going to press the number of countries that had ratified the treaty, according to the International Cam-paign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), stood at 151 countries. A total of 43 countries, with a combined stockpile of some 160 million anti-personnel mines, remain outside of the Mine Ban Treaty. They include three of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, Russia and the United States); most of the Middle East; most of the former Soviet republics; and many Asian states (1).

The joint efforts, whether political, financial or technical, of all involved within the mine action community continue to encourage the remaining states not yet party to the treaty to adhere to ratify the MBT. Support for interna-tional mine action remains an important political priority for the European Union, and it continues to play a promi-nent role in achieving the ‘zero victim’ target.

(1) Landmine Monitor Report 2005: ‘Toward a mine-free world’,International Campaign to Ban Landmines, (October, 2004).

12

The European Community’s role

Did you know that the EU contributes half the global budget for mine action?

The European Community envisions a world free from the threat of anti-personnel landmines and unexploded ordnance, in which all mine-affected countries are able to take full control of their APL and UXO problems and to provide victims with prompt care and ongoing assistance.

The role of Europe within this broad mine action com-munity is multi-faceted; it plays a political role, a coordi-nating role and a financial role. Based upon this strong position and support, the EU has a role to play in using its political leverage and financial weight to convince more states to adhere to the principles of the MBT.

Political role

The overarching policy in EC mine action is to drastically reduce the lingering threat and impact of landmines in the context of increased local security and regional con-fidence...

…and to aim towards a ‘zero victim target’.

This goal encompasses the following three objectives:

• to reduce the anti-personnel landmine threat;• to alleviate mine victim suffering and aid socioeco-

nomic reintegration;• to enhance local and regional impacts of effective

mine action capacity.

Together the EU Member States and the European Com-mission are working to achieve the goals of the MBT. EU institutions have played a full role in international engage-ments, in regional seminars and workshops as well as in the Standing Committees of the Mine Ban Treaty and the annual meetings of the states parties (MSP). Both the Council of the European Union and the European Par-liament have made strong political commitments to the fight against APLs. The two regulations on action against anti-personnel landmines adopted on 23 July 2001 are proof of this commitment. These regulations, referred to collectively as the APL regulation (in the singular), cover: mine clearance operations (as well as detection surveys, marking and fencing of mined areas); the destruction of stockpiles and landmines; local capacity building includ-ing mine risk education and training, which ensures that mine-affected countries have the expertise and equip-ment to address the problem without long-term reliance on external assistance; and finally assistance to victims including their rehabilitation and socioeconomic reinte-gration.

Coordinating role

The EC cannot and does not work in isolation but con-tinues to coordinate its work with the EU Member States and other key players in the international arena, including organisations, donors and private campaigners all work-ing towards common goals as set out in the MBT. The United Nations, for example, is heavily involved in mine action, in particular through the United Nations Mine Ac-tion Service (UNMAS) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (Unicef). The UN offers a framework for mobilising global support for mine action and for coordinating the activities. Canada and Norway are very proactive and have been visible partners in implementing the MBT. Al-though not party to the MBT, the United States remains the world’s largest national donor through the US Depart-ment of State, the US Agency for International Develop-ment (USAID) and the US Department of Defence. The strategic EU–US relationship, which focuses on donor coordination, the pursuit of efficiency and effectiveness in local capacity, and fund raising, has been particularly welcomed by the beneficiary countries and has been recognised as a positive element of interaction with EC mine action.

The important role being played by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines and its network of NGOs, both in the collection of up-to-date information by the Landmine Monitor, as well as awareness raising and ad-vocacy, has continued to have a significant impact. Simi-

© M

AG

EC

Delegation to A

ngola

13

larly, the dedicated work of the International Committee of the Red Cross, in particular in mine victim assistance, continues to contribute greatly to the challenge of allevi-ating human suffering.

Established coordination mechanisms, such as the South-Eastern Europe Mine Action Coordination Coun-cil (SEEMACC), and trust fund mechanisms, such as the International Trust Fund for De-mining and Mine Victims Assistance (ITF), have increased cooperation in south-eastern Europe. These lead the way for other mine-af-fected regions.

The EC will continue to help set the common objectives among its partners and promote the mobilisation of com-bined resources.

Financial role

Political support for mine action has gathered pace within Europe in recent years and has also been clearly matched with financial support. In 2005 alone, the EU (European Community and Member States) contributed a total of more than EUR 156 million, including almost EUR 60 million from the EC. The overall financial support from the EU between 1997 and 2005 reached a record high of over EUR 1.2 billion, representing half of the total global budget for mine action. The EU continues to be the most significant donor worldwide. This financial sup-port enables the EU to play a prominent role within the mine action community and the EU continues to strive for a significant long-term impact on the mine problem.

These funds are used to support mine actions in six de-fined regions: Central/Latin America, Caucasus and cen-tral Asia, Asia-Pacific, Middle East, Africa and Europe.

Africa and Caucasus and central Asia have been the key areas of EC spending in recent years (together account-ing for 60 % of the EC mine action budget in 2005). EU assistance focuses on the ‘most afflicted countries’ in-cluding Afghanistan, Angola, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Croatia, northern Iraq, Kosovo, Laos, Mo-zambique, Nicaragua, Somalia and Zimbabwe.

For more information concerning the overall EC contri-bution, see the table ‘2002–05 Yearly totals: APL and

© M

AG Where is the money spent and why?

In focusing geographically, the EC ensures that the following criteria are applied when choosing particular regions to support:

• commitment to the Mine Ban Treaty;

• high humanitarian and developmental need;

• strategic importance for the European Union;

• sustainability and coherence with wider assist-ance;

• proven commitment of non-states parties to mine action and the principles of the MBT;

• efficiency and effectiveness of local/national mine action planning and programmes.

In addition to this, the following guidelines and rec-ommendations (based on the mine action operations listed in Article 2 of the APL regulation) are also taken into consideration before funding a particular project.

1. Actions to be undertaken should contribute to the implementation of the national priorities. Further in-tegration of mine action priorities into national de-velopment priorities is to be considered the ideal target for projects.

2. Mine clearance should increasingly prioritise mined areas of highest impact on the local populations.

3. Mine risk education, surveying and marking of sus-pected or affected areas are closely interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Composite projects cov-ering these activities have added value.

4. Landmine victim and rehabilitation assistance should provide infrastructural connections with the national health systems in view of full and sustain-able integration, where this is not yet the case.

5. Implementation of the projects should be entrusted to local or national mine action entities whenever possible.

The Commission services intend to elaborate more detailed guidelines launched before the end of 2006, in cooperation with EU Member States within the framework of the APL Expert Group.

14

geographical budget lines’, p.xxx. More information on specific countries within these regions is included in the country-specific profiles.

The EC’s ongoing commitment

The EC will continue its commitment to reduce the hu-man risk of landmines as well as increase its assistance to mine victims. These commitments are aimed at ful-filling the following three key objectives of EC mine ac-tion.

n Reducing the threat from anti-personnel landmines

The priority will continue to be on landmine clearance in ‘high-impact areas’, which includes areas where land-mines prevent easy access to water, agricultural land, roads and so on. The EC will also increase its focus on the marking and fencing of medium- and low-impact areas. In parallel, mine risk education programmes will help to raise local awareness of the dangers and prevent future injuries and fatalities. In the worst mine-affected areas, the need for increased awareness remains high.

The EC will continue to provide donor assistance to states parties in order that they meet their legal obliga-tions under the MBT, the most immediate of which re-late to stockpile destruction. The preventive action of destroying landmines in stockpiles or dumping grounds helps to reduce the risk that further APLs will be replant-ed and improves regional security by building mutual confidence and trust. These measures also contribute to the wider goals of non-proliferation and conventional disarmament.

The EU will continue to further the universalisation of the Mine Ban Treaty by impressing upon non-states parties to the MBT the real benefits for security and stability that can be gained by destroying stockpiles and ceasing the further use, production and transfer of APLs. Clearing mine-affected areas within the territory of non-states parties offers neither a guarantee to the international community, nor to the local populations affected, that landmines will not be relaid in the future, but at least it is a step in the right direction.

It is hoped that this collective package will reduce the threat from and the casualties of anti-personnel land-mines.

n Assisting the victims of APLs

Much of the past international mine action has focused on landmine threat reduction — as a primary priority

© S

panish M

FA (E

du Fernand

ez)

— in order to prevent as far as possible further landmine casualties. Significant progress has already been made in this area, but there is a strong need to address the on-going difficulties faced by both the landmine victims and the authorities that have to care for them. For the most severely affected countries, acquiring the necessary ma-terials and institutional resources to address survivors’ needs is a major challenge. National medical capacity is often limited to the largest population centres far from the local communities that suffer from landmine casual-ties. Consequently, many victims face severe difficulties in accessing the urgent care they need. The EC strat-egy in this area will continue to build upon existing na-tional structures and policies, bridging (temporary) gaps and/or giving technical assistance to build and reinforce these structures, in close integration with development assistance programmes.

There is also a need to focus on the long-term rehabilita-tion of mine victims. Components of victim assistance such as professional training, job finding, adult educa-tion, and so on, can enable the disabled to become more self-sufficient. An integrated approach including medi-cal capacity building and socioeconomic rehabilitation

15

and reintegration are the key components of the EC re-sponse. Wherever possible, this will be mainstreamed into wider health sector development and social rehabili-tation programmes to ensure long-term sustainability.

n Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of mine action

By incorporating the lessons learned from mine action into future activities, their effectiveness and efficiency can be improved to ensure that the benefits and impacts of the assistance are maximised. The EC will address this issue through several means. Local capacity build-ing will continue to be supported where needed to im-prove the impact and effectiveness of local structures to combat the landmine problem. Reducing the depend-ence of local structures on expensive expatriate staff, as well as introducing auditing skills, are also important priorities. Furthermore, initiatives at regional level will be supported in order to enable sharing of expertise and capacity. To this end, the use of existing landmine im-pact surveys to help prioritise operations will be encour-aged. The EC will also tackle specific gaps identified by the mine action community as technical hindrances with major impacts.

Significant funding over the recent years, including through the previous EC strategy, has supported the de-velopment and testing of new mine action technology.There is now a real need to ensure that this investment bears fruit by ensuring that the most appropriate, cost-effective and efficient technologies are used in the field.The EC will continue to channel its efforts in fielding in-novative and promising technologies and equipment.

The EC will also help to address the difficulty in coordi-nating donors’ assistance, both at field and at strategic level, to improve the collective impact. The European Commission will also help increase coordination and ex-change of information, on an international level, between the EU Member States as well as strategic partners and, on a national level, between donors, operators and lo-cal authorities within affected countries. The EC will take steps to address the difficulty in enabling closer interac-tion between mine action and development programmes and will support activities to raise the international com-munity’s awareness of landmine issues through advo-cacy, campaigning and monitoring activities. Addition-ally, an extensive evaluation of the previous strategy and activities it supported will also be conducted to learn further lessons and share these with the international community.

What is becoming evident is that more attention, than has been given in the past, should be focused on integrating mine action into infrastructure rehabilitation (i.e. energy and water supply) as well as into the rehabilitation of

roads and agricultural planning. Similarly, NGOs should be encouraged to incorporate socioeconomic indicators in their programmes to help increase the socioeconomic impacts that can be linked to mine clearance. Likewise, development experts, or mine experts with a develop-ment background, should be included within technical assistance projects, especially when directed at nation-al or local authorities. In addition, the decentralisation process within the European Commission, which at the time of writing was about to be completed, whereby ex-ternal aid projects are to be managed by the delegations of the European Commission in the beneficiary countries themselves, will further enhance the integration of mine action. The delegations will implement the entirety of the external aid programmes and will be able to better coor-dinate the different in-country programmes.

A brighter future

In the seven years since the signature of the MBT, the international community has made significant progress in alleviating the widespread personal suffering and eco-nomic burden that APLs and UXO have on some of the world’s poorest nations.

• We have seen the destruction of 38 million stockpiled anti-personal landmines (1999–2006) by those 73 states parties to the Mine Ban Treaty who declared possessing stockpiles of anti-personnel mines (2).

• Large areas of the world that were seriously affected by these weapons have now been cleared and made safe.

• The number of victims has dropped dramatically.

• There are no more state transfers of landmines, (pre-viously 34) and the number of states where mines are used has similarly dropped from 19 (in 1997) to no more than 4 (in 2005) (3).

• Year after year, mine action programmes, including programmes for victim assistance, are being imple-mented with increasing efficiency and effectiveness through cooperation between civil society, govern-ments and international organisations.

There is still a long way to go before we can rid the world completely of the scourge of landmines. Together with our partners, the EC will continue to be at the forefront of efforts to stop the terrible human suffering that mines cause and fight for a ‘zero victim’ target.

(2) Source: Landmine Monitor fact sheet: ‘Stockpile destruction’, May2006.

(3) Source: Landmine Monitor Report 2005, ‘Toward a mine-free world’,October 2005, p. 1.

16

Africa

ATLANTIC OCEAN

INDIANOCEAN

MEDITERRANEANSEA

Black Sea CaspianSea

ATLANTIC OCEAN

SOUTH AFRICA

NAMIBIA

BOTSWANA

ZAMBIA

ZIMBABWE

MALAWI

MADAGASCAR

TANZANIA

RWANDA

KENYA

DJIBOUTI

YEMEN

SAUDI ARABIA

QATAR

BAHRAIN

KUWAIT

IRAN

AZERBAIJANAZ.

GEORGIA

ARMENIA

JORDAN

IRAQ

SYRIA

ISRAEL

LEBANON

CYPRUS

TURKEY

EGYPTLIBYA

GREECE

ALBANIA

F.Y.R.MACE.

BULGARIA

SERBIA

MONT.

CROATIA

BOS &HERZE.

SLOVENIA

MOLDOVA

RUSSIA

KAZAKHSTAN

ROMANIAHUNGARYAUSTRIASWITZERLAND

FRANCE

ITALY

SANMARINOMON.

ANDORRA

SPAINPORTUGAL

MOROCCO

ALGERIA

MALTA

NIGERMALI

THE GAMBIA

GUINEA

LIBERIA

SIERRALEONE

CÔTED'IVOIRE

BURKINAFASO

GHANA

TOGONIGERIA

CAMEROON

EQUATORIALGUINEA

SÃO TOMÉ & PRÍNCIPE

GABON

CENTRALAFRICAN REPUBLIC

LESOTHO

SWAZILAND

CONGO

ANGOLA

THE DEM. REP.OF CONGO

BENINSOMALIA

ERITREA

SUDAN

MOZAMBIQUE

ETHIOPIA

GUINEA-BISSAU

SENEGAL

BURUNDI

UGANDA

MAURITANIA

CHAD

TUNISIA

Luanda

Kinshasa

Addis Ababa

Asmara

Khartoum

Mogadishu

Maputo

Bissau

Dakar

Nouakchott

Porto-Novo

Kampala

Bujumbura

N'Djaména

AFRICA

17

REGION-WIDE

TOTAL EU 2005 581.773

AUSTRIA 214.000 • ICRC Fund for the Disabled: victim assistance• International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL): victim assistance in east Africa

CZECH REPUBLIC 69.820 • UNDDA: mine clearance and mine risk education in Angola and Zambia

FINLAND 200.000 • Unicef: mine awareness plan in Sudan and Eritrea

IRELAND 40.000 • UNMAS Voluntary Trust Fund: integrated mine action, support to the UN Mission inEthiopia and to Eritrea’s Mine Action Coordination Center

NETHERLANDS 57.953 • Landmine Action UK: mine risk education

EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2004

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY +MEMBER STATES

EUR 7.059.244 • Total amount of support in Africa for the period 1999–2004

© M

AG

AFRICA

18

Angola is still one of the most heavily mined countries in the world, af-fected both by mines and unexploded ordnance (UXO). At different lev-els, all 18 provinces are thought to be affected.

The main challenge of the national mine action authority, the Comissão Nacional Intersectorial de Desminagem e Assistência Humanitária (CNI-DAH), is still the decentralisation of the coordination of the sector to the provincial level, to disseminate accurate information to partners and to follow the increased demand to ensure and control the quality of the demining activities conducted in the country.

The Mine Ban Treaty was ratified in July 2002; in the convention it is foreseen that Angola should remove all anti-personal landmines in a 10-year period. Angola does not produce or export landmines, and a United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) project funded by the EC (EUR 1.5 million) is ongoing for the destruction, until the end of 2006, of the anti-personnel mines in stock.

Mine action is a top priority in the Community strategy paper/national indicative programme (CSP/NIP) with EUR 26 million allocated for 2004–06 for demining operations integrated with the reconstruction of bridges, logistics and rehabilitation of secondary roads. These funds represent about 30–40 % of the total support to mine action in the country, and are intended to follow the emergency programme supporting the peace process (EUR 30 million) which included a demining component.

Under the previous multiannual strategy and programming, the EC sup-ported the landmine impact survey (LIS) with EUR 1.5 million. The LIS was launched and took place during 2004 and 2005, in order to de-termine the social and economic impact of the contamination on the communities. Up to now, 80 % of the country is covered, missing the northern provinces of Uige and Zaire (to be completed in September) and the Bengo and Cabinda provinces. The collected information was used as a baseline for the ongoing preparation of the strategic planning for the period 2006–10. The LIS identified 2 900 mine-suspected areas, covering approximately 1 300–1 400 km2, affecting 1 900 localities (8.6%of the existing communities) with an estimated 2.2 million people (16 % of the population).

The impact scores are determined as high for 2 % of the affected com-munities, medium for 24 % and low for 74 %. The identified blockages are 50 % for restricting access to agricultural land, 21 % to firewood, building materials and herbs, and 10 % for limited access to roads and paths.

After the increased number of mine incidents in 2003, particularly those involving anti-vehicle mines in roads, a result of the intense movement of people and goods following the ceasefire agreement of 4 April 2002, in the last three years the number of mine/UXO victims has been reduc-ing, from 270 in 2003 to 187 in 2004 and 67 in 2005. Less than 30 % of the population has access to specific healthcare with nine national orthopaedic centres available for mine survivors; 30 to 50 % of mine injuries are fatal.

CABINDA

ATLANTICOCEAN

BOTSWANANAMIBIA

ZAMBIA

DEMOCRATICREPUBLIC OF

CONGO

ANGOLALobito Luena

MenongueLubango

Luanda

KinshasaBrazzaville

Angola

Area (land): 1 246 700 km2

Capital: LuandaCurrency: kwanza (AOA)Population: 12 127 071 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 3 200 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth:

• total population: 38.62 years• female: 39.83 years (2006 est.)• male: 37.47 years

Natural resources: petroleum, diamonds, iron ore,phosphates, copper, feldspar, gold, bauxite, uraniumClimate: semiarid in south and along coast toLuanda; north has cool, dry season (May to October) and hot, rainy season (November to April)Terrain: narrow coastal plain rises abruptly to vastinterior plateauLand use: • arable land: 2.65 %

• permanent crops: 0.23 %• other: 97.12 % (2005 est.)

Mine Ban Treaty adherence position

Ratified

ANGOLA

AFRICA

19

The humanitarian demining operational capacity in the country has prin-cipally been developed by international NGOs since 1995, and has in-creased considerably in the last years, in large part supported by the European Development Fund (EDF), with the clearance of 5 km2/year in 2003 to 10.6 km2/year in 2004, and 10.8 km2/year in 2005.

The government has been supporting the development of the National Demining Institute (INAD), increasing its operational capacity to support reconstruction tasks, such as the main railways lines of the country. The government also intends to invest considerable funds in equipment both for INAD and the military engineers of the armed forces. Training in na-tional humanitarian standards, already introduced in the country by CNI-DAH, constitutes a major concern for those new actors in the sector.

EU EXPENDITURE 1999–04: EUR 19.625.588

TOTAL EU 2005 19.625.588

DENMARK 1.008.010 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/DanChurchAid: mine clearance and mine risk education

FINLAND 966.000 • HALO Trust: mine clearance• FinnChurchAid: mine clearance• FRC/ICRC: support to ICRC’s mine victim assistance programme

FRANCE 1.800.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Geomine: mine clearance in the province of Huambo• Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Handicap/local operators: assistance to victims and

resettlement of the displaced persons

GERMANY 2.774.244 • Medico international: mine clearance in the province of Moxico• Menschen gegen Minen: mine clearance in the provinces of Kunene and Kuando

Kubango• Stiftung Sankt Barbara: mine clearance in the province of Benguela• GTZ: rehabilitation of mine victims

IRELAND 200.000 • Handicap International: mine education

ITALY 606.600 • General mine action

NETHERLANDS 2.055.935 • Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA): clearance/mine risk education• Handicap: victim assistance• MAG: clearance/mine risk education

PORTUGAL • PNUD: mine assistance (in-kind contribution)

SPAIN 160.000 • AECI/NPA: mine clearance of a road in Samboto Place, municipality of Hungulo (Huambo)

SWEDEN 855.615 • SIDA: support through Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) — mine clearance

UNITED KINGDOM 1.131.100 • MAG: GICHD Ottawa sponsorship support• HALO: Geneva Call core contribution

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

8.068.084 • NPA: demining• UNDP: demining• UNDP: institutional support• UNDP: disposal of stockpiled anti-personnel land mines• Technical assistance• Handicap BE: victim assistance

© M

AG

AFRICA

20

BENIN

Gulf of Guinea

NIGERIATOGO

GHANA

BURKINA FASONIGER

BENINParakou

Kandi

Natitingou

Cotonou

Porto-Novo

Accra

Ouagadougou

Niamey

Lomé


Ratified

TOTAL EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: EUR 1.388.080

TOTAL EU 2005 IN KIND

FRANCE In kind • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Mindef: support to OuidahRegional Centre of demining

Benin

Area (land): 110 620 km2

Capital: Porto-Novo is the official capital; Cotonou isthe seat of governmentCurrency: Communauté Financière Africaine franc(XOF); NB: responsible authority is the Central Bank ofthe West African StatesPopulation: 7 862 944. NB: estimates for this countryexplicitly take into account the effects of excessmortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower lifeexpectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates,lower population and growth rates, and changes in thedistribution of population by age and sex than wouldotherwise be expected (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 100 (2006 est.)Life expectancy at birth:


Natural resources: small offshore oil deposits,limestone, marble, timberClimate: tropical; hot, humid in south; semiarid innorthTerrain: mostly flat to undulating plain; some hills andlow mountainsLand use: • arable land: 23.53 %

• permanent crops: 2.37 %• other: 74.1 % (2005)

Benin does not have a mine problem on its territory. Since 2002, France has provided financial support for the establishment and operation of a regional mine clearance training centre.

Benin has not produced or stockpiled anti-personnel mines.

© IC

BL (M

ercedes S

ayaguess)

AFRICA

21

BURUNDI


Ratified

TOTAL EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: EUR 132.000

TOTAL EU 2005 1.502.742

BELGIUM 502.742 • DANCHURCH Aid:mine clearance in the provinceof Makamba

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

1.000.000 • DANCHURCH Aid:Humanitarian Mine Action withfocus on Makamba

Burundi


Capital: BujumburaCurrency: Burundi franc (BIF)Population: 8 090 068. NB: estimates for this countryexplicitly take into account the effects of excessmortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower lifeexpectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates,lower population and growth rates, and changes in thedistribution of population by age and sex than wouldotherwise be expected (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 600 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 50.81 years • female: 51.58 years (2006 est.) • male: 50.07 yearsNatural resources: nickel, uranium, rare earth oxides,peat, cobalt, copper, platinum, vanadium, arable land,hydropower, niobium, tantalum, gold, tin, tungsten,kaolin, limestoneClimate: equatorial; high plateau with considerablealtitude variation (772 m to 2 670 m above sea level);average annual temperature varies with altitude from23 to 17 °C but is generally moderate as the averagealtitude is about 1 700 m; average annual rainfall isabout 150 cm; wet seasons from February to May andSeptember to November, and dry seasons from June toAugust and December to JanuaryTerrain: hilly and mountainous, dropping to a plateauin east, some plainsLand use: • arable land: 35.57 % • permanent crops: 13.12 % • other: 51.31 % (2005)

Fourteen areas have been identified as mined or suspected to be mined in five different provinces.

The UN peacekeeping mission in Burundi (ONUB), established on 1 June 2004, is authorised to coordinate and conduct mine action activities.UNMAS is establishing a mine action centre at ONUB headquarters.Between July and November 2003, with the support of Unicef, Burundi conducted a mine-risk education campaign in the five most mine-af-fected provinces. In 2003, 174 new civilian mine/UXO casualties were reported, representing a significant increase from the 114 casualties re-ported in 2002.

Burundi does not have a national mine action programme yet. With the help of Unicef, a mine-risk education programme has been functioning since July 2003.

Burundi is not known to have produced or exported anti-personnel mines.

© M

AG

AFRICA

22

The Republic of Chad became a state party to the Mine Ban Treaty in November 1994.

National implementation legislation is in the approval process. Chad stated its objective to be ‘free of the impact of mines and UXO before the end of 2010’.

From May 2004 to April 2005, 244 227 m2 were cleared of mines and 2.68 km2 were cleared through battle area clearance.

At the First Review Conference, Chad was identified as one of 24 states parties with the greatest needs and responsibility to provide adequate survivor assistance.

Chad is not known to have produced or exported anti-personnel mines.Chad completed destruction of its stockpile of 4 490 anti-personnel mines in January 2003. It has not retained any mines for training pur-poses. After completion of the destruction programme, the National Demining Office in August 2003 destroyed 207 PMA3 anti-personnel mines that had been newly discovered in a container abandoned by the Libyan army.

The mine problem in Chad is a result of decades of internal conflict and the 1973 Libyan invasion. Most of the known mined areas are lo-cated in the Borkou–Ennedi–Tibesti region in the north, and in the Biltine and Ouaddai regions in the east, with lesser-mined areas in the west and south. There is also a serious problem of contamination with UXO throughout the country, especially in the north and east.

In December 2005, a project was started aimed at clearing all known arms caches and water points from mines and UXO in the region of Borkou and Ennedi in northern Chad. Completion of this project is scheduled for 2007.

The Chadian army recruited 120 deminers in 2004 and training started in January 2005, under a cooperation project with France.

(*) Text based on the Landmine Monitor Report 2005

NIGER

NIGERIA

LIBYAEGYPT

SUDAN

CAMEROONCENTRAL AFRICAN

REPUBLIC

Faya(Largeau)

MoundouSarh

Am Timan

Abéché

N'Djaména

CHAD

Chad

Area (land): 1 259 200 km2

Capital: N’DjamenaCurrency: Communauté Financière Africaine franc(XAF); NB: responsible authority is the Bank of theCentral African StatesPopulation: 9 944 201 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth:


Natural resources: petroleum, uranium, natron,kaolin, fish (Lake Chad), gold, limestone, sand andgravel, saltClimate: tropical in south, desert in northTerrain: broad, arid plains in centre, desert in north,mountains in north-west, lowlands in southLand use: • arable land: 2.8 % • permanent crops: 0.02 % • other: 97.18 % (2005)


Ratified

CHAD



FRANCE In kind • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Mindef: training activities

AFRICA

23

DEMOCRATAA IC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO


Ratified

CONGO

CAMEROON

ANGOLA

ZAMBIA

GABON

SUDANCENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

DEMOCRATICREPUBLIC OF CONGO

Kinshasa

Yaoundé

Luanda

Brazzaville

Bangui

Kigali

Bujumbura

Lubumbashi

Likasi

Kananga

Kisangani

Kikwit

Matadi Mbuji-Mayi

Democratic Republic of Congo

Area (land): 2 267 600 km2

Capital: KinshasaCurrency: Congolese franc (CDF)Population: 62 660 551. NB: estimates for this countryexplicitly take into account the effects of excessmortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower lifeexpectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates,lower population and growth rates, and changes in thedistribution of population by age and sex than wouldotherwise be expected (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 51.46 years • female: 52.94 years (2006 est.) • male: 50.01 yearsNatural resources: cobalt, copper, niobium, tantalum,petroleum, industrial and gem diamonds, gold, silver,zinc, manganese, tin, uranium, coal, hydropower,timberClimate: tropical; hot and humid in equatorial riverbasin; cooler and drier in southern highlands; coolerand wetter in eastern highlands; north of Equator —wet season April to October, dry season December toFebruary; south of Equator — wet season NovembertoMarch, dry season April to OctoberTerrain: vast central basin is a low-lying plateau;mountains in eastLand use: • arable land: 2.86 %

• permanent crops: 0.47 %• other: 96.67 % (2005)

Landmines and UXO have been, and continue to be, a significant feature inmocratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), a post-conflict country wherebetween armed groups still occur regularly.yy No nation-wide survey or

assessment has been conducted in the DRC. The country has no nationalbudget for mine action and no nation-wide data-collection mechanism,although the government demonstrated a certain interest in the situationas two presidential advisors have been employed recently.yy Officials have

ed the need for an urgent LIS.

curity Council Resolution 1291 of 2000 created the United NationsOrganisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC), with a mandate to develop an action plan for the implementation of the Lu-saka agreement, including assessment and action on landmines and UXO.The United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) established the Mine Ac-tion Coordination Center (MACC) in Kinshasa and two regional offices in Bunia and Bukavu.

The national mine action strategy is currently defined by the United Nations and implemented by the UN Mine Action Coordination Center (UNMACC).UNMACC, as focal point for mine action in the DRC, is to provide expertiseto MONUC, to the national authorities and to the humanitarian community,through coordination and assistance in implementing mine action activities.Its primary objectives are: to develop and maintain a reliable mine/UXO in-formation system, based on the information management system for mineaction (IMSMA); to deploy several mobile survey teams to implement emer-rrgency surveys; to implement emergency mine action activities; to assistUnicef in developing a nation-wide mine risk education (MRE) campaign; and to coordinate humanitarian mine actions realised throughout the coun-try by international NGOs such as the Mines Advisory Group, HandicapInternational Belgium and DanChurchAid. UNMACC also assists MONUCin implementing urgent survey operations of suspected mined airfields.

By January 2006, 1 249 dangerous areas had been registered by the UNMine Action Coordination Center (UNMACC), compared with the 366 re-ported in June 2004. In 2005 alone, 555 new dangerous areas have beenlisted.

The DRC government is not known to have produced or exported anti-per-rrsonnel mines, but in the past acquired them from different sources. Securityin the area between the DRC, Sudan and Uganda is threatened by the pres-ence of numerous anti-personnel landmine (APL) dumping grounds. Theregional impact of APL- and UXO-related problems in this area will repre-sent one focus of EC mine action identified for these three countries. In thiscontext, support for the destruction of stockpiles is highly recommended.EC mine action will furthermore focus on the Katanga province where dan-gerous zones have been identified and the return of refugees and internallydisplaced persons create new risks. Landmine technical surveys linked tocommunity-based mine risk education are needed to focus assistance onareas of the highest impact and thus to act on priority needs.

>>>

AFRICA

24


TOTAL EU 2005 2.786.665

BELGIUM 369.222

9.000 (in-kindcontribution)

• MAG: humanitarian mine action in south-east Congo

• Ministry of Defence: UXO clearance diver experts to manage ammunition storage anddestroy dangerous ammunitions

DENMARK 671.998 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/DanChurchAid: mine risk education and victim assistance

GERMANY 350.000 • DanChurchAid: mine clearance in Katanga province

NETHERLANDS 250.000 • UNMAS: clearance/mine risk education

SWEDEN 1.002.160 • SIDA: mine clearance, support through the Mines Advisory Group (MAG)

UNITED KINGDOM 134.285 • MAG: integrated mine action

© IC

BL (M

ercedes S

ayaguess)<<< DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

AFRICA

25

ERITREA


Ratified

Red Sea

SUDAN

ETHIOPIADJIBOUTI

SOMALIA

YEMEN

SAUDI ARABIA

Asmara

Djibouti

Sana'a

ERITREAMassawa

Adi Ugri

Ed

Assab

Eritrea


Capital: AsmaraCurrency: nakfa (ERN)Population: 4 786 994 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 000 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 59.03 years • female: 60.66 years (2006 est.) • male: 57.44 yearsNatural resources: gold, potash, zinc, copper, salt,possibly oil and natural gas, fishClimate: hot, dry desert strip along Red Sea coast;cooler and wetter in the central highlands (up to 61cm of rainfall annually); semiarid in western hills andlowlandsTerrain: dominated by extension of Ethiopian north–south trending highlands, descending on the east to acoastal desert plain, on the north-west to hilly terrainand on the south-west to flat-to-rolling plainsLand use: • arable land: 4.78 % • permanent crops: 0.03 % • other: 95.19 % (2005)

After three decades of protracted war and two and a half years of border conflict, Eritrea has a significant landmine and UXO problem. One third of the communities are affected. The main contamination is along the 1 000 kmborder between Ethiopia and Eritrea, due to the recent armed conflict.

An LIS (co-financed by the EC) identified 481 mine-affected communitiesand approximately 129 km2 of suspected mined area. There are a total of 132mined areas under the control of Eritrea, with 87 of these considered high ormedium impact.

The United Nations Mission on Eritrea and Ethiopia Mine Action Coordina-tion Center was established in August 2000 following the cessation of hostili-ties. It supported the development of the Eritrean mine action programme, asthe coordinating body to oversee mine action, and the creation of a nationaldemining NGO.

Eritrea’s objectives for the period 2005–09 include: completing technical sur-rrveys, marking, clearance and mine risk education to enable 65 000 internallydisplaced persons to return by the end of 2006; clearing the remaining 116high- and medium-impacted communities by the end of 2009, clearing ap-proximately 48 km2 of land; and reducing casualties through mine risk edu-cation and by marking in the 344 low-impact communities. From 2000 toJune 2004, Eritrea cleared 52 484 762 m2, destroying 4 781 anti-personnelmines and 50 399 UXO. Eritrea states it has never produced or exported anti-personnel mines and claims it obtained all the mines it used from Ethiopian forces during the 1961–91 wars for independence. Eritrean government of-ficials have estimated a stockpile of some 450 000 anti-personnel mines priorto the 1998–2000 conflict. Between 1999 and 2005, the EU (EC and MemberStates) has heavily funded Eritrea’s capacity building for mine action.


TOTAL EU 2005 628.052

GERMANY 193.860 UNMAS: activities of UNMACC

SWEDEN 434.192 SIDA: support through Swedish Rescue Services Agency (SRSA)

AFRICA

26

ETHIOPIA


Ratified


TOTAL EU 2005 865.600

FINLAND 200.000 • NPA: support to mine detection dog capacity and technical survey capacity

GERMANY 250.000 • UNDP: procurement of demining equipment

NETHERLANDS 300.000 • UNDP: CAPACITY BUILDING

UNITED KINGDOM 115.600 • Armor Group: demining dog teams

RedSea

INDIANOCEAN

SOMALIA

KENYA

SUDAN

UGANDA

YEMEN

ERITREA

DJIBOUTI

ETHIOPIA

Gonder

Harer

Sodo

Mega

Addis Ababa

Mogadishu

Djibouti

AsmaraSana'a

Ethiopia

Area (land): 1 119 683 km2

Capital: Addis AbabaCurrency: birr (ETB)Population: 74 777 981. NB: estimates for this countryexplicitly take into account the effects of excessmortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower lifeexpectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates,lower population and growth rates, and changes in thedistribution of population by age and sex than wouldotherwise be expected (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 49.03 years • female: 50.24 years (2006 est.) • male: 47.86 yearsNatural resources: small reserves of gold, platinum,copper, potash, natural gas, hydropowerClimate: tropical monsoon with wide topographic-induced variationTerrain: high plateau with central mountain rangedivided by Great Rift ValleyLand use: • arable land: 10.01 % • permanent crops: 0.65 % • other: 89.34 % (2005)

Ethiopia has a significant landmine/UXO contamination problem resulting from successive conflicts over the past 70 years. The problem primarily af-fects the border regions with Eritrea, Somalia and Sudan.

The EC-supported LIS was completed in March 2004. It indicates that more than 1.9 million people in 1 492 communities are affected by landmine/UXO contamination. A total of 152 communities were high impact, 308 medium impact and 1 032 low impact. Over half of the affected communities report-ed blocked access to pasture land, and over one third reported blockage to local roads, trails and crop land. Three regions in northern and eastern Ethio-pia (Afar, Somalia and Tigray) account for 86 % of the landmine impact in the country. The remaining 14 % of high-impacted communities are located in the Amhara, Dire Dawa, Gambella and Orimiya regions.

During the 1998–2000 border conflict, Ethiopian forces laid an estimated 150 000 to 200 000 mines and Eritrean forces laid an estimated 240 000 mines. The United Nations Mission on Eritrea and Ethiopia Mine Action Coordination Center was established in August 2000, following the cessa-tion of hostilities. The government created the Ethiopian Mine Action Office (EMAO) in February 2001. EMAO started humanitarian demining operations in mid–2002. By February 2004, the EMAO reported having cleared 4.6 mil-lion m2 of land.

Ethiopia has stated that it does not produce anti-personnel mines and has not imported anti-personnel mines since the overthrow of the Mengistu re-gime in 1991. The size of Ethiopia’s stockpile of anti-personnel mines re-mains unknown. In 2006, the European Commission Delegation will provide EUR 8 million (European Development Fund) for a three-year, large-scale demining project in the country’s northern and north-eastern areas.

AFRICA

27

GUINEA-BISSAU


Ratified

Bissau

Conakry

Banjul

ATLANTICOCEAN

Bafatá

Béli

Catió

Cacheu

THEGAMBIA

GUINEA

SENEGAL

GUINEA-BISSAU

Guinea-Bissau


Capital: BissauCurrency: Communauté Financière Africaine franc(XOF). NB: responsible authority is the Central Bank ofthe West African StatesPopulation: 1 442 029 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 46.87 years • female: 48.75 years (2002 est.) • male: 45.05 yearsNatural resources: fish, timber, phosphates, bauxite,unexploited deposits of petroleumClimate: tropical; generally hot and humid; monsoon-type rainy season (June to November) with south-westerly winds; dry season (December to May) withnorth-easterly harmattan windsTerrain: mostly low coastal plain rising to savanna ineastLand use: • arable land: 8.31 % • permanent crops: 6.92 % • other: 84.77 % (2005)

The landmine and UXO problem in Guinea-Bissau was primarily the result of the military conflict of the late 1990s. A significant number of mines are also attributed to foreign troops involved in the conflict. Mines continued to proliferate with the latest conflict between the Casamance rebels and the Bissau Guinean army at the northern border.

In order to measure the extent of the problem, a general impact survey of Bissau’s suspected areas was launched in 2004. Seventeen suspected minefields have been identified in areas in Bissau and its surroundings.Other suspected areas exist in the east and the northern region bordering Senegal.

The National Mine Action Center (Centro Nacional de Coordenacao da Ac-cao Anti-Minas — CAAMI) was established in March 2001, and a draft na-tional humanitarian mine action programme (PAAMI) was prepared in early 2001. Guinea-Bissau’s objectives during the period 2005–09 include the fol-lowing: marking all suspected areas in Bissau by 2005; addressing the mine and UXO problem by 2006; identifying and marking all other suspected ar-eas by 2008; addressing the mine and UXO problem in these areas outside the capital city of Bissau by 2009. Casualties continued to be reported in 2003. Capacities for the care and rehabilitation of mine/UXO casualties are severely limited in Guinea-Bissau as the healthcare system was seriously affected by the 1998/99 conflict. Guinea-Bissau reports that it has never produced anti-personnel mines and that no mine production facilities exist.Guinea-Bissau is not known to have ever exported anti-personnel mines.


TOTAL EU 2005 701.342

GERMANY 89.782 • UNDP: mine clearance activities of Lutcam

UNITED KINGDOM 11.560 • Cleared Ground: demining report UXO problem

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

600.000 • Handicap International: capacity building

AFRICA

28

MAURITANIA


Ratified

TOTAL EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: NO PRIOR EXPENDITURE


FRANCE In kind • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Mindef: training of an officer in France (ESAG)

Nouakchott

Bissau

BanjulBamako

Dakar

Fdérik

Laayoune

ALGERIA

MALI

SENEGAL

M A U R I TA N I A

THE GAMBIA

WESTERNSAHARA

(occupiedby Morocco)

Mauritania

Area (land): 1 030 400 km2

Capital: NouakchottCurrency: ouguiya (MRO)Population: 3 177 388 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 2 000 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 53.12 years • female: 55.42 years (2006 est.) • male: 50.88 yearsNatural resources: iron ore, gypsum, copper,phosphate, diamonds, gold, oil, fishClimate: desert; constantly hot, dry, dustyTerrain: mostly barren, flat plains of the Sahara; somecentral hillsLand use: • arable land: 0.2 % • permanent crops: 0.01 % • other: 99.79 % (2005)

The Islamic Republic of Mauritania became a state party to the Mine Ban Treaty in January 2001. Mauritania has reported that it has never manufac-tured anti-personnel mines and does not posses any landmine production facilities. It is not known to have exported mines.

The mine and UXO problem in the north of Mauritania results from its in-volvement in the conflict over the disputed region of western Sahara be-tween 1975 and 1978. All parties to the conflict used mines extensively. No-mads are believed to be particularly at risk. It is not known how many mines are present in the affected zones. Mauritania states that one reason for this is the ‘chaotic and archaic’ manner in which mines were laid in the 1970s.Estimates range from 50 000 to 100 000 mines remaining in the ground.

Mauritania’s mine action strategy was drafted in 2002 and revised in 2004.For the period 2005–09, its objectives are to enhance the National Humani-tarian Demining Office’s (NHDO) planning, coordination and implementation capacity, with technical assistance of the UNDP. To enhance existing knowl-edge of impact areas, the strategy envisages implementation of a targeted and cost-efficient landmine impact assessment. Once identified, contami-nated areas will be marked based on the threat level to the population. Ac-cording to the strategy, all landmines and UXO in high-, medium- and low-impact areas will be cleared by the end of 2009.

(*) Text based on the Landmine Monitor Report 2005.

AFRICA

29

MOZAMBIQUE


Ratified

ZIMBABWE

MALAWI

SWAZILAND

SOUTHAFRICA

ZAMBIA

TANZANIA

MozambiqueChannel

Inhambane

Beira

Nampula

Lichinga

MaputoPretoria

Lusaka

Mbabane

Harare

Lilongwe

MOZAMBIQUE

Mozambique


Capital: MaputoCurrency: metical (MZM)Population: 19 686 505. NB: estimates for this countryexplicitly take into account the effects of excessmortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower lifeexpectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates,lower population and growth rates, and changes in thedistribution of population by age and sex than wouldotherwise be expected (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 300 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 39.82 years • female: 40.13 years (2006 est.) • male: 39.53 yearsNatural resources: coal, titanium, natural gas,hydropower, tantalum, graphiteClimate: tropical to subtropicalTerrain: mostly coastal lowlands, uplands in centre,high plateaus in north-west, mountains in westLand use: • arable land: 5.43 % • permanent crops: 0.29 % • other: 94.28 % (2005)

Mozambique’s landmine problem is mostly the result of a two-decade-long civil war that ended in 1992. An LIS, completed in 2001, indicated that all 10 provinces were affected by mines, but particularly the provinces of Cabo Delgado, Nampula, Zambezia, Inhambane and Maputo which represent 70 % of the suspected contaminated areas. As of January 2004, 583 villages and a population of approximately 1 022 501 inhabitants were still affected by mines. Suspected mined areas of high and medium impact total 130 801 989 m2. The National Demining Institute (IND) is a semi-autonomous governmental institute, reporting directly to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, which coordinates all mine action in the country. Besides its headquarters in Maputo, IND has a regional office in Beira (Sofala province) for the cen-tral region and another in Nampula for the northern part of the country. A national demining fund (Fundo Nacional de Desminagem — FUNAD) has been established. The health infrastructure in Mozambique, severely dam-aged during almost 30 years of armed conflict and the floods of 2000, is dependent on international funding. Mozambique completed destruction of its stockpile of 37 318 anti-personnel mines on 28 February 2003, meeting its treaty-mandated deadline. The national programme was supported by the EC under previous multiannual strategy and programming. The number of high-impact areas has been reduced to 2.5 % of the communities affect-ed. The LMM states: ‘In April 2003, the National Demining Institute reported it had re-evaluated information from the 2001 LIS and decided to reduce its estimate of mined areas by 38 %, from 558 million m2 to 346 million m2. On the basis of Mine Ban Treaty (MBT) requirements, further support is given to Mozambique to eliminate the threat posed by APLs in the most affected communities.

There have also been important developments concerning the estimated area potentially affected by mines (it has been reduced significantly). How-ever, the responsible government institution (the National Demining Insti-tute) will not release the information officially until a final verification by the demining operators. Hopefully, this will happen before the seventh meeting of states parties (MSP) in 2006.


TOTAL EU 2005 1.898.120

AUSTRIA 364.690 • Handicap International: twodemining projects

FRANCE 570.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/PNUD:demining activities

GERMANY 179.406 • German Red Cross: physicalrehabilitation of mine victims

• KfW: mine clearance in Limpopo

ITALY 200.000 • UNDP

NETHERLANDS 584.024 • HALO: clearance/mine riskeducation

AFRICA

30

SENEGAL


Ratified


TOTAL EU 2005 320.856

SWEDEN 320.856 • SIDA: support for survey and marking of mine-affected areas in Casamanche throughSwedish Rescue Services Agency (SRSA

ATLANTICOCEAN

GUINEA

GUINEA-BISSAU

THE GAMBIA

MAURITANIA

MALISENEGALThiès

Saint-Louis

Louga

KaolackTambacounda

Nouakchott

Banjul

Bissau

Dakar

Senegal


Capital: DakarCurrency: Communauté Financière Africaine franc(XOF). NB: responsible authority is the Central Bank ofthe West African StatesPopulation: 11 987 121 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 700 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 59.25 years • female: 60.85 years (2006 est.) • male: 57.7 yearsNatural resources: fish, phosphates, iron oreClimate: tropical; hot, humid; rainy season (May toNovember) has strong south-east winds; dry season(December to April) dominated by hot, dry, harmattanwindTerrain: generally low, rolling, plains rising to foothillsin south-eastLand use: • arable land: 12.51 % • permanent crops: 0.24 % • other: 87.25 % (2005)

The most mine-affected area borders Guinea-Bissau. Both regions of Casa-mance province, Ziguinchor and Kolda, are mine affected. The most mine-affected area is Niaguis, Nyassia in the south of Casamance. The mine prob-lem seriously affects the economic development of Casamance, having an impact on agriculture, fishing, transport of goods and services, and tourism.The presence of mines reportedly also hampers donor and NGO efforts in the region.

Senegal states that it has never produced, transferred or stockpiled anti-per-sonnel mines. In September 2002, Senegal stated that it will not allow transit or stockpiling of anti-personnel mines on its territory.

In the Banjul Declaration of 26 December 1999, the Senegalese Government and the Movement of Democratic Forces of Casamance (MDFC) committed themselves to stop using anti-personnel landmines, although ongoing use of APLs and anti-vehicle mines was reported until early 2001.

The European Development Fund has foreseen for 2005–07 to carry out the required mine risk education and mine clearance, and thus free Senegal from the mine problem.

© H

andicap

International Belgium

AFRICA

31

SOMALIA


Not acceded


TOTAL EU 2005 2.485.410

FINLAND 200.000 • HALO Trust: mine clearance

GERMANY 465.616 • UNDP: support of policeexplosive ordnance disposal(EOD) teams

NETHERLANDS 496.000 • HALO: clearance/mine riskeducation

SWEDEN 855.615 • SIDA: mine clearance, supportthrough Danish Demining Group(DDG)

UNITED KINGDOM 468.179 • HALO Trust: demining

INDIANOCEAN

KENYA

ETHIOPIA

YEMEN

DJIBOUTI

SOMALIA

Kismaayo

Dolo Odo

BerberaHargeysa

Mogadishu

Addis Ababa

Djibouti

Somalia


Capital: MogadishuCurrency: Somali shilling (SOS)Population: 8 863 338. NB: this estimate was derivedfrom an official census taken in 1975 by the SomaliGovernment; population counting in Somalia iscomplicated by the large number of nomads and byrefugee movements in response to famine and clanwarfare (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 600 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 48.47 years • female: 50.28 years (2006 est.) • male: 46.71 yearsNatural resources: uranium and largely unexploitedreserves of iron ore, tin, gypsum, bauxite, copper, salt,natural gas, likely oil reservesClimate: principally desert; north-east monsoon(December to February), moderate temperatures innorth and very hot in south; south-west monsoon(May to October), torrid in the north and hot in thesouth, irregular rainfall, hot and humid periods(tangambili) between monsoonsTerrain: mostly flat to undulating plateau rising to hillsin northLand use: • arable land: 1.64 % • permanent crops: 0.04 % • other: 98.32 % (2005)

There has been ongoing use of anti-personnel landmines in various parts of Somalia by a number of factions. In November 2003, a UN Security Council expert panel report found that landmines had been delivered to Somalia from Ethiopia and Yemen, in violation of the UN arms embargo.Central and southern Somalia is heavily contaminated with landmines and UXO. Galguduud, Bakool, Bay, Hiran and the Lower Jubba region are the most affected. Conflict in much of Somalia (outside of Somali-land) has seriously disrupted mine action efforts. There continue to be charges, albeit unclear and non-detailed, of ongoing landmine use in Somalia. Although Somalia does not produce landmines, large stocks are believed to be in the hands of militias and private individuals. Both anti-personnel and anti-vehicle mines are plentiful in Somalia and can be bought from weapons markets in Mogadishu and other towns.

The EC-co-sponsored LIS in Somaliland points to high-impact mine presence in 45 communities (13 % of the impacted areas). In the rest of the country, operations, including further surveys, remain difficult.

According to the peace and human rights network, there are no special programmes for landmine survivors in Somalia. The health infrastructure in the country is very poor and the few hospitals available are poorly staffed and ill equipped.

AFRICA

32

SUDAN


RatifiedRedSea

EGYPTLIBYA

CHAD

CEN. AFRICANREPUBLIC

DEM. REP.OF CONGO UGANDA KENYA

ETHIOPIA

ERITREA

SUDAN

Khartoum

Addis Ababa

AsmaraOmdurman

Delgo

Nyala

Juba

PortSudan

Sudan

Area (land): 2 376 million km2

Capital: KhartoumCurrency: Sudanese dinar (SDD)Population: 41 236 378 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 2 100 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 58.92 years • female: 60.21 years (2006 est.) • male: 57.69 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, small reserves of ironore, copper, chromium ore, zinc, tungsten, mica, silver,gold, hydropowerClimate: tropical in south; arid desert in north; rainyseason varies by region (April to November)Terrain: generally flat, featureless plain; mountainsin far south, north-east and west; desert dominatesthe northLand use: • arable land: 6.78 % • permanent crops: 0.17 % • other: 93.05 % (2005)

Sudan has been involved in internal conflict for more than 20 years and 21 of the country’s 26 states may have been affected by mines and ERW.

Anti-personnel mines were used extensively in Sudan’s two decades of civil conflict with the SPLM/A in southern Sudan, and in the three so-called conflict areas in northern Sudan (the Nuba Mountains, Abyei and Blue Nile).Mines were also allegedly used in recent years along Sudan’s borders with Chad, Eritrea, Libya and Uganda.

Following a three-year peace process, the Government of Sudan and the southern-based rebel Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) signed a comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) on 9 January 2005, putting an end to the longest-running internal conflict in Africa. An interim implementation period of six years will last until July 2011, when a referen-dum on self-determination for the south will be held. The CPA includes a prohibition on the use of landmines.

A Government of National Unity (GONU), to be shared by the former ruling party, the National Congress, SPLM/A and others, and a semi-autonomous Government of South Sudan (GOSS), were being established as of July 2005. The interim federal constitution entered into force.

On 24 March 2005, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolu-tion 1590 to monitor the implementation of the CPA and establish a peace-keeping mission called United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS). UNMIS has been tasked with assisting the CPA parties to engage in mine action activities.

The conflict that escalated in early 2003 in the Darfur region on Sudan’s western border with Chad continued at a lower level in 2005, though the humanitarian crisis persisted as 2 million internally displaced persons re-mained in camps, unable to return home because of persistent harassment and violence. The humanitarian ceasefire for Darfur, signed in Chad in April 2004, has been scarcely respected. The Darfur region is affected by UXO more than by mines, although mine incidents causing severe casualties to aid workers were reported.

There is continued military activity on the southern Sudanese border with Uganda, primarily by rebels of the Ugandan Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA).The LRA has engaged in attacks on southern Sudanese civilians inside Su-dan, driving thousands of them to take refuge in Uganda in 2005. The LRA is a known user of landmines.

The Republic of Sudan signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 4 December 1997 and ratified it on 13 October 2003. The treaty entered into force for Sudan on 1 April 2004. Sudan has not yet taken any domestic legal measures spe-cifically to implement the Mine Ban Treaty and enforce the anti-personnel mine prohibitions.

AFRICA

33

The size of the country (four times that of France), the lack of data and reli-able information, and the shortage of systematic surveys make it difficult to establish the extent of contamination by landmines and ERW in Sudan with any precision. Available information indicates that the south generally faces a larger problem than the north, and that landmines are in general a lesser problem than ERW (comprising abandoned ordnance — AXO, and unexploded ordnance — UXO) both in the south and north. However, road access in both parts of the country is hampered by the suspected presence of mines.

Anti-personnel and anti-vehicle mines as well as other types of munitions were an integral part of the conflict, and were used by both the Government of Sudan (GoS) and SPLM/A forces. According to various assessments, anti-vehicle mines were mainly used on roads by SPLM/A to restrict GOS forces’ movements and access to towns. The GoS used anti-personnel landmines defensively to protect its garrison towns and to prohibit move-ment of insurgent forces.

The presence of mines on roads in the north and south has restricted ac-cess by aid agencies and increased the cost of food and non-food items.The World Food Programme estimates that food security for 2 million peo-ple is directly affected by mines. Landmines and ERW are also a serious obstacle to reconstruction projects.

Major problems are expected when large numbers of displaced people re-turn to their home areas. Refugees and internally displaced persons are at risk, both in the process of returning on roads, which may be mined, and as they resettle in communities affected by landmines and ERW. They may also cultivate land, not knowing which areas are dangerous. UNHCR estimates that around 500 000 to 600 000 refugees in camps in eight neigh-bouring countries will return. Most refugees are expected to return to West-ern Equatoria, while many refugees currently in Ethiopia are from the Upper Nile and Blue Nile provinces.

There has long been no unified national mine action authority in Sudan.Responsibilities for mine action were shared between the north and the south with the support of the UN Mine Action Office. The tripartite structure consisted of:

• UN Mine Action Office (UNMAO), with the overall task of assisting both parties’ demining efforts by providing technical advice and support for coordination;

• National (North) Mine Action Office, directed by a National Mine Action Technical Committee;

• New (South) Sudan Mine Action Directorate, directed by the New Sudan Authority on Landmines.

The CPA endorsed the existing ‘one country two systems’ approach, and foresaw a mine action structure consisting of two mine action authorities (north and south), with the UNMAO providing overall support and coor-dination. Since the CPA was signed, the National Mine Action Office has become de facto the NMAO for the north and NSMAD remained the New

© D

anish Dem

ining Group

(Per Toftager)

© IC

BL (Tim

Grant)

AFRICA

34

(South) Sudan Mine Action Directorate. The overall question of how mine action will be addressed within the Government of National Unity (GNU) envisaged by the CPA was unresolved until 24 December 2005, when the National Mine Action Authority (NMAA)-Sudan was established by presi-dential decree — it remains to be seen how this new entity will evolve.

The EC has been actively involved in mine action in Sudan since 1999, when funding was provided for an assessment as part of the IGAD ‘Plan-ning for peace’ initiative. Furthermore, the EC supported the first crosslines NGO meeting in London. Since then, the EC has been funding a number of NGOs as well as UNMAS in support of surveys, demining and MRE.

In addition to this support, the EC has emphasised mine action as an im-portant component in any kind of ‘linking relief, rehabilitation and develop-ment’ (LRRD) and community-based project approach and thus encour-aged a humanitarian mine action project to become part of NGO consortia bidding for funding. The aim is to ensure that mine clearance and explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) take into account the development needs of af-fected people, rather than solely the humanitarian access needs.

<<< SUDAN


TOTAL EU 2005 15.018.340

DENMARK 671.998 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/DanChurchAid: mine clearance and mine risk education

FINLAND 100.000 • HALO Trust: mine clearance and weapons and ammunition disposal

GERMANY 1.985.198 • UNMAS/FSD: technical survey in Nuba Mountains and southern Sudan• UNMAS/DCA: manual clearance in Nuba Mountains• DCA: mine clearance in Nuba Mountains• NPA: mine clearance in southern Sudan• Landmine action: procurement of detectors


NETHERLANDS 3.952.420 • HALO: clearance and mine risk education• NPA: clearance and mine risk education• UNDP: clearance and mine risk education• UNMAS: capacity building• WFP: clearance and mine risk education

SWEDEN 782.353 • SIDA: mine clearance, support through Swedish Rescue Services Agency (SRSA)

UNITED KINGDOM 2.983.925 • MAG-Blue Nile: integrated demining• Contribution to UNMAS: coordination and demining

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

4.299.946 • Landmine Action: demining and survey• UNMAS: demining• MAG: demining

© IC

BL (Jackie H

ansen)

AFRICA

TUNISIA


Ratified

TOTAL EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: NO PRIOR EXPENDITURE


FRANCE In kind • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Mindef: training of an officer inFrance (ESAG)

MEDITERRANEAN SEA

Tunis

Bizerte

Sfax

GabèsTozeur

Sousse

T U N I S I A

LIBYAALGERIA

Tunisia


Capital: TunisCurrency: Tunisian dinar (TND)Population: 10 175 014 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 7 600 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 75.12 years • female: 76.96 years (2006 est.) • male: 73.4 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, phosphates, iron ore,lead, zinc, saltClimate: temperate in north with mild, rainy wintersand hot, dry summers; desert in southTerrain: mountains in north; hot, dry central plain;semiarid south merges into the SaharaLand use: • arable land: 17.05 % • permanent crops: 13.08 % • other: 69.87 % (2005)

The Republic of Tunisia became a state party to the Mine Ban Treaty in January 2000. Tunisia believes that its domestic laws are sufficient to cover any violations of the Mine Ban Treaty and thus has not enacted new legal measures to implement the treaty.

Tunisia has stated that it has never produced or exported anti-personnel mines. It imported mines from different countries and reports last using anti-personnel mines in February 1980. Tunisia laid a limited number of defensive minefields along its eastern border with Libya during tension between the two countries in the late 1970s. Although Tunisia is mine affected, Tunisian officials and the UNMAS agree that the mines have a relatively low humanitarian impact. Minefields are all clearly mapped, fenced and marked, and pose very little danger to the population, in-deed many are located in very sparsely populated areas. In addition, there is limited UXO contamination throughout the country dating from World War II.

In November 2004, Tunisia started to clear the Ras Jedir minefield, rep-resenting 70 % of known mined areas on its territory; by April 2005, the army had already cleared 3 305 mines. In addition, 477 UXO from World War II-era battlefields were destroyed between December 2004 and June 2005.


35

AFRICA

36

UGANDA


Ratified

Landmines were used by both government forces and the National Re-sistance Army in the early 1980s, and by rebel forces since that time in northern and western Uganda. The government is not believed to have used anti-personnel mines inside Uganda in recent years. Uganda stated that the Lord’s Resistance Army continued to lay anti-personnel mines in the north in 2003 and 2004. From 30 March to 7 April 2004, the UN carried out an inter-agency assessment mission in Uganda.

The number and exact location of landmines are not known, but ac-cording to a July 2004 report of a United Nations assessment mission, there are three main areas reporting mine/UXO contamination: firstly, the Luwero district north of Kampala is affected by UXO remaining from an internal conflict in the 1980s; secondly, the western Rwensori Moun-tains are affected as a result of infiltration in the late 1990s by the United Democratic Forces; and, thirdly, the northern region (districts of Gulu, Kitgum and Pader) and eastern region (Katakwi, Soroti and Kabera-maido districts).

Uganda completed its stockpile destruction of 6 383 anti-personnel landmines in July 2003; it retained 1 764 mines for training purposes.

Uganda


Capital: KampalaCurrency: Ugandan shilling (UGX)Population: 28 195 754. NB: estimates for this countryexplicitly take into account the effects of excessmortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower lifeexpectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates,lower population and growth rates, and changes in thedistribution of population by age and sex than wouldotherwise be expected (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 700 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 52.67 years • female: 53.69 years (2006 est.) • male: 51.68 yearsNatural resources: copper, cobalt, hydropower,limestone, salt, arable landClimate: tropical; generally rainy with two dry seasons(December to February, June to August); semiarid innorth-eastTerrain: mostly plateau with rim of mountainsLand use: • arable land: 21.57 % • permanent crops: 8.92 % • other: 69.51 % (2005)


TOTAL EU 2005 1.355.204

GERMANY 220.000 • UNDP: coordination,secondment of German expert

• UNDP: procurement of detectors

UNITED KINGDOM 135.204 • Mine Awareness Trust:demining/MRE

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

1.000.000 • UNDP: mine clearance, victimassistance and mine awareness

• Mine risk awareness, victimassistance and socioeconomicrehabilitation

Asia

SOUT

H CH

INA

SEA

ANDA

MAN

SEA

BAY

OF B

ENGA

LAR

ABIA

N SE

A

INDI

AN O

CEAN

Red

Sea

The

Gulf

Aral

Sea

Casp

ian

Sea

Gulf

of O

man

Vien

tiane

Colo

mbo

Baku

Tbili

si

Yere

van

Kabu

l

Isla

mab

ad

Dush

anbe

Hano

i

Band

ar S

eri

Bega

wan

Phno

mPe

nh

Man

ila

SAUD

I ARA

BIA

IRAQ

SYRI

A

TURK

EY

IRAN

KAZA

KHST

ANM

ONGO

LIA

CHIN

A

INDI

A

MAL

AYSI

A

SING

APOR

E

MAL

AYSI

A

INDO

NESI

A

NEPA

LBH

UTAN

BANG

LADE

SH

THAI

LAND

TAIW

AN

JAPA

N

SOUT

HKO

REA

NORT

HKO

REA

UZBE

KIST

AN

TURK

MEN

ISTA

N

RUSS

IA

SOM

ALIA

DJIB

OUTI

ETHI

OPIA

ERIT

REA

YEM

EN

(YEM

EN)

OMAN

U. A

. E.

BAHR

AIN

KUW

AIT

QATA

R

BRUN

EI

INDO

NESI

A

VIET

NAM

AFGH

ANIS

TAN

AZER

BAIJ

AN

AZ.

GEOR

GIA

LAOS

SRI L

ANKA

CAM

BODI

A

MYA

NMAR

TAJI

KIST

AN

KYRG

YZST

AN

PHIL

IPPI

NES

PAKI

STAN

ARM

ENIA

37

38

ASIA

REGION-WIDE

EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2002: EUR 274 945

TOTAL EU 2005 529.439

DENMARK 349.439 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Danish Demining Group: mine risk education in north Caucasus

FINLAND 180.000 • FRC/ICRC: support to ICRC’s mine victim and assistance and awareness programme in northern Caucasus


EUROPEANCOMMUNITY + MEMBER STATES

328.895 • Total amount of support in Asia for the period 1999–2004

© M

AG

39


Ratified

AFGHANISTAN

nistan stands as one of the most heavily contaminated mines-and-countries in the world, the result of nearly three decades of war.rrmine and UXO problem has a devastating effect on human livesvelihoods in Afghanistan. This problem also constitutes a structuraldiment to the development of the country and its elimination is aondition for the emergence of an economically sound and politi-stable Afghanistan.

rding to an EC-supported, nation-wide LIS, mines/UXO and otherdirectly affect 4.2 million Afghans who live in one of about 2 370

communities contaminated by these weapons. Some 70 to 100 Afghansare killed or injured each month due to mines or UXO, and they areadded to the list that is thought to be in excess of 100 000, according tobest estimates. This contamination, which amounts to as much as 716million m2 of land spread across 32 of 34 Afghan provinces, also affectsall Afghans, by hindering local development initiatives and national pub-lic works projects. The survey is continuously updated so that priorityareas are addressed.

Afghanistan, which itself has never been a landmine producer, is infect-ed with about 56 different types of mines originating from 10 countries.In addition to its support to the LIS, the EC also provided general sup-port to the mine action programme for Afghanistan (MAPA).

The mine action programme for Afghanistan (MAPA), with its agenciesemploying some 10 000 Afghans, is the largest programme of its kindanywhere in the world. One of the important issues in the deminingsector is the transition of the ownership of the MAPA from the UnitedNations Mine Action Center for Afghanistan (Unmaca) to the AfghanGovernment. A demining law has been drafted and is expected to beapproved by the Afghan Government in 2006. The law will help pavethe way for the transition of the MAPA to the government over the nexttwo years.

Afghanistan


Capital: KabulCurrency: afghani (AFA)Population: 31 056 997 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 800 (2004 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 43.34 years • female: 43.53 years (2006 est.) • male: 43.16 yearsNatural resources: natural gas, petroleum, coal,copper, chromite, talc, barites, sulfur, lead, zinc, ironore, salt, precious and semi-precious stonesClimate: arid to semiarid; cold winters and hotsummersTerrain: mostly rugged mountains; plains in north andsouth-westLand use: • arable land: 12.13 % • permanent crops: 0.21 % • other: 87.66 % (2005)

KYRGYZSTAN

IRAN

INDIA

TURKMENISTAN

UZBEKISTAN

TAJIKISTAN

PAKISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

Mazar-e Sharif

Herat

Farah

Kandahar

Kabul

Islamabad

TOTAL EUTT EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: EUR 30.724.020

TOTAL EU 2005 29.354.754

BELGIUM 26.000(in-kind

contribution

• Ministry of Defence: UXO clearance experts in Kabul

CZECH REPUBLIC 973.503 • NATO: mine risk education and anti-explosives protection of the Kaia InternationalAirport in Kabul, by the Czech army contingent deployed in the framework of theNATO International Security Force

ASIA

40

<<< AFGHANISTAN

DENMARK 2.284.793 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Danish Demining Group: mine clearance• Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Danish Demining Group: mine clearance and mine risk

education in a three-year programme• Ministry of Foreign Affairs/UNMAS: mine clearance

FINLAND 1.000.000 • UNMAS: mine and UXO clearance programmes

GERMANY 3.381.066 • WISAG: coordination, secondment of German expert• HALO Trust: mine clearance in northern Afghanistan• Medico International: mine clearance, training and support to Heart and OMAR HQ in

Kabul

LITHUANIA 100.000 • Ministry of Defence: mine and UXO clearance by the Lithuanian-led ProvincialReconstruction Team in the province of Ghor

NETHERLANDS 1.489.544 • HALO: clearance and mine risk education• UNMAS: clearance and mine risk education

POLAND 294.000 • Ministry of National Defence: mine and UXO clearance within the framework of Operation Enduring Freedom

SLOVAKIA 868.208 • Slovak armed forces: mine and UXO clearance

SPAIN 282.200 • Ministry of Defence: mine clearance

SWEDEN 339.572 • SIDA: support to quality management in mine clearance through Danish Demining Group (DDG)

UNITED KINGDOM 2.736.061 • MAG: integrated mine action• HALO: mechanical demining

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

15.605.807 • UNMAS/UNMAPA: mine and UXO survey and clearance, stockpile and destruction• UNMAS: landmine and UXO survey and clearance in Kassala and Red Sea states

(contribution to the Voluntary Trust Fund)• Agrisystems Consortiums: assessment mission of EC support to mine action and

ammunition stockpile destruction

ASIA

© IC

BL (John R

odsted

)

41


Not acceded

ARMENIA

Armenia’s landmine problem is largely a result of the Armenian–Azerbai-jani conflict from 1988 to 1994. After the 1994 ceasefire following the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, the Armenian army surveyed approximately 800 km of border territories in Armenia and estimated 50 000 to 80 000 landmines. Armenia has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty. It has shown its support for a global ban on anti-personnel mines by voting in favour of each annual UN General Assembly resolution sup-porting universalisation and full implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty since 1997, including UNGA Resolution 59/84 on 3 December 2004.Armenia does not produce or export anti-personnel mines and does not permit the transfer of mines through territory under its control. Its land-mine stockpile is a legacy of the Soviet era, but the number and types of mines are not known. Landmines were used by all sides throughout the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and sporadically after the signing of the ceasefire agreement in May 1994.

Funded by the EC and co-funded by the UNDP and the Government of Armenia, the UNDP Armenia is implementing a humanitarian dem-ining programme in Armenia in cooperation with the Armenian Ministry of Defence, Humanitarian Demining Centre and the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Infrastructure Coordination. The goal of the project is to strengthen the national capacity for coordination and implementation of a demining programme in Armenia.

An LIS within the framework of the abovementioned project was con-ducted in Armenia in 2005. According to its results, 102 sites with a total surface area of 321.68 km2 (1.08 % of the territory of Armenia) are currently affected by mines; 60 communities with 68 737 people are impacted by mines and UXO; 36 communities with 50 suspected minefields are located in restricted military areas, which are not subject to humanitarian demining. Humanitarian demining only addresses 103 712 km2, and 52 suspected minefields in 24 communities of which two have high, nine medium and the rest low impact. Although the Armenian Humanitarian Demining Center (AHDC) started systematic mine clear-ance in 2003, current trends indicate it will be decades before the threat of landmines and UXO can be fully removed from the country.

The project mentioned below is planning the following mine action ac-tivities in 2006: preparing and conducting a technical survey, marking and clearance (one community, as a pilot project); conducting a public awareness campaign and mine risk education in mine-affected areas; conducting targeted victim assistance in mine-affected areas; sup-porting the Armenian Humanitarian Demining Center; and assisting the Government of Armenia in drafting a national mine action strategy and legislation.

The UNDP Armenia humanitarian demining project does not solve the overall problem of landmines in Armenia. This initiative is a pilot initia-tive to start addressing the problem and attracting more attention to the issue. Further EC support can be envisaged if Armenia undertakes the necessary steps to join the Mine Ban Treaty.

Armenia


Capital: YerevanCurrency: dram (AMD)Population: 2 976 372 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 5 300 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 71.84 years • female: 76.02 years (2006 est.) • male: 68.25 yearsNatural resources: small deposits of gold, copper,molybdenum, zinc, aluminaClimate: highland continental, hot summers, coldwintersTerrain: Armenian Highland with mountains; little forestland; fast flowing rivers; good soil in Aras River valleyLand use: • arable land: 16.78 % • permanent crops: 2.01 % • other: 81.21 % (2005)

GEORGIA

AZERBAIJAN

(AZER.)

ARMENIAARMENIA

IRAN

TURKEY

RUSSIA

Tbilisi

Yerevan

Gyumri

Sevan

Vanadzor

Sisian

ASIA

42

ASIA


TOTAL EU 2005 140.000

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

140.000 • UNDP: humanitarian demining programme (remaining funding as part of a multi-annual programme)

© IC

BL (John R

odsted

)

43

ASIA

Azerbaijan’s landmine problem is largely a result of the conflict with Ar-menia from 1988 to 1994, but leftover munitions dumps and UXO pose a significant threat as well. The Azerbaijan Campaign to Ban Landmines (AzCBL) undertook a variety of activities in 2002 and 2003 in support of the anti-personnel mine ban.

Under previous multiannual strategy and programming, the EC support-ed capacity building, mine clearance, MRE and an LIS, now completed.The LIS confirms the wide spread of the problem with, however, a low level (2.1 %) of highly impacted communities. Out of these communities, 900 are currently accessible to Azeri authorities. The LIS indicates that 643 communities were affected: 480 were found to be mine-impacted and another 163 were affected by both mines and UXO from former So-viet military bases. The survey identified 11 communities as high impact, with at least one casualty in the past two years, 101 as medium impact, and 368 as low impact. The contaminated areas are believed to affect an estimated 514 000 inhabitants. Commendable, efficient and effective capacity has been built within the Azerbaijan National Agency for Mine Action (ANAMA), whose priorities target communities highly affected by APLs. Provision of essential equipment might accelerate the current pace of clearance of high-impact areas/communities.

Azerbaijan does not produce or export anti-personnel mines and does not permit the transfer of mines through territory under its control. Its landmine stockpile is a legacy of the Soviet era, but the number and types of mines are not known. Landmines were used by all sides throughout the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and sporadically after the signing of the armistice in May 1994.

Nagorno-Karabakh

Located within the internationally recognised boundaries of Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh declared independence as the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) in September 1991. Since 1994, the NKR has presented itself as a self-proclaimed republic but it has not been recognised by anyone.

The NKR political and military leaders have stated their support for an eventual ban on anti-personnel landmines, but have indicated that Nagorno-Karabakh would not join the Mine Ban Treaty not even if eligi-ble to do so. The NKR has stated that it has never produced or exported mines, and has not purchased new mines since 1995. Its anti-personnel mine stockpile consists of mines left over from the Soviet Union. There were no reports of new mine use in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2004 or the first half of 2005.

In 2005, the HALO Trust cleared and handed over more than 450 000 m2,destroying 149 anti-personnel mines, 186 anti-vehicle mines and over


Not acceded

GEORGIA

AZERBAIJAN

(AZER.)

ARMENIA

IRAN

RUSSIACaspian

Sea

Baku

Yerevan

Tbilisi

Gäncä

Xankändi Ali Bayamli

Sumqayit

Azerbaijan


Capital: Baku (Baki)Currency: Azerbaijani manat (AZM)Population: 7 961 619 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 4 700 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 63.85 years • female: 68.13 years (2002 est.) • male: 59.78 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, natural gas, iron ore,non-ferrous metals, aluminaClimate: dry, semiarid steppeTerrain: large, flat Kur-Araz Ovaligi (Kura-AraksLowland) (much of it below sea level) with GreatCaucasus Mountains to the north, Qarabag Yaylasi(Karabakh Upland) in west; Baku lies on AbseronYasaqligi (Apsheron peninsula) that juts into CaspianSeaLand use: • arable land: 20.62 % • permanent crops: 2.61 % • other: 76.77 % (2005)

AZERBAIJAN

44

ASIA

1 000 UXO. With the exception of two areas, all areas were cleared, a post-clearance survey carried out and land released to local communi-ties. The two exceptions are a small minefield (some 500 m2) close to a military base, and one area in Dikhazurga village where mines are very deep in the ground due to flooding.


TOTAL EU 2005 1.667.638

NETHERLANDS 667.638 • HALO: clearance and mine risk education (Nagorno-Karabakh)

UNITED KINGDOM • Via ITF: demining in Albania, Bosnia and Azerbaijan (for amount, consult the Europeregion-wide table)

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

1.000.000 • UNDP: marking and fencing, demining, victim assistance coordination and mine victim data collection

© IC

BL (P

aul Hansen)

45

ASIA

CAMBODIA

Cambodia is one of the most severely landmine- and UXO-affectedcountries although lately casualty statistics have been dropping yearafter year.rr All 24 provinces in the country are affected and the totalsuspected contaminated area covers approximately 2.5 % of the totalsurface of the country. In 2002, 98 % of mine casualties were civilian.Access for civilians living in rural areas to essential resources and facili-ties such as water, roads, bridges and cultivable land is restricted andhazardous.

In February 2004, the Royal Government of Cambodia adopted land-mine clearance as an additional millennium development goal, in addi-tion to the eight goals adopted by the United Nations. The CambodianMine Action and Victim Assistance Authority (CMAA) was established byroyal decree in September 2000. CMAA is the coordinating and planningbody for mine action in Cambodia. In 2002, CMAA prepared a plan of mine action activities to be integrated in the national poverty reductionstrategy. It also established policy guidelines for developing a long-termmine action strategy, including the five-year mine action activities plan.In addition, the CMAA helped mine action operators form a mine-aware-ness working group and develop a mine-awareness strategic plan.CMAA also initiated a series of discussions on how to reduce the sizeof suspected areas.

Discussions are ongoing within the mine action community on the ‘lackof progress’ in reducing the number of mine and UXO casualties. Someof the hypotheses put forward include: poor funding levels for MRE;population growth and new settlements of internally displaced personsand returning refugees; fluidity of population and the socioeconomicsituation in the affected areas; and the need for a greater emphasis onthe danger of UXO as the leading cause of mine action related injuriesin Cambodia. Healthcare services for landmine survivors are available,but are often economically inaccessible for the individual or family. Mostassistance is provided by their families, although international and localNGOs provide some specialised and community services. The govern-ment provides a small monthly pension to military landmine survivors.

Under previous multiannual strategy and programming, the EC support-ed mine clearance and capacity building. EUR 5 million was committedin 2004. The focus of this contribution is on mine clearance integratedinto rehabilitation programmes. Further victim assistance contribution isprovided under the EC strategy 2005–07.

THAILAND

VIETNAM

LAOS

CAMBODIA

PhnomPenh

Batdâmbâng

KompongCham

Sihanoukville

Gulf of Thailand

Cambodia


Capital: Phnom PenhCurrency: riel (KHR)Population: 13 881 427. NB: estimates for this countryexplicitly take into account the effects of excessmortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower lifeexpectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates,lower population and growth rates, and changes in thedistribution of population by age and sex than wouldotherwise be expected (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 2 200 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 59.29 years • female: 61.32 years (2006 est.) • male: 57.35 yearsNatural resources: oil and gas, timber, gemstones,some iron ore, manganese, phosphates, hydropowerpotentialClimate: tropical; rainy, monsoon season (May toNovember); dry season (December to April); littleseasonal temperature variationTerrain: mostly low, flat plains; mountains in south-west and northLand use: • arable land: 20.44 % • permanent crops: 0.59 % • other: 78.97 % (2005)


Ratified

46

ASIA


TOTAL EU 2005

Finland 1.020.000 • HALO Trust: mine clearance• Handicap International: mine clearance• FinnChurchAid: mine clearance

France In kind • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Mindef: training of an officer in France (ESAG)

Germany 663.000 • CMAA/CMAC: mine clearance

Luxembourg 50.000 • Handicap International Luxembourg: schooling and education of mine victims and people and children from mine-affected areas

Netherlands 1.243.526 • HALO: clearance/mine risk education• NPA: capacity building

Sweden 406.417 • SIDA: support to CMAC mine detection dogs (MDDs) and mine clearance through UNDP

United Kingdom 932.058 • MAG: integrated mine action• UNDP: support to CMVIS• HALO: demining

© M

AG

47

ASIA

BlackSea

CaspianSea

Tbilisi

Yerevan

Sokhumi

Bat'umi

K'ut'aisi

Zestap'oniRust'avi

Georgia/Abkhazia


Capital: TbilisiCurrency: lari (GEL)Population: 4 661 473 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 3 300 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 76.09 years • female: 79.87 years (2002 est.) • male: 72.8 yearsNatural resources: forests, hydropower, manganesedeposits, iron ore, copper, minor coal and oil deposits;coastal climate and soils allow for important tea andcitrus growthClimate: warm and pleasant; Mediterranean-like onBlack Sk ea coastTerrain: largely mountainous with Great CaucasusMountains in the north and Lesser CaucasusMountains in the south; Kolkhet’is Dablobi (KolkhidaLowland) opens to the Black Sk ea in the west; MtkvariRiver Basin in the east; good soils in river valley floodplains, foothills of Kolkhida LowlandLand use: • arable land: 11.51 % • permanent crops: 3.79 % • other: 84.7 % (2005)

GEORGIA/AAA BKHAZIA

Georgia has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty, but it has frequentlyexpressed support for a global ban on anti-personnel mines. Neverthe-less, although strongly denied by the authorities, there continue to bereports of use of anti-personnel mines by Georgian military forces.

The landmine issue is not a humanitarian priority in Georgia and the exist-ing organisations involved already cover most of the needs, in particularin the region of Abkhazia. Accordingly, mine action is not included in thestrategic priorities for advancing the economic and social developmentof Georgia. Demining actions form part of reconstruction programmes inthe framework of conflict prevention, resolution and post-conflict reha-bilitation, in order to restore normal living and working conditions.

Abkhazia/Georgia

As a result of the conflict in the region of Abkhazia, an unknown numberof landmines and UXO can be found in Abkhazia. They affect both Ab-khaz residents and internally displaced persons (IDPs) living in the Zug-didi region and conducting various economic activities between the twozones. EC assistance for mine awareness will be complemented in 2006by financial support to the clearance of the last mine-affected areas,thus liberating the country from the threat of anti-personnel landmines.


TOTAL EU 2005 203.359

NETHERLANDS 203.359 • HALO: clearance and mine risk education


Not acceded

48

ASIA

LAOS

Laos is mainly affected by UXO dating back to the Indochina War, es-pecially the period from 1964 to 1973, when it is estimated that more than 2 million tonnes of ordnance were dropped on Laos. Fifteen of the country’s 18 provinces are significantly affected by UXO. Over 85 % of the population lives in rural areas, and UXO seriously constrains the livelihood and food security of large sections of the population.

According to the national clearance agency UXO LAO, minefields (as opposed to UXO) have a limited impact on the civilian population and are not considered a priority for clearance. Laos adopted a national stra-tegic plan for its UXO programme in March 2004. The plan creates a new national regulatory authority to oversee and coordinate UXO/mine action activities, and redefines the role of UXO LAO. Victim assistance is included in the plan, and resources through the UNDP Trust Fund will be available for both physical rehabilitation and socioeconomic integration.An LIS conducted by Handicap International (HI) and released in 1997 remains the main reference, as no other comprehensive technical survey has been conducted since. Casualties from UXO continue to be report-ed. In some parts of the country, the scrap metal industry has become a leading cause of UXO casualties. Healthcare facilities in Laos are lim-ited. A poor communications infrastructure and lack of information on available services limits access to medical and rehabilitation facilities for UXO survivors who generally live in remote areas and, in particular, for survivors from ethnic minorities who do not speak Lao. Reportedly, a person with disabilities is the poorest of the poor in a developing country where food security remains a problem in rural areas. First aid to UXO casualties is usually provided in the district hospital, where only very basic medical care is available. Under previous multiannual strategy and programming, the EC supported mine clearance and awareness as well as capacity building of UXO LAO.

In 2005–07, further support will be provided for preventive measures such as mine risk education, marking and fencing of suspected areas, and victim assistance/rehabilitation. Support will focus on the poorest districts such as those considered by the national poverty eradication programme. According to government officials, Laos does not produce anti-personnel mines and, ‘if it possesses’ mines, it is for ‘self-defence and security purposes’. Laos is not known to have exported anti-per-sonnel mines.

CAMBODIA

CHINA

MYANMAR

VIETNAM

CHINA

THAILAND

LAOSLuangPrabang

Pakse

Savannakhet

Gulf ofTongking

Vientiane

Bangkok

Hanoi

Laos


Capital: VientianeCurrency: kip (LAK)Population: 6 368 481 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 900 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 55.49 years • female: 57.61 years (2006 est.) • male: 53.45 yearsNatural resources: timber, hydropower, gypsum, tin, gold, gemstonesClimate: tropical monsoon; rainy season (May toNovember); dry season (December to April)Terrain: mostly rugged mountains; some plains andplateausLand use: • arable land: 4.01 % • permanent crops: 0.34 % • other: 95.96 % (2005)


Not acceded

49

ASIA


TOTAL EU 2005 1 241 532

Belgium 367.158

36.000(in-kind

contribution)

• Federal Public Service, Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Defence: UXO clearance and capacity building

• Capacity building: UXO clearance in the province of Cahpmassak

Germany 360.748 • Potsdam Konnunikation: mine clearance in provinces of Luang Prabang and Houaphan

• UNDP: mine clearance in provinces of Luang Prabang and Houaphan

Luxembourg 277.626 • Trust Fund Lao UXO/PNUD: mine and UXO clearance

Netherlands 200.000 • UNDP UXO LAO: capacity building

© M

AG

50

ASIA

PAPP KISTAN

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan has not acceded to the Mine Ban Trea-y. There has been a little change in government policy over the past

decade. Pakistan has repeatedly stated that anti-personnel mines are anecessary part of its self-defence strategy and that it cannot relinquishhe weapon until viable alternatives are developed. Nevertheless, Paki-

stan has acknowledged the negative human and socioeconomic impactof landmines, and expressed support for the goal of the eventual elimi-nation of anti-personnel mines. In November 2003, Pakistan proposedthat ‘mine-laying prevention and mine clearance’ be included as essen-tial objectives in conflict situations.

Pakistan is one of a small number of countries still producing anti-per-sonnel mines. The state-owned weapons manufacturer established in1951 is producing six types of landmines. According to the PakistaniGovernment, the private sector is not allowed to manufacture land-mines. Pakistan was reported to be developing a remotely-deliveredanti-personnel mine system in 2002, but no further information has beendiscovered since then. Pakistan had declared a complete moratoriumon the export of mines in 1997. It has stated that in practice it has notexported mines since 1992. In the past, the country was a major ex-porter of landmines and Pakistani-made mines are found in Afghanistan,Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sri Lanka and other locations.

There is no official information available on the size of Pakistan’s anti-personnel mine stockpile. Since 2000 it has been estimated that Paki-stan holds at least 6 million anti-personnel mines in stockpiles, whichconstitutes the fifth largest stockpile in the world. In November 2004,Pakistan said that, by December 2007, all old stockpiled mines wouldbe notified and made detectable.

The instances of use of anti-personnel mines by Pakistani armed forcesduring 2004 andthe first half of 2004 were not confirmed. The last majormine-laying operation took place in 2001–02 along the Indian border.rrPakistan claims that, from May 2004 to mid-2005, it will have complete-ly cleared the border area that it mined during tensions with India in2001–02.


ARABIANSEA

scat

KabulIslamabad

New Delhi

Karachi

Hyderabad

Lahore

N

Pakistan


Capital: IslamabadCurrency: Pakistani rupee (PKR)Population: 165 803 560 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 2 400 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 63.39 years • female: 64.44 years (2006 est.) • male: 62.4 yearsNatural resources: land, extensive natural gasreserves, limited petroleum, poor quality coal, iron ore,copper, salt, limestoneClimate: mostly hot, dry desert; temperate in north-west; arctic in northTerrain: flat Indus plain in east; mountains in north andnorth-west; Balochistan plateau in westLand use: • arable land: 24.44 % • permanent crops: 0.84 % • other: 74.72 % (2005)


Not acceded

TOTAL EUTT EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: NO PRIOR EXPENDITURE

TOTAL EU 2005 70.500

Spain 70.500 • Ministry of Defence: reconnaissance mission and mine awareness: in the margins ofthe NATO’s aid operation after Cachemira’s earthquake, the Spanish army deployed,from November 2005 until January 2006, a mixed EOD/EOR team that carried out themission in affected areas

51

ASIA

BandBeg

Manila

DavaoaZamboanga

LaoagAparri

Quezon City

Cebu

Sulu Sea

SouthChinaSea

SIABRUNE

DONESIA

P H I L I P P I N E S

Philippines


Capital: ManilaCurrency: Philippine peso (PHP)Population: 89 468 677 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 5 100 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 70.21 years • female: 73.24 years (2006 est.) • male: 67.32 yearsNatural resources: timber, petroleum, nickel, cobalt,silver, gold, salt, copperClimate: tropical marine; north-east monsoon(November to April); south-west monsoon (May toOctober)Terrain: mostly mountains with narrow extensivecoastal lowlandsLand use: • arable land: 19 % • permanent crops: 16.67 % • other: 64.33 % (2005)

PHILIPPINES

The Republic of the Philippines became a state party to the Mine BanTreaty in August 2000.

The Philippines may have been a minor producer of anti-personnelmines in the past. It has never exported mines. The Philippines declaredthat it disposed of its entire inventory of anti-personnel mines in July1998, and that since there has been no procurement of manufacturingof landmines.

The Philippines Government has indicated for several years that it doesnot consider any area of the country to be mine affected. Mine risk inthe Philippines is restricted to areas of ongoing conflict, where sporadicuse of anti-personnel and anti-vehicle mines and improvised explosivedevices (IEDs) by rebel groups occurs. There may also be some minesand other devices, which remain in a few localities, from previous armedconflict between non-state armed groups and government forces.

The Philippines has reported that it conducts 250 courses on an annual basis in explosive ordnance disposal training and bomb threat preven-tion seminars to military and civilians alike from the threat of improvisedexplosive devices and landmines.

There is no comprehensive data collection on landmine incidents in thePhilippines and it is difficult to determine the exact number of mine cas-ualties; however, data from various sources provide an indication of thescope of the problem. Since 2004, a significant increase in the numberof new mine casualties has been reported.



TOTAL EU 2005 32.000

SWEDEN 32.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs:AAmine awareness, Geneva Callengaging armed non-stateactors to respect and adhere tothe MBT


Ratified

52

ASIA

SRI LANKA

APLs were used extensively both by the government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elelam (LTTE). The Ministry of Foreign Affairs acknowl-edges that a lot of work has been done, especially in the field of mine clearance. Many IDPs have been able to move back home since the ceasefire of February 2002. The LTTE have done some demining of its own. The government has set a goal of making Sri Lanka mine-free by the end of 2006.

There is no reliable estimate of the numbers of mines in the ground.Government estimates range from 700 000 to 1 million, while the LTTE estimate that more than 2 million mines were planted. Whatever the overall total is, the effects of mine and UXO contamination are clearly seen in the north and east, where the majority of hostilities took place.

The Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE do not have the necessary resources required, in terms of trained manpower, equipment or funds, to address the problem independently of outside assistance. Communi-ties affected need the support of the international community. On 13 July 2004, the cabinet of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs approved a resolution to submit a voluntary Article 7 report. Additionally, the minister deposited the instrument of accession to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) in New York on 24 September 2004. This accession does not include a total ban on landmines but it only disciplines use.Sri Lanka’s position towards the MBT remains unchanged. According to government sources, accession is totally subject to progress in the peace negotiations.

The international community is requested to support mine action under the government’s priorities for resettlement. The government has em-barked on a comprehensive humanitarian mine action programme with a broad objective of making Sri Lanka a mine-free country by the end of 2006. The EC supports the government objective to make Sri Lanka a mine-free country within a relatively short time span. This intention needs to be accompanied by the government’s steps towards acces-sion to the MBT.

INDIAN SEA

INDIA

SRI LANKA

Jaffna

KandyBatticaloa

Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte

Galle

Colombo

Sri Lanka


Capital: Colombo. NB: Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte isthe legislative capitalCurrency: Sri Lankan rupee (LKR)Population: 20 222 240. NB: since the outbreakof hostilities between the government and armedTamil separatists in the mid-1980s, several hundredthousand Tamil civilians have fled the island and morethan 200 000 Tamils have sought refuge in the west(July 2006)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 4 300 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 73.41 years • female: 76.12 years (2006 est.) • male: 70.83 yearsNatural resources: limestone, graphite, mineral sands,gems, phosphates, clay, hydropowerClimate: tropical monsoon; north-east monsoon(December to March); south-west monsoon (June toOctober)Terrain: mostly low, flat to rolling plain; mountains insouth-central interiorLand use: • arable land: 13.96 % • permanent crops: 15.24 % • other: 70.8 % (2005)


Not acceded

53

ASIA


TOTAL EU 2005 4.506.490

Austria 160.000 • Unicef: victim assistance and mine risk education

Denmark 1.881.594 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Danish Demining Group: mine clearance, mine risk education and victim assistance

Finland 280.000 • HALO Trust: mine clearance, team training, in the Jaffna area• MAG: post-conflict rehabilitation in thr Vanni area

Sweden 534.476 • SIDA: mine clearance, support through the Mines Advisory Group (MAG)

United Kingdom 350.420 • HALO Trust: demining• MAG: integrated mine action

European Community 1.300.000 • UNDP: technical survey, marking and fencing

© M

AG

54

ASIA

TAJIKISTAN

Mined and suspected areas can be found in the central region as a result of the 1995–97 civil war, along the Afghan border (which contain So-viet-laid and Russian-maintained minefields) and along the border with Uzbekistan as a result of mines laid by Uzbekistan.

In 2004, the Government of Tajikistan approved a five-year strategic plan (2004–08) which aims to eliminate all mine incidents and ensure that economic activity and development projects are not impeded by landmines or UXO. Specific objectives include: conducting a general mine action assessment of affected communities located along the bor-der with Uzbekistan and in the Sugd region; progressively assessing the extent of mine-contaminated areas along the border with Afghanistan as responsibility for the border is handed over by the Russian border troops; continuing technical surveys in the central region; marking ar-eas along the border with Uzbekistan; carrying out mine risk educa-tion programmes in concert with technical survey and mine clearance efforts; and, by 2006, expanding survey and clearance capacity to six survey teams, four manual clearance teams and four mine detection dog teams.

From 1997 to 2004, Tajikistan neutralised and destroyed more than 3 250 pieces of mines and explosives. A general mine action assessment has been completed in the central region, reducing the amount of sus-pected area by 29 km2 and 124 linear km of road/rail. In September and October 2004, general research on frontier sites of the Tajik–Uz-bek border in the Sughd region, two areas of the Hatlon region (in the south) and three areas of the autonomous region of Badakhshan (in the east) was completed. In the central region, technical surveys and mine clearance of the minefields are being updated. Additionally, three areas were demined and handed over to the local governmental authorities for long-run use.

The EC strategy 2005–07 supports this country, party to the MBT, to further survey and clear suspected areas, which have a high impact on populations. Support is envisaged for mine risk education, surveys and clearance of village communities.



FRANCE In kind • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/OSCE: training of deminers

UNITED KINGDOM 184.960 • UNDP: capacity building


Ratified

Tajikistan

AArea (land): 142 700 km2Capital: DushanbeCurrency: somoniPopulation: 7 320 815 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 1 200 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 64.94 years • female: 68 years (2006 est.) • male: 62.03 yearsNatural resources: hydropower, some petroleum,uranium, mercury, brown coal, lead, zinc, antimony,tungsten, silver, goldClimate: mid-latitude continental, hot summers, mildwinters; semiarid to polar in Pamir MountainsTerrain: Pamir and Alay Mountains dominatelandscape; western Fergana Valley in north,Kofarnihon and Vakhsh Valleys in south-westLand use: • arable land: 6.52 % • permanent crops: 0.89 % • other: 92.59 % (2005)

55

ASIA

LAOS

MYANMAR

THAILAND

CAMBODIA

CHINA

VIETNAM

SOUTHCHINASEA

Hanoi

Phnom Penh

Bangkok

Vientiane

Hai Phong

Qui Nhon

Ho Chi Minh

Da Nang

Vietnam


Capital: HanoiCurrency: dong (VND)Population: 84 402 966 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 3 000 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 70.85 years • female: 73.85 years (2006 est.) • male: 68.5 yearsNatural resources: phosphates, coal, manganese,bauxite, chromate, offshore oil and gas deposits,forests, hydropowerClimate: tropical in south; monsoonal in north withhot, rainy season (May to September) and warm, dryseason (October to March)Terrain: low, flat delta in south and north; centralhighlands; hilly, mountainous in far north and north-westLand use: • arable land: 20.14 % • permanent crops: 6.93 % • other: 72.93 % (2005)

VIETNAM

Vietnam is heavily contaminated with UXO from the conflict in the 1960s and early 1970s, as well as smaller quantities of bombs and mines from other conflicts. Minefields exist from as long ago as the Dien Bien Phu campaign against the French in 1954, extending through border conflicts with China and the Khmer Rouge in the 1970s. All 61 provinces of Viet-nam are affected, as well as major cities. The Ministry of Defence states that the most affected portions of the country are the central provinces from the former demilitarised zone (DMZ) southward.

Local survey data give, for the first time, a detailed view of mine and UXO casualties and contamination in portions of two heavily affected central provinces. Mine and UXO clearance, risk education and survi-vor assistance projects continued to expand, including into new areas of the country. Groundbreaking local mine-impact assessment surveys were completed in 2002 and early 2003 in three districts of the cen-tral provinces of Quang Tri and Thua Thien-Hue. The Vietnamese army, Ministry of Health, and Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs (Molisa) have all gathered internal data on landmine-related subjects; nevertheless, they would only release data regarding the total land area affected by mines and UXO, or the total number of deaths and injuries since 1975, but no details or survey methodologies, which affects the accuracy of the data.

There is no comprehensive nation-wide mechanism for collecting and recording data on mine/UXO casualties in Vietnam. The Landmine Moni-tor’s independent survey of domestic and international press together with information provided by Clear Path International (CPI) indicates that there were at least 220 new landmine/UXO casualties in 2003, including 81 people killed and 139 injured.

Medical and healthcare services are provided by the national Ministry of Health at the province, district and commune levels, and rehabilitation services are provided by the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of La-bour, Invalids and Social Affairs (Molisa). Although adequate healthcare and rehabilitative services for landmine and UXO survivors exist, survi-vors face obstacles of location and cost in accessing these services.Most mine and UXO incidents happen far from provincial centres where medical facilities are concentrated. The central region, in particular, is underserved.


TOTAL EU 2005 1.064.123

GERMANY 1.064.123 • Solidaritätsdienst International: mine clearance in the province of Quang Tri

• Potsdam Kommunikation: mine clearance in the province of Hué


Not acceded

56

Central/Latin America

ATLANTIC OCEAN

ATLANTIC OCEAN

PACIFIC OCEAN

CARIBBEAN SEA DOMINICAST. LUCIA

VENEZUELAGUYANA

SURINAME

PERU

PANAMA

BARBADOSST. VINCENT &THE GRENADINES

ANTIGUA & BARBUDAST. KITTS & NEVIS

DOMINICANREPUBLIC

TRINIDAD & TOBAGOCOS TA RICA

CUBA

BELIZE JAMAICA

HONDURAS

MEXICO

PARAGUAY

URUGUAY

BOLIVIA

ARGENTINA

GUATEMALA

EL SALVADOR

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

GRENADA

THE BAHAMAS

HAITI

COLOMBIA

NICARAGUA

CHILE

Managua

Bogotá

Santiago

Lima

57

CENTRAL/LATIN AMERICA

Chile reported an estimated 117 855 APLs still in place in 2006. The APLs are mainly concentrated in minefields within the first (Tarapacá) and second regions (Antofagasta) in the north of Chile along the borders with Peru and Bolivia. In the south, it is the 12th region (Magallanes) bordering Argentina. From 1999–2003, a total of 300 039 APLs were de-stroyed. In order to comply with the objectives laid down in the national deming plan, Chile foresees for 2006–07 demining activities in the first, second and 12th regions. A total of 11 minefields with 8 929 APLs and 3 344 anti-tank mines are to be cleared. Chile’s deadline according to the Ottawa Convention to remove and destroy all APLs located along exist-ing minefields is March 2012.

Special attention is directed towards four minefields within the Llullail-laco National Park (second region) and three minefields in the Bahía Azul, Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego area (12th region). This special consideration is due to its expected positive socioeconomic impact on tourist development.

EC assistance during 2006–07 is directed towards mine-clearing activi-ties in the Bahía Azul, Isla Grande de Tierra de Fuego area within the 12th region. Mine awareness activities, demining training and victim re-habilitation will be carried out in the first, second and 12th regions.

The EC ‘Humanitarian demining project Chile’ assists Chile in the dem-ining and destruction of anti-personnel mines and UXO, contributing thus to the restoration of the necessary security conditions of the country’s population and visitors and to its economic and social development.Likewise, it contributes to maintaining and strengthening Chile’s agree-able relations with neighbouring countries and preserves its peaceful insertion in the international security agenda. This will be accomplished through concrete actions of demining (removal and destruction of anti-personnel mines), of maintenance and georeferenciation of mined areas, of capacity building of local personnel and of demining and humanitar-ian assistance to the injured, and of campaigns of prevention, of educa-tion (especially to school-age children) and of dissemination.

In this way, Chile fulfils the requirements of the Ottawa Convention, considers security issues also taken from the perspective of a person and his or her rights and gives friendly indications to its neighbours, to the borderline population and all the people that visit the country. The beneficiaries will thus be Chile, as a country inserted in the concert of nations, the Chilean population and that of the neighbouring countries, and the tourists who visit Chile.


Ratified

CHILE

Chile


Capital: SantiagoCurrency: Chilean peso (CLP)Population: 16 134 219 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 11 300 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 76.77 years • female: 80.21 years (2006 est.) • male: 73.49 yearsNatural resources: copper, timber, iron ore, nitrates,precious metals, molybdenum, hydropowerClimate: temperate; desert in north; Mediterranean incentral region; cool and damp in southTerrain: low coastal mountains; fertile centralvalley; rugged Andes in eastLand use: • arable land: 2.62 % • permanent crops: 0.43 % • other: 96.95 % (2005)


TOTAL EU 2005 1.198.381

NETHERLANDS 198.381 • Ministry of Defence: capacity building• CIAHZM: victim assistance and mine risk education

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

1.000.000 • UNDP: demining

58


Colombia is the most mine-affected country in Latin America. The mine problem is a legacy of the internal conflict which affected the country for over 40 years. Colombia remains the only country in the Americas region where anti-personnel mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) continue to be used on a daily basis. All major guerrilla groups have publicly acknowledged that they are not only users but also manu-facturers of APLs which are used in their fight against the government.Most of these mines are homemade, using cheap and easy-to-find ma-terials, among them plastic mines that cannot be found by the metal detectors used by the army. Mines are laid, and continue to be laid, indiscriminately and not in the ‘conventional’ minefield patterns; 493 municipalities in 29 (out of the 32) departments are affected (equalling 45 % of the territory).

The number of reported victims has peaked in the last three years and reached a cumulative total of 3 756 at May 2005 (since 1990), of which 35 % are civilians and half of them children (experts agree that there is a significant level of under-reporting). Between 1990 and May 2005, the highest percentage of mine accidents occurred in the departments of Antioquia and Santander, followed by Bolivar, Meta and Norte de Santander. Although most areas are not heavily mined, the presence, or perceived presence, of landmines or UXO remains a significant obsta-cle to development and reconstruction in rural areas. With the conflict still ongoing, mine clearance activities may have limited sustainability in some areas. Additional EC assistance will therefore build on previous programmes and focus, as a first step, on the continuation of mine risk education and victim rehabilitation as a way to reduce the risk posed by mines and UXO to the civilian population. Mine clearance assistance, in accordance with the national mine action plan, which has postponed mine clearance action to the last phase, could be envisaged for 2006 or 2007.

Under the previous multiannual strategy and programming, the EC sup-ported border mine clearance, mine awareness, involvement of non-state actors and victim rehabilitation. However, the extent and location of the threat is not adequately captured. An LIS is long overdue in order to identify and assess the impact of the APL problem in this country and plan its elimination according to sound planning. An EC-funded techni-cal mission in April 2004 supported the Colombian Landmine National Observatory in formulating the national policy and programme and iden-tified a possible EC intention in this field, which was approved at the end of 2004. The EC country strategy 2002–06 includes mine action as a priority. A EUR 2.5 million action under the geographic budget has been directly supporting the anti-personnel mines’ national plan by assisting the Columbian Anti-Personnel Landmines Observatory (CAPLO) in the areas of carrying-out an LIS and its monitoring, mine awareness, atten-

PACIFICOCEAN

CARIBBEAN SEA

Panamá

Bogotá

Caracas

Medellín

Cali

Cúcuta

Barranquilla

VENEZUELA

COLOMBIA

PERU

ECUADORBRAZIL

Pasto

PANAMA

Quito


Ratified

COLOMBIA

Colombia

Area (land): 1 038 700 km2

Capital: BogotaCurrency: Colombian peso (COP)Population: 43 593 035 (July 2004 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 7 100 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 71.99 years • female: 75.96 years (2006 est.) • male: 68.15 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, natural gas, coal, ironore, nickel, gold, copper, emeralds, hydropowerClimate: tropical along coast and eastern plains;cooler in highlandsTerrain: flat coastal lowlands, central highlands, highAndes Mountains, eastern lowland plainsLand use: • arable land: 2.01 % • permanent crops: 1.37 % • other: 96.62 % (2005)

59

tion to victims (physical rehabilitation and social reinsertion), institutional strengthening and information system reinforcement. Furthermore, sup-port to mine risk education, victim rehabilitation and mine clearance ac-tivities will be provided under APL programming 2005–07.


TOTAL EU 2005 297.376

GERMANY 139.796 • Unicef: rehabilitation of mine victims, mainly children

SPAIN 57.000 • Municipality of Barcelona — NGO Moviment per la Pau: mine victim assistance fromMeta, Antioquia, Cauca and Bolivar

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

100.580 • NGO Fundación Antonio Restrepo Barco: mine risk education for children and young people• NGO Diakonie: mine risk education

© U

nicef Colom

bia (Lup

i Herrera)


60


NICARAGUA

PACIFICOCEAN

CARIBBEANSEA

Matagalpa

SomotoPto Cabezas

Juigalpa

Managua

San José

Belmopan

TegucigalpaSanSalvador

ELSALVADOR

GUATEMALA

PANAMA

COSTA RICA

HONDURAS

NICARAGUA


Ratified

Nicaragua’s landmine problem is a result of the 1979–90 internal con-flict. In addition to landmines, a large quantity of UXO such as bombs, fragmentation grenades, mortars and ammunition also remain in former combat areas, including urban areas.

Nicaragua acted as a Friend of the President of the First Review Confer-ence and has served as co-chair of the Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-Economic Reintegration since December 2004.Nicaragua hosted a workshop on advancing victim assistance in the Americas in April 2005.

The humanitarian demining programme of Nicaragua aims to destroy all mines within the 10-year timeframe set by the convention. To ful-fil this objective, a term of five years (2000–04) was initially estimated, but the programme was extended until 2006. The programme is imple-mented with the support of the Organization of American States (OAS) programme of assistance for integral mine action. Demining is carried out by the Nicaraguan army through the small demining units of the body of engineers.

At December 2005, 89 % of the plan was completed; 131 236 anti-personnel mines out of a total of 147 303 had been detected and de-stroyed; 16 067 remain to be destroyed up to 2006 in order to declare Nicaragua free of mines.

Nicaragua plans to clear some 70 minefields in Jinotega, Nueva Segovia and RAAN by the end of 2006 and some specific objectives by the end of 2007 (campaign of information, preventive education, victim assist-ance and reinsertion).

On 28 August 2002, Nicaragua completed the destruction of the last of its 133 435 stockpiled anti-personnel mines. Between 2002 and 2004, the EC had supported mine clearance and stockpile destruction activi-ties within the OAS PADCA programme.

At the First Review Conference, Nicaragua was identified as one of 24 states parties with significant numbers of mine survivors, and with the greatest needs and responsibility to provide adequate survivor assist-ance. In June 2005, Nicaragua presented some of its objectives for the period 2005–09 to address the needs of mine survivors.

Nicaragua is currently seeking funding to support the process of demo-bilising mine clearance personnel in 2007 once clearance operations have ceased. Nicaragua plans to provide partial compensation and re-training to facilitate the transition to civilian life.


TOTAL EU 2005 1.174.080

AUSTRIA 25.437 • Horizont 3000: victim assistance inRio Coco region

DENMARK 806.397 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Government of Nicaragua: mineclearance and mine risk education

SWEDEN 342.246 • SIDA: mine clearance, supportthrough OAS

Nicaragua


Capital: ManaguaCurrency: gold cordoba (NIO)Population: 5 570 129 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 2 400 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 70.63 years • female: 72.81 years (2006 est.) • male: 68.55 yearsNatural resources: gold, silver, copper, tungsten, lead,zinc, timber, fishClimate: tropical in lowlands, cooler in highlandsTerrain: extensive Atlantic coastal plains rising tocentral interior mountains; narrow Pacific coastal plaininterrupted by volcanoesLand use: • arable land: 14.81 % • permanent crops: 1.82 % • other: 83.37 % (2005)

© IC

BL

61


The Republic of Peru became a state party to the Mine Ban Treaty in March 1999. There is no specific legislation in place to implement the MBT. In September 2005, Peru announced that a mine action plan cov-ering 2002–06 was approved but is not publicly available.

Peru is a former producer of anti-personnel mines but claims never to export them. In the past, Peru imported mines from various countries.

Peru has acknowledged that it used anti-personnel landmines to protect high-tension electrical towers and public infrastructure during and after the internal conflict of 1980–92 with guerrillas of the Shining Path (Sen-dero Luminoso) and the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement. Peru has continued to maintain that it never laid mines along the border with Ecuador before, during or after the 1995 Cenepa conflict. Mine con-tamination in Peru is concentrated in three areas: the northern border with Ecuador, where both countries used mines during the 1995 Cenepa conflict; the territory inland from the Pacific coast and Andean highlands, where the police used mines to protect infrastructure (primarily high-ten-sion electrical towers); and the southern border with Chile, where the Chilean military government mined its side of the border in the 1970s and 1980s. In June 2005, Peru reported also casualties from depart-ments not previously identified as having a landmine or UXO problem (La Libertad, Ancash, San Martin, Huanuco and Ayachuco).


Sucre

Lima

Quito

La Paz

Callao

Iquitos

Trujillo

Chiclayo

PACIFICOCEAN

Qosqo

Arequipa

COLOMBIA

P E R U

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

BOLIVIA


Ratified

PERU

Peru

Area (land): 1.28 million km2

Capital: LimaCurrency: nuevo sol (PEN)Population: 28 302 603 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 6 100 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 69.84 years • female: 71.71 years (2006 est.) • male: 68.05 yearsNatural resources: copper, silver, gold, petroleum, timber, fish, iron ore, coal, phosphate, potash,hydropower, natural gasClimate: varies from tropical in east to dry desert inwest; temperate to frigid in AndesTerrain: western coastal plain, high and rugged Andesin centre, eastern lowland jungle of Amazon BasinLand use: • arable land: 2.88 % • permanent crops: 0.47 % • other: 96.65 % (2005)

TOTAL EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: EUR 26.000 1

TOTAL EU 2005 1.000.000

NETHERLANDS 1.000.000 • Mine action in the Condor mountain range of Peru/Ecuador: anti-personnel mines andUXO clearance, landmine victim rehabilitation and mine risk education programmes

62

Europe

Casp

ian

Sea

Blac

k Se

a

Balti

c Se

a

MED

ITER

RANE

AN S

EA

SWED

EN

ANY

POLA

ND

LITH

UANI

A

ROM

ANIA

BULG

ARIA

HUNG

ARY

SLOV

AKIA

CZEC

H RE

PUBL

IC

SLOV

ENIA

AUST

RIA

ITAL

Y

SAN

MAR

INO

GREE

CETU

RKEY

GEOR

GIA

AZER

BAIJ

AN

KAZA

KHST

AN

TURK

MEN

ISTA

N

IRAN

IRAQ

SYRI

A

ARM

ENIA

MOL

DOVA

LATV

IA

RUSS

IA

RUSS

IA

SERB

IA

MON

T. KOSO

VO

CHEC

HNYA

INGU

SHET

IA

CROA

TIA

BOSN

IA-

HERZ

F.Y.

R.O.

M

CYPR

US

ALBA

NIA

BELA

RUS

UKRA

INE

Belg

rade

Mos

cow

Kiev

Nico

sia

Tira

na

Podg

oric

a

Sara

jevo

Zagr

eb

Min

sk

63

EUROPE

REGION-WIDE

TOTAL EU 2005 1.044.600

SPAIN 177.600 • Ministry of Defence: mine clearance and mine risk education in Kosovo. In-kindcontribution: the Spanish army deployed an EOD team for destruction of explosives inthe margins of the Stabilisation Force (SFOR), and a mine risk education programmewas implemented

UNITED KINGDOM 867.000 • Via ITF: demining in Albania, Bosnia and Azerbaijan


EUROPEANCOMMUNITY + MEMBER STATES

8.200.000 • Total amount of support in Europe for the period 1999–2004

© U

ND

P M

ine Action C

enter Cyp

rus

EUROPE

64

Albania ratified the Mine Ban Treaty on 29 February 2000 and became a state party on 1 August 2000. Specific legislation to implement the treaty has yet to be adopted. Albania’s stockpile of 1 683 860 anti-per-sonnel mines was destroyed by 4 April 2002, well in advance of the treaty deadline of 1 August 2004. Albania has opted not to retain any anti-personnel mines for training purposes.

In the north-east of the country, some 15 km2 remained heavily contami-nated with landmines and UXO from the Kosovo crisis in 1999. Patrolling of the Albania–Kosovo border, where trafficking and other illegal activi-ties take place, is hazardous for the Albanian border police.

From 1999 to July 2004, 269 mine/UXO casualties were recorded in north-east Albania.

The Albanian Mine Action Committee (AMAC) and the Albanian Mine Action Executive (AMAE) were formed in October 1999 and strength-ened in subsequent years with assistance from the UNDP.

More than 12 km2 of mine-affected land have been released so far with the support of international donors through clearance and areas’ reduc-tion, leaving the country with some 3 km2 to be cleared. The national clearance plan is now aimed at making the country completely free from landmines within the Ottawa Treaty deadline in 2010.

In 2003, an integrated victim assistance strategy was also adopted in Albania.

The EC strongly contributed to the implementation of the national mine action plan with two major donations of EUR 2 million in 2003 from CARDS funds and EUR 2.57 million in 2006 from the thematic budg-et. Funds were aimed at all the mine action pillars including support to monitoring and coordination functions of the AMAE, clearance opera-tions, MRE as well as victim assistance.

Adriatic Sea GREECE

KOSOVOSERBIA &

MONTENEGRO

Tirana

ALBANIA

FYROM

Elbasan

Berat

Durrës

Shkodër

Korçë


Ratified

ALBANIA

Albania


Capital: TiranaCurrency: lek (ALL)Population: 3 581 655 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 4 900 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 77.43 years • female: 80.34 years (2006 est.) • male: 74.78 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, natural gas, coal,bauxite, chromite, copper, iron ore, nickel, salt, timber,hydropowerClimate: mild temperate; cool, cloudy, wet winters; hot,clear, dry summers; interior is cooler and wetterTerrain: mostly mountains and hills; small plains alongcoastLand use: • arable land: 20.1 % • permanent crops: 4.21 % • other: 75.69 % (2005)


TOTAL EU 2005 4.002.597

Czech Republic 11.200 • ITF: mine clearance, quality management project in north-western Albania

France 50.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs: victim assistance

Germany 400.711 • ITF/DCA: mine clearance in northern Albania

Slovenia 40.686 • Institute for Rehabilitation of the Republic of Slovenia: rehabilitation• Geneva International Center for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD): mine action• Implementation Support Unit (ISU): mine action

European Community 3.500.000 • UNDP mine clearance

65

EUROPE

The Republic of Belarus acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty in September 2003 and the treaty entered into force in March 2004. Belarus has not produced or exported anti-personnel mines since its independence in 1992. It has stated that it has not used anti-personnel mines for protec-tion of its borders or for other purposes. Prior to becoming a state party to the Mine Ban Treaty, Belarus established a moratorium prohibiting the export of anti-personnel mines in 1995; in 2003 this was extended to the end of 2007.

Belarus inherited its huge stockpile of anti-personnel mines from the Soviet Union. Belarus reported that, as of 1 July 2004, it has 3 988 057 mines in its stockpile, including 3 374 864 of the PFM and PFM-1S type.It intends to destroy 3 869 706 of its stockpiled mines by 1 March 2008, the four-year deadline mandated by the Mine Ban Treaty.

In support of Belarus’ efforts to meet the Ottawa Convention obliga-tions, in 2005 the EC decided to finance the disposal of the entire stock-pile of PFM for an amount of EUR 3 million.

(*) Text partly based on the Landmine Monitor Report 2005.


Ratified

BELARUS

Belarus


Capital: MinskCurrency: Belarusian ruble (BYB/BYR)Population: 10 293 011 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 7 700 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 69.08 years • female: 74.98 years (2006 est.) • male: 63.47 yearsNatural resources: forests, peat deposits, smallquantities of oil and natural gas, granite, dolomitic,limestone, marl, chalk, sand, gravel, clayClimate: cold winters, cool and moist summers;transitional between continental and maritimeTerrain: generally flat and contains much marshlandLand use: • arable land: 26.77 % • permanent crops: 0.6 % • other: 72.63 % (2005)


TOTAL EU 2005 3.000.000

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

3.000.000 • Support of Belarus’ efforts to meet the Ottawa Convention obligations: financing ofstockpile disposal of PFM mines

EUROPE

66

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

Bosnia and Herzegovina became a state party of the Mine BanTreaty on 1 March 1999. National legislation to implement thetreaty has been delayed by political changes. Bosnia and Herze-govina announced completion of destruction of its stockpile of 460 727 anti-personnel mines in November 1999. But in 2003,the Stabilisation Force (SFOR) found several hundred thousandanti-personnel mines among old munitions at military storagesites. From 1998, when Operation Harvest began, through Feb-ruary 2004, 32 907 anti-personnel mines and large quantities of other munitions were collected and destroyed by SFOR.

The Bosnia and Herzegovina Demining Commission has the re-sponsibility to oversee the policy and legislative components of mine action in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Demining Commis-sion is responsible for the planning, monitoring and evaluation of all mine action. The BHMAC is responsible for the coordinationof all mine action efforts in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Occasional use of anti-personnel mines has occurred in criminalor terrorist activities, and illegal stores of mines and other weap-onry continue to be discovered.

An EC co-financed LIS was completed in December 2003; itidentified 1 366 populated places as being mine affected, of which 154 were categorised as high impact, and 696 as medi-um impact. In May 2004, BHMAC stated that there were 18 319minefields in the country containing an estimated 260 751 anti-personnel mines, 51 447 anti-vehicle mines and 3 635 UXO. Thetotal area potentially contaminated was estimated in April 2004as 2 780 km2. By the end of 2004, this number further decreasedto 2 300 km2, which approximately represents 4.4 % of the totallandmass of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In 2004, the final version of the landmine victim assistance strat-egy and mine risk education strategy were released. Bosnia andHerzegovina is in the process of finalising its mine action strategy2005–09 and has already adopted a mine action plan for 2005.

>>>


Ratified

Adriatic Sea

MON

ALBANIA

CROATIA

BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA

Banja Luka

Mostar

Brč ko

Bihác

Sarajevo

Bosnia and Herzegovina


Capital: SarajevoCurrency: marka (BAM)Population: 4 498 976 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 6 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 78 years • female: 81.88 years (2006 est.) • male: 74.39 yearsNatural resources: coal, iron ore, bauxite, copper,lead, chromite, cobalt, manganese, nickel, clay,gypsum, salt, sand, forests, hydropowerClimate: hot summers and cold winters; areas of highelevation have short, cool summers and long, severewinters; mild, rainy winters along coastTerrain: mountains and valleysLand use: • arable land: 19.61 % • permanent crops: 1.89 % • other: 78.5 % (2005)

67

EUROPE


TOTAL EU 2005 4.535.106

Austria 500.000 • International Trust Fund: support to integrated community mine action plans

Belgium 80.000 • Slovenian Trust Fund for Demining: assistance to demining

Czech Republic 41.164 • ITF: mine clearance

France 100.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs: demining of agricultural land

Germany 1.700.000 • ITF/DCA: tender for mine clearance activities

Hungary 16.000 • Stiftung Sankt Barbara: landmine clearance in Sarajevo via ITF

Italy 485.000 • UNDP

Luxembourg 211.240 • Handicap International Luxembourg: integrated mine action, support to local capacities to reduce mine risks

Netherlands 500.000 • UNDP/BHMAC: capacity building

Poland 255.000 • Ministry of National Defence: mine and UXO clearance in the margins of the EUFORmission

Slovenia 212.226 • ITF: mine action

Sweden 534.476 • SIDA: mine clearance, support to BiHMAC

<<< BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

© S

panish M

FA (P

epe D

iaz)

EUROPE

68

atia became a state party to the Mine Ban Treaty in March 1999.atia has played an active role in the global effort to ban anti-per-rrnel mines for many years, hosting regional landmine conferences ineb in June 1999 and Dubrovnik in October 2002. Croatia completedruction of its stockpile of almost 200 000 anti-personnel mines in

ober 2002, well in advance of the treaty deadline of 1 March 2003.Initially, Croatia announced that it would retain 17 500 anti-personnelmines, but in December 2000 reduced this to approximately 7 000. TheDecree of Proclamation of the Law on Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling,Production and Transfer of AP Mines and their Destruction was issuedon 6 October 2004. Since 1998, approximately 518 km2 of mine-affectedand mine-suspected land has been released to the community throughsurvey reduction (about 70 %) and clearance (about 30 %). In 2005, 27km2 of mine-affected and mine-suspected land was released to com-munities, through survey reduction. From 1998 to April 2006, Cromacrecorded 262 mine/UXO victims, among them 98 fatalities. A total of 100000 persons have been involved and educated per year through variousforms of MRE in the period between 1998 and 2005. This resulted in areduction of the number of mine victims, which dropped from 88 in 1998to 13 in 2005.

Since 1998, approximately EUR 255 million has been spent on mineaction by Cromac. In 2005, Croatia spent about EUR 40 million on mineaction. Croatia hosted the sixth annual meeting of states parties to theMine Ban Treaty in November 2005.


Ratified

AdriaticSea

Rijeka

Zadar

Split

Osijek

Zagreb

Sarajevo

Ljubljana

Croatia


Capital: ZagrebCurrency: kuna (HRK)Population: 4 494 749 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 11 600 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 74.68 years • female: 78.53 years (2006 est.) • male: 71.03 yearsNatural resources: oil, some coal, bauxite, low-gradeiron ore, calcium, gypsium, natural asphalt, silica, mica,clays, salt, hydropowerClimate: Mediterranean and continental; continentalclimate predominant with hot summers and coldwinters; mild winters, dry summers along coastTerrain: geographically diverse; flat plains alongHungarian border, low mountains and highlands nearAdriatic coastline and islandsLand use: • arable land: 25.22 % • permanent crops: 2.19 % • other: 71.99 % (2005)

© S

panish M

inistry of Foreign Affairs

CROATAA IA

69

EUROPE



Austria 100.000 • International Trust Fund: demining in eastern Slavonia

France In kind

100.000

• Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Mindef: advice and assessment of the local demining programmes

• Ministry of Foreign Affairs: demining of agricultural land

Germany 800.000 • ASB: tender for mine clearance activities

Luxembourg 250.000 • Croatian Demining Centre: two mine clearance projects in Moscenica-Gata and Petrinja

Slovenia 45.615 • ITF: mine action

European Community 1.010.000 • Cromac: demining

<<< CROATIA

© S

panish M


© S

panish M


EUROPE

70

Before and after 1974, both sides laid defensive minefields. Following a de facto ceasefire, the UN peacekeeping force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) inspected the deployment of the Cyprus National Guard and the Turkish and Turkish Cypriot forces, and a buffer zone was established between the areas controlled by the opposing forces. The defensive minefields laid by both sides were located within, and outside of, the buffer zone.

The ceasefire lines extend approximately 180 km across the island. The buffer zone varies in width from less than 20 m to some 7 km, and it covers about 3 % of the island, including some of the most valuable ag-ricultural land. The total estimated mined area amounts to 6 million m2, of which 4 million m2 is in the buffer zone. It is estimated that the overall cost for mine clearance in Cyprus amounts to EUR 15 million of which EUR 8 million in the buffer zone between the Republic of Cyprus and the government non-controlled areas which is under the supervision of the United Nations.

Under the 2004 budget from heading 3, the European Parliament has recommended and approved a pilot project on demining activities in Cyprus (under budget line 22 02 09) with a budget of EUR 2.5 million.For 2005, the Parliament granted another EUR 1.5 million strengthening this project.

The ultimate objective of the project is to contribute to the peace build-ing process between the two communities through the removal and de-struction of all landmines and UXO: identified minefields, suspect mined areas and booby-trapped areas in Cyprus. The identified immediate ob-jective of the project is the clearance of all known minefields and UXO, booby-traps and suspected mined areas in the United Nations force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) controlled buffer zone.

The removal of the minefields in Cyprus will contribute to the peace and confidence-building processes between both sides, which will benefit the whole island. Furthermore, it is essential for a future economic ex-ploitation of the land.

The EU-funded demining project substantially contributes to the rec-onciliation process in Cyprus. The political impact of mine clearance in Cyprus will certainly be significant both through the elimination of physical barriers which divide the two sides and as a confidence-build-ing measure for other bi-communal initiatives. It is also essential for the future economic exploitation of the currently mined land. After the out-come of the simultaneous referendums in April 2004 and the renewed burst of lack of trust between the two communities, the opening of new crossing points thanks to the demining project does represent a major contribution to the reconciliation process.

It is for this reason that the highest priority for clearance in the pro-gramme is linked to the opening of new crossing points through the buffer zone and targeted to those areas where landmines are present or


Ratified

CYPRUS

Cyprus


Capital: NicosiaCurrency: Cypriot pound (CYP);Population: 749 200 (end 2004)GDP per capita:purchasing power parity — USD 20 300Life expectancy at birth: • total: 79.2 years • female: 81.4 years • male: 77.0 yearsNatural resources: copper, pyrites, asbestos, gypsum,timber, salt, marble, clay earth pigmentClimate: temperate; Mediterranean with hot, drysummers and cool wintersTerrain: central plain with mountains to north and south;scattered but significant plains along southern coastLand use: • arable land: 10.81 % • permanent crops: 4.32 % • other: 84.87 % (2005)

71

suspected and mine clearance activities are required before new cross-ing points can be established.

To achieve this, the following outputs have been pursued:

• establishment of a mine action centre (MAC) to oversee that all dem-ining operations in Cyprus are carried out correctly and to interna-tional mine action standards;

• construction of a mine detection dog accreditation area to ensure that the dogs and handlers are competent to carry out the work in Cyprus to international standards;

• development of technical standards and guidelines for the mine ac-tion project in Cyprus;

• development and implementation of the accreditation process for quality assurance/quality control, and clearance contractors;

• clearance of mines and UXO: identified minefields, suspect mined areas and booby-trapped areas cleared of all landmines and UXO, in a cost-effective and timely manner, in accordance with technical standards and guidelines for Cyprus and international mine action standards.

After the establishment of the MAC, mine clearance operations started in November 2004. Highest priority has been given to clear mined areas that would affect the opening of new crossing points across the buffer zone. A number of suspected areas have been cancelled through tech-nical surveys.

At the end of January 2006, 18 of the 48 suspect mined areas in the buffer zone totalling 750 000 m2 were cleared, equivalent to around 15 % of the estimated overall 6 million m2 of mine-contaminated land, and 2 288 mines destroyed. Altogether with the EUR 4 million allocated since 2004, it is expected that, by April 2006, 1.1 million m2 of mined land would be cleared, released though mine action (i.e. 22 %). Fur-thermore, a number of suspected areas have been cancelled through technical surveys.

The eight National Guard minefields handed over for clearance were completed by the end of July 2005. With good cooperation, the Turkish forces agreed for 13 minefields in and around the Nicosia City area to be cleared in August 2005. A general minefield survey was conducted of these 13 dangerous areas. It was found that the actual fenced area on the ground was more then 1 million m2 larger than previously recorded.It is fair to assume that this trend is likely to continue throughout the buffer zone, which is likely to increase the overall cost. (It has not been possible to complete a full general survey of the mined and suspect dangerous areas throughout the buffer zone due to restricted access to the north.)

Among the cleared areas, there are two new crossing points between the northern and southern parts of Cyprus, respectively at Astromeridis-Kato Zhodia and Ledra Street in the centre of the walled city of Nicosia (though the latter has not yet been opened). Further mine clearance will pave the way for the opening of additional crossing points in the short to medium term.

>>>

EUROPE

© U

ND

P M

ine Action C

enter Cyp

rus©

UN

DP

Mine A

ction Center C

yprus

© S

panish M

FA (P

epe D

iaz)

EUROPE

72


TOTAL EU 2005 4.000.000

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

4.000.000 • UNDP: landmine and UXO clearance

© S

panish M

inistry of Foreign Affairs (P

epe D

iaz)

73

EUROPE

MONTENEGRO AND SERBIA

Montenegro and Serbia acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty on 18 September2003 and became a state party on 1 March 2004. Montenegro andSerbia reported that the treaty became an integral part of domestic

ation upon accession. Changes to the penal code have been madentenegro and are under way in Serbia. In January 2003, the Ministry

of Defence disclosed that Montenegro and Serbia holds a stockpile of just over 1.3 million anti-personnel mines. Negotiations are under waywith NATO to carry out stockpile destruction. Military authorities alsoclaimed that no anti-personnel mines have been produced, importedor exported since 1992. The Mine Action Centre (MAC) for Montenegroand Serbia was formed in March 2002. Responsibility for the MAC was passed to the Serbian Government’s General Secretariat in September2003.

TOTAL EU 2005 990.000

Austria 250.000 • Euro-AtlanticAA Partnership Council/NATO Partnership for Peace: stockpiledestruction

Germany 600.000 • ITF: tender for mine clearanceactivities in Nis and in KosovoKK

Hungary 40.000 • Menschen gegen Minen: mineclearance via NATO NAMSA

Luxembourg 100.000 • PRVA ISKRA-Namenska Proizvodnja:destruction of APL stockpiles

KOSOVO

Since January 2002, the Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Management Section of the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) has beencoordinating the continued residual clearance of mines and UXO inKosovo after the closure of the United Nations Mine Action CoordinationCenter (UNMACC) in December 2001. The national capacity Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) has also been trained, developed and monitoredby Handicap International since early 2002. The current mine and UXOsituation that remains in Kosovo is that there are 46 dangerous areas known to contain a mine or UXO threat that require as a minimum a survey and most likely full clearance. There are also 53 tasks that requirean EOD response team to conduct as a minimum a technical survey to verify or discredit any existing threat from mines or UXO. Suspiciousand dangerous areas are still being reported today by the municipalities,members of the public and KFOR.

>>>


Ratified

MONTENEGRO

SERBIA, KOSOVO

SeaA

Podgorica

Novi Sad

Pristina

Belgrade

Sofia

Skopje

Sarajevo

Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo


Capital: BelgradeCurrency: new YugoslavYY dinar (YUM); NB: inMontenegro the euro is legal tender; in Kosovo boththe euro and the YugoslavYY dinar are legalPopulation: 10 835 545 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 2 700 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 74.95 years • female: 77.75 years (2006 est.) • male: 72.37 yearsNatural resources: oil, gas, coal, iron ore, bauxite,copper, lead, zinc, antimony, chromite, nickel, gold,silver, magnesium, pyrite, limestone, marble, salt,hydropower, arable landClimate: in the north, continental climate (cold wintersand hot, humid summers with well-distributed rainfall);central portion, continental and Mediterranean climate;to the south, Adriatic climate along the coast, hot, drysummers and autumns, and relatively cold winters withheavy snowfall inlandTerrain: extremely varied; to the north, rich fertileplains; to the east, limestone ranges and basins; tothe south-east, ancient mountains and hills; to thesouth-west, extremely high shoreline with no islandsoff the coastLand use: • arable land: 33.18 % • permanent crops: 3.2 % • other: 63.62 % (2005)

EUROPE

74

TOTAL EU 2005 1.120.108

Belgium 150.000(in-kind contribution)

• Ministry of Defence: UXO clearance within KFOR mandate and assistance to local demining organisations

Netherlands 766.108 • HALO: clearance and mine risk education

Poland 204.000 • Ministry of National Defence: mine and UXO clearance in the margins of the mission under the auspices of NATO

<<< MONTENEGRO, SERBIA, KOSOVO

© S

panish M


75

EUROPE

The Russian Federation has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty. Itslong-held reservations to joining the treaty include its perception of theutility of anti-personnel mines and the lack of viable alternatives, and thefinancial difficulties in destroying the country’s considerable stockpileof anti-personnel mines within four years, as required by the treaty. InJanuary 2005, Russia declared at the Conference on Disarmament thata ‘mine-free world remains our goal’.

Russia and other countries making up the former Soviet Union wereheavily contaminated by mines and UXO as a result of World War II. Rus-sia had produced anti-personnel mines since 1992. Since 1997, Russiahas conducted research on modifications to existing landmines, devel-opment of new landmines, and alternatives to landmines.

Russia had used mines on a regular basis since 1999, primarily inChechnya, but also at times in Dagestan, Tajikistan, and on the borderwith Georgia. Russia has generally argued that its mine usage has beennecessary to stop the flow of terrorists, weapons and drugs, and hasbeen in full compliance with CCW Amended Protocol II.

CHECHNYAYY

The situation in Chechnya and in its neighbouring republics remainscomplex and continues to be unstable. The Chechen conflict has re-sulted in a widespread use of mines by both sides of the conflict. Thishas made Chechnya one of the most mine-affected territories. AlthoughChechnya requires immediate and important assistance for deminingaction, so far very little has been done. As in most mine-affected coun-tries, there is no clear estimate of the number of mines which have beenlaid in Chechnya. Published figures vary between 500 000 and 3 millionmines.

The IMSMA (information management system for mine action) database,which is run by Unicef in Chechnya, reveals that over 3 030 civilianshave been killed or wounded by mines and UXO in the republic since1995; 25 % of the total number of victims were children under 18 yearsold at the time of the incident and 14 % were adult women.

Large-scale civilian clearance and demining are not going on in Chech-nya, apart from short operations undertaken by the Russian authori-ties to clear some industrial and agricultural areas. This reinforces theimportance of mine risk education activities to limit the negative impactof mines and UXO on a population which has already been severelyaffected by the conflict. The EC assistance in Chechnya is mostly pro-vided through the Commission’s humanitarian aid department. For hu-manitarian reasons, further support to the alleviation of the APL andUXO threats in this region will continue to be provided.


CaspianSea

Tbilisi

Groznyy

MakhachkalaNazran'

Kizlyar

Khasav'yurtGudermes


Not acceded

RUSSIA

Russia

Area (land): 16 995 800 km2

Capital: MoscowCurrency: Russian rouble (RUB)Population: 142 893 540 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 10 700 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 67.08 years • female: 74.1 years (2006 est.) • male: 60.45 yearsNatural resources: wide natural resource baseincluding major deposits of oil, natural gas, coal, andmany strategic minerals, timberClimate: ranges from steppes in the south throughhumid continental in much of European Russia;subarctic in Siberia to tundra climate in the polar north;winters vary from cool along Black Sk ea coast to frigidin Siberia; summers vary from warm in the steppes tocool along Arctic coastTerrain: broad plain with low hills west of Urals; vastconiferous forest and tundra in Siberia; uplands andmountains along southern border regionsLand use: • arable land: 7.17 % • permanent crops: 0.11 % • other: 92.72 % (2005)

EUROPE

76


TOTAL EU 2005 331.058

Germany 260.558 • Unicef: victim assistance, rehabilitation of mine victims, mainly children

Spain 70.500 • Ministry of Defence/Spanish International Demining Centre (CID): training seminar on deactivation of conventional ammunitions from the Ministry for Civil Defence, Emergencies and Elimination of the Consequences of Natural Disasters (Emercom)

<<< RUSSIA©

ICB

L (Brian Liu)

77

EUROPE

Ukraine has ratified the Mine Ban Treaty in December 2003. Landminesand UXO from World War II still affect Ukraine. From independence in1992 to today, Ukrainian demining teams have cleared more than 270000 hectares of land.

During the Soviet era, Ukraine produced components for anti-personnelmines. The government has repeatedly stated that Ukraine has not beeninvolved in production since its independence. Ukraine has a morato-rium on the export of anti-personnel mines in place through 2003.

The Ministry of Defence states that anti-personnel mines have not beenused on Ukrainian territory since World War II. Ukrainian police continueto record individual cases of criminal use of landmines.

Ukraine inherited a stockpile of 6.35 million anti-personnel mines, in-cluding PMN-type mines and PFM-type mines, from the Soviet Union.Ukraine completed the destruction of nearly 405 000 PMN-type minesbetween July 2002 and May 2003.

The key problem for Ukraine now is the destruction of its huge stock of 6 million highly hazardous and toxic PFM1 landmines. As in previousmultiannual strategy and programming, the EC supports the destructionof the total stockpile of PFM1 landmines. Further support to clearanceand stockpile destruction of ERW is being envisaged under the newEuropean neighbourhood policy instrument.

Sea ofAzov

Dnipropetrovs'k

KharkivL'viv

Odesa

Donets'k

Kiev

Sofia

Bucharest

Vilnius Minsk

Chisinau


Ratified

UKRAINE

Ukraine


Capital: Kiev (Kyyiv)Currency: hryvnia (UAH)Population: 46 710 816 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 6 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 69.98 years • female: 75.59 years (2006 est.) • male: 64.71 yearsNatural resources: iron ore, coal, manganese, naturalgas, oil, salt, sulfur, graphite, titanium, magnesium,kaolin, nickel, mercury, timber, arable landClimate: temperate continental; Mediterraneanonly on the southern Crimean coast; precipitationdisproportionately distributed, highest in west andnorth, lesser in east andsouth-east; winters varyfrom cool along the Black Sk ea to cold farther inland;summers are warm across the greater part of thecountry, hot in the southTerrain: most of Ukraine consists of fertile plains(steppes) and plateaus, mountains being found onlyin the west (the Carpathians), and in the Crimeanpeninsula in the extreme southLand use: • arable land: 53.8 % • permanent crops: 1.5 % • other: 44.7 % (2005)

TOTAL EU EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: 229.000


France In kind • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/AA Mindef: advice and assessment on demining training

Luxembourg 50.000 • OSCE: mine clearance and destruction of dangerous ammunition stockpiles• NATO: destruction of ammunition and mine stockpiles

European Community 5.910.000 • GTZ Consortium: stockpile destruction

78

The Middle East

CaspianSea

Black Sea

RedSea

Arabian Sea

The Gulf

Gulf of O

MEDITERRANEANSEA

EGYPT

SUDANERITREA

ETHIOPIA

DJIBOUTI

ISRAEL

PALESTINIANAUTHORITY

AZ.

AZERBAIJANARMENIA

GEORGIA

RUSSIA

IRAN

TURKMENISTAN

UZB

TURKEY

CYPRUS

SAUDI ARABIA

QATAR

KUWAIT

BAHRAIN

U.A.E.

OMAN

IRAQ

LEBANON

YEMEN

SYRIA

JORDAN

Sana'a

Beirut Damascus Baghdad

Amman

79

THE MIDDLE EAST

Iraq is not a party to the Mine Ban Treaty and did not participate in MBT activity until 2004. Iraqi officials have not yet articulated an of-ficial policy on banning APLs. The country’s mine and UXO problem is a consequence of four decades of internal and external conflicts. Since there is no systematic nation-wide data collection, the survey of con-taminated land remains to be done and the total size of Iraq’s stockpile is not known. Landmines and ammunition were dispersed to storage locations across the country and abandoned in 2003. There are not enough security forces to guard all these depots. Fifteen major donors provided approximately USD 55 million for mine action in Iraq in 2003.An Iraqi Mine Action Authority and the Iraqi Mine Action Centre were established in Baghdad in 2003. However, the ongoing security situa-tion and instability in the country is a major obstacle to mine and UXO clearance, mine risk education and appropriate care to mine and UXO victims. Iraq has seen a dramatic increase in the use and sophistication of improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Easy access to ammunition and landmines contribute to this situation.

SYRIA

KUWAITSAUDI ARABIA

TURKEY

IRAN

Baghdad

Kuwait

IRAQ

Arbíl

Al Basrah

Karbala

An Nasiríyah

Al Mawsil


Not acceded

IRAQ

Iraq


Capital: BaghdadCurrency: new Iraqi dinar (NID) as of 22 January 2004Population: 26 783 383 (2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 3 400 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 69.01 years • female: 70.31 years (2006 est.) • male: 67.76 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, natural gas, phosphates, sulfurClimate: mostly desert; mild to cool winters with dry,hot, cloudless summers; northern mountainous regionsalong Iranian and Turkish borders experience coldwinters with occasionally heavy snows that melt inearly spring, sometimes causing extensive flooding incentral and southern IraqTerrain: mostly broad plains; reedy marshes alongIranian border in south with large flooded areas;mountains along borders with Iran and TurkeyLand use: • arable land: 13.12 % • permanent crops: 0.61 % • other: 86.27 % (2005)


TOTAL EU 2005 12.303.709

BELGIUM 490.180 • Humanitarian mine action, north Iraq

DENMARK 671.998 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/DanishDemining Group: mine clearance and mine risk education (2005–07)

GERMANY 612.554 • HELP: mine clearance and EOD in Baghdad area

GREECE 1.900.000 • UNDG-TF: demining programme


NETHERLANDS 1.386.958 • Handicap: victim assistance• MAG: CLEARANCE AND MINE RISK

EDUCATION

POLAND 919.000 • Ministry of National Defence: mine and UXO clearance within the framework of stabilisation forces

SLOVAKIA 4.882.000 • Slovak armed forces: mine and UXOclearance

SPAIN 129.000 • Ministry of Defence/Spanish International Demining Centre (CID): training on humanitarian demining for 21 students from Iraq

SWEDEN 1.069.519 • SIDA: mine clearance, support through the Mines Advisory Group (MAG)

80

THE MIDDLE EAST

Landmines were planted in Jordan in three distinctive periods: the 1948partition of Palestine; the 1967–69 Arab–Israeli conflict; and during theperiod surrounding the civil war of 1970. When humanitarian deminingbegan in 1993 there were approximately 60 million m2 of suspectedhazardous areas subdivided into 497 minefields. The distribution of theminefields in Jordan is limited to the northern Syrian border area, theJordan Valley and Wadi Araba. Based on military estimates, there wereroughly 305 000 mines laid on Jordan territory, of which 73 000 wereIsraeli and 232 000 Jordanian. Between 1993 and 2005, more than 101000 mines were removed and 25 million m2 cleared, representing 183of the 497 minefields.

Jordan has long suffered the negative impacts of landmines. Rich agri-cultural lands have remained uncultivated, irrigation and hydro projectsdelayed and historical and world cultural heritage sites unexplored. Ac-cording to the government and the Royal Engineering Corps, roughly500 000 people representing 8 % of the population are affected by thepresence of mines, the majority of whom are women and children. Dueto the combination of high population growth rates (2.8 %), low mortalityrates, rapid urbanisation, sizable in-migration of political and economi-cal refugees, and extremely low levels of arable land (9 %), the activitiesassociated with mine action in Jordan are viewed as being important tohelping to secure the future welfare of all Jordanians.

Although a total breakdown of the accidents and incidents between1967–2004 is not possible, the Government of Jordan estimates thatthe actual number of incidents is higher than reported (529 of which 111were fatalities) and is likely to be closer to 700–800. Basic rehabilita-tion services have been available for survivors since the late 1960s. Itis estimated by the Royal Medical Services that 80 % of survivors havebeen fitted with prosthetics and 50 % have returned to work — the latterstatistics being of grave concern given that the mean age of survivors is29 years and 90 % are males.

Jordan signed and ratified the Ottawa Treaty in 1998. It came into forcein May 1999 and hence the completion deadline under Article 5 is May2009. In compliance with Article 4 of the convention, Jordan completedits destruction of stockpiles of anti-personnel landmines in April 2003.

The civilian-led National Demining and Rehabilitation Committee (NDRC)was established by royal decrees issued in March 2000 and April 2002and headed by retired General Muhammad al-Malkawi. It is the focalpoint for all mine action in Jordan. The NDRC’s duty is to ensure con-tinuity of annual funding and support for demining operations and re-


Ratified

ORDAN

Jordan


Capital: AmmanCurrency: Jordanian dinar (JOD)Population: 5 759 732 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 4 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 78.4 years • female: 81.05 years (2006 est.) • male: 75.9 yearsNatural resources: phosphates, potash, shale oilClimate: mostly arid desert; rainy season in west(November to April)Terrain: mostly desert plateau in east, highland area inwest; Great Rift Valley separates east and west banksof the Jordan RiverLand use: • arable land: 3.32 % • permanent crops: 1.18 % • other: 95.5 % (2005)

81

habilitation projects. In 2003, the NDRC signed a memorandum of un-derstanding with the Royal Jordanian Corps of Engineers to exchange information concerning the mine action programme. In June 2005, the national mine action plan was launched by the NCDR.

THE MIDDLE EAST


TOTAL EU 2005 1.325.986

GERMANY 92.486 · UNDP: procurement of demining equipment

UNITED KINGDOM 433.500 · UNDP Ardvaark: refurbishment and capacity building

EUROPEANCOMMUNITY

800.000 · National Demining and Rehabilitation Committee: technical survey, demining and training of deminers

© U

ND

P M

ine Action P

rogramm

e

82

THE MIDDLE EAST

Lebanon is not a party to the Mine Ban Treaty, in line with a number of countries in the region, putting forward a continuing conflict with Israelon this subject. The Lebanese Government nevertheless participatesin intercessional activity. On the ground, the withdrawal of Israeli forc-es from south Lebanon in May 2001 has left behind a mine and UXOproblem. The Lebanese army, a United Arab Emirates funded deminingproject, NGOs, commercial companies and foreign armies contributedto clearing contaminated land and destroying landmines. The NationalDemining Office (NDO) of the Lebanese army is the official administra-tion in charge of the national mine action plan. It plans and coordinatesdemining activity and provides information and assistance to NGOs andcommercial companies. Large-scale risk education activities reachednearly 1 million citizens, including 200 000 students. Casualties havesteadily declined.

Lebanon’s nation-wide LIS (supported by the EC) was completed by theMines Advisory Group (MAG) and NDO in May 2003. It indicates that22 out of 24 districts (covering 137 km2) were contaminated to somedegree. The Lebanese army estimates that there are about half a millionmines laid throughout the country. The UN has stated that most of themined areas are border minefields along the ‘blue-line’.

Victim assistance is given by the Ministry of Health and Ministry of SocialAffairs. Rehabilitation services are also provided by NGOs. More atten-tion is being directed towards employment and economic integration.


Not acceded

LEBANON



FRANCE In kind • Training ofTT Lebanese militariesin France (ESAG)

POLAND In kind • Ministry of National Defence:supply of mine detectionequipment

MEDITERRANEANSEA

Beirut

Tripoli

Sidon

Tyre

Lebanon


Capital: BeirutCurrency: Lebanese pound (LBP)Population: 3 874 050 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 5 300 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 72.88 years • female: 75.48 years (2006 est.) • male: 70.41 yearsNatural resources: limestone, iron ore, salt, water-surplus state in a water-deficit region, arable landClimate: Mediterranean; mild to cool, wet winters withhot, dry summers; Lebanon Mountains experienceheavy winter snowsTerrain: narrow coastal plain; Al Biqa’ (Bekaa Valley)separates Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon MountainsLand use: • arable land: 16.35 % • permanent crops: 13.75 % • other: 69.9 % (2005)

83

THE MIDDLE EAST

SYRIA

has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty. According to Syria, themain reason for not joining the treaty is its consideration of anti-person-nel mines as a necessary defensive weapon, especially vis-à-vis Israelwhich continues to occupy the Golan Heights, in south-west Syria.

Golan is divided into three areas: Syrian controlled, Israeli controlleda buffer zone monitored by the UN disengagement force (UNDOF).

Each contains mined areas. In some of the Syrian-controlled areas in theGolan, minefields are not well marked or fenced and civilian casualtiesoccur on a regular basis.

One of the main problems dealing with mine action in Syria is the verylimited information available about the size and number of minefields inthe country, past and ongoing mine clearance activities carried out bythe national government, the number of Syrian army personnel trained indemining and landmine casualty data. Also, the size and origin of Syria’smine stockpile is not known.

In the last two years, the Syrian Government has shown to be more en-gaged in attending regional and international meetings on mine-relatedissues as well as promoting landmine awareness in affected border ar-rreas.


Not acceded

TOTAL EUTT EXPENDITURE 1999–2004: EUR 36.000

TOTAL EU 2005 16.000

POLAND 16.000 • Ministry of National Defence:mine and UXO clearance in themargins of the mission under theauspices of the UN

ISRAE

HalabAl Hasakah

mascus

JerusalemereeJ

Amman

Bei

PALESTINITERRITOR

L

Syria


NB: includes 1 295 km2 of Israeli-occupied territoryCapital: DamascusCurrency: Syrian pound (SYP)Population: 18 881 361NB: in addition, about 40 000 people live in theIsraeli-occupied Golan Heights — 20 000 Arabs(18 000 Druze and 2 000 Alawites) and about 20 000Israeli settlers (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 3 400 (2006 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 70.32 years • female: 71.7 years (2006 est.) • male: 69.01 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, phosphates, chromeand manganese ores, asphalt, iron ore, rock salt,marble, gypsum, hydropowerClimate: mostly desert; hot, dry, sunny summers(June to August) and mild, rainy winters (December toFebruary) along coast; cold weather with snow or sleetperiodically in DamascusTerrain: primarily semiarid and desert plateau; narrowcoastal plain; mountains in westLand use: • arable land: 24.8 % • permanent crops: 4.47 % • other: 70.73 % (2005)

84

THE MIDDLE EAST

YEMEN

Yemen, the first country in the region to sign and ratify the Ottawa MineBan Treaty in 1998 and to start its mine action programme in the sameyear, completed a nation-wide LIS in July 2000. The LIS identified 594mine-affected villages in 19 of the country’s 20 governorates. By April2004, at least 6 688 575 m2 of land, including 213 minefields, had beendemined, accounting for 74 % of the total area marked in Yemen forclearance; 11 of the 14 high-impacted and 67 medium- to low-impactedcommunities had been cleared. In compliance with Article 7 of the Ot-tawa Treaty, Yemen completed destruction of its anti-personnel minestockpile in April 2002. More importantly, civilian casualties have beenreduced by 80 % since the completion of the impact survey in 2000.However, casualties have continued to be reported lately.

Mine action in Yemen has been running smoothly in accordance withthe national five-year strategic plan without much disruption in the pastfew years. Due to the complexity of landmine problems and lack of ap-propriate technology and field requirements, however, some commonproblems encountered during the mine clearance operations in Yemeninclude steep terrain, moving dunes, lack of technology, nuisance min-ing, soil contamination and funding.

As foreseen in the EC mine action strategy 2005–07, the EC primarilysupports the Yemeni Government’s efforts to comply with the terms of the MBT, by clearing mined areas of high and medium impact on thepopulation and by assisting mine survivors.


Ratified


TOTAL EU 2004 674.196

FRANCE 250.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/AA MACYemen: participation in theYYregional demining programmewithin the Anti-Mines Centreof YemenYY

GERMANY 284.196 • UNDP: coordination, running costof YEMA


Yemen


Capital: SanaaCurrency: YemeniYY rial (YER)Population: 21 456 188 (July 2006 est.)GDP per capita: purchasing power parity —USD 800 (2005 est.)Life expectancy at birth: • total population: 62.12 years • female: 64.11 years (2006 est.) • male: 60.23 yearsNatural resources: petroleum, fish, rock salt, marble,small deposits of coal, gold, lead, nickel and copper,fertile soil in westClimate: mostly desert; hot and humid along westcoast; temperate in western mountains affected byseasonal monsoon; extraordinarily hot, dry, harshdesert in eastTerrain: narrow coastal plain backed by flat-toppedhills and rugged mountains; dissected upland desertplains in centre slope into the desert interior of theArabian peninsulaLand use: • arable land: 2.91 % • permanent crops: 0.25 % • other: 96.84 % (2005)

© Yem

en National M

ine Action P

rogramm

e

© Yem

en National M

ine Action P

rogramm

e

85

Contribution to worlwide activities (1)

UN AND RELATED AGENCIES/TOTAL EU (MEMBER STATES): EUR 6.747.434

Denmark 712.318 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/GIHD: research• Ministry of Foreign Affairs/UNMAS/VTF: mine clearance

Estonia 1.555 • UN Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine Action

Finland 500.000 • UNMAS: national surveys

Italy 175.000 • UNMAS

Netherlands 677.344 • UNIDIR: advocacy, research and development• UNOG: treaty obligation• UNDP middle senior management training: capacity building

Sweden 1.718.967 • SIDA: global coordination of mine action through UNMAS Voluntary Trust Fund• SIDA: mine awareness through Unicef’s landmines and small arms team• Ministry of Foreign Affairs: core funding, UNMAS and GICHD

United Kingdom 2.962.250 • GICHD: core contribution• UNMAS: global contribution for coordination• Unicef: mine risk education

OTTAWA CONVENTION: EUR 840.101

Austria 76.000 • GICHD: support for the Implementation Support Unit• GICHD: contribution to the sponsorship programme

Belgium 50.000 • GICHD: sponsorship programme• GICHD: Implementation Support Unit

Czech Republic 52.365 • GICHD: activities of the Implementation Support Unit and implementation of IMAS

Denmark 26.880 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs: advocacy, general contribution to Ottawa Convention sponsorship programme

Finland 100.000 • Core funding to GICHD

Germany 295.864 • GICHD: mine action, evaluation and sponsorship programme

Hungary 8.000 • GICHD: Implementation Support Unit

Italy 112.000 • GICHD

Sweden 106.951 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs: sponsorship programme• SIDA: support to the sponsorship programme of Ottawa Convention through GICHD

United Kingdom 12.041 • GICHD: Ottawa sponsorship support

(1) This table outlines the EU Member States’ and the European Commission contribution to those activities whose action, rather than limited to one specific beneficiary country or region, is outreaching in scope and geographical coverage.

86

LANDMINE MONITOR/ICBL: EUR 447.220

Austria 53.700 • Contribution to Landmine Monitor 2005

Belgium 50.000 • Advocacy and prevention: assistance in reviewing the implementation of the convention

Denmark 26.880 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ICBL: advocacy

France 50.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs: support to NGOs

Germany 105.000 • ICBL: advocacy, Landmine Monitor Report and states parties meeting

Netherlands 129.640 • Advocacy

Sweden 32.000 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs

R & D: EUR 6.304.680

Denmark 33.602 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Nordic Demining Research Forum: research

Spain • Ministry of Defence/CID/GTD Sistemas de Información: research (in-kind contribution)

United Kingdom 1.551.858 • R & D Disarmco: dragon mine incinerator• R & D ERA: mine-hound detector

EUROPEANCOMMISSION

4.719.220 • “STREAM” research project: Technology to support sustainable humanitarian crisis management (EC funds: 2.499.220)

• “RESCUER” research project: Improvement of the emergency risk management through secure mobile mechatronic support to bomb disposal (EC funds:

2.000.000)• “DELVE” research project: Restructuring Demining rEsearch from regionaL initiatiVEs

(EC funds: 220.000)

MISCELLANEOUS: EUR 4.802.035

Belgium 222.80013.600(in-kind

contribution)

• Royal Military Academy — ITEP: developing standards for testing and evaluating performance of demining tools

• Royal Military Academy: formation and training of military and civilians from some African countries

• VUB (BEL): sensor technologies• Ministry of Defence: in-kind contribution

Denmark 25.394 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Geneva Call: advocacy• Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Mine Action Canada: sponsorship, training and symposium

on landmines (2005 06)

Germany 260.087 • BAM: mine action, detector tests• ERA/DFID: mine-hound trials

Ireland 1.500.000 • DFA/HALO Trust: mine clearance in Afghanistan, Somalia and Angola

Italy 123.803 • OSA

Lithuania 10.000 • Ministry of Defence/Ministry of Foreign Affairs: regional seminar on explosive remnants of war

WORLDWIDE

87

MISCELLANEOUS: EUR 4.802.035

Netherlands 362.942 • NPA MDD: clearance and mine risk education• NPA community action in mine action: clearance and mine risk education• Next Step Productions Inc.: advocacy• Mines Action Canada: advocacy in south Asia and Middle East

Spain 236.900 • Ministry of Defence/Spanish International Demining Centre (CID): training seminars and mine risk education

• Ministry of Defence/CID/Ingeniería de Sistemas para la Defensa (ISDEFE): technical assistance

• In-kind contribution, Ministry of Defence/CID/GTD Sistemas de Información: research• Municipalities from Barcelona and NGO Moviment per la Pau: mine awareness

Sweden 6.417 • Ministry of Foreign Affairs: youth symposium

United Kingdom 950.092 • Cranfield middle management course and technical advisers course• Demining Advice BARIC• Support to ITEP-QINETIQ• Geneva Call: core contribution

European Community 1.090.000 • European Committee for Standardisation (CEN): standardisation activities in the field of humanitarian mine action

• Geneva Center for Humanitarian Demining: information and coordination programme for mine action, projects evaluations

• Geneva Center for Humanitarian Demining: interpretation in English, French and Spanish

WORLDWIDE

88

2002

–05

year

ly t

ota

ls a

t a

gla

nce:

AP

L an

d g

eog

rap

hica

l bud

get

line

s

Regi

onYe

arCe

ntra

l/Lat

inAm

eric

aAs

iaM

iddl

e Ea

stAf

rica

Euro

peCo

ntrib

utio

nto

Wor

ldw

ide

Activ

ities

*20

02TO

TAL

2002

Tota

l EC

fund

s(E

UR)

1.30

0.00

016

.360

.000

—13

.045

.000

9.05

0.00

02.

326.

000

42.0

81.0

00EC

min

eac

tion

actio

nbu

dget

(%of

42.0

81.0

00)

3%38

%—

29%

26%

5%10

1%AP

Lbu

dget

line

(EUR

)1.

300.

000

900.

000

—3.

645.

000

7.17

6.00

02.

326.

000

15.3

47.0

00AP

Lbu

dget

line

fund

s(%

of15

.347

.000

)8%

6%—

24%

47%

15%

100%

2003

TOTA

L 20

03To

tal E

Cfu

nds

(EUR

)—

22.7

93.5

3910

.374

.309

19.1

02.8

164.

220.

000

547.

920

57.0

38.5

84EC

min

eac

tion

actio

nbu

dget

(%of

57.0

38.5

84)

—40

%18

%34

%7%

1%10

0%AP

Lbu

dget

line

(EUR

)—

6.48

9.00

02.

000.

000

6.88

6.58

52.

850.

000

537.

920

18.7

63.5

05AP

Lbu

dget

line

fund

s(%

of18

.763

.505

)—

34%

11%

37%

15%

3%10

0%

2004

TOTA

L 20

04To

tal E

Cfu

nds

(EUR

)2.

000.

000

18.7

00.0

00—

27.0

00.0

007.

000.

000

3.46

0.00

058

.160

.000

ECm

ine

actio

nac

tion

budg

et(%

of58

.160

.000

)4%

33%

—46

%12

%6%

100%

APL

budg

etlin

e(E

UR)

1.00

0.00

03.

500.

000

—7.

000.

000

6.00

0.00

096

0.00

018

.460

.000

APL

budg

etlin

efu

nds

(%of

18.4

60.0

00)

5%19

%—

38%

33%

5%10

0%

2005

TOTA

L 20

05To

tal E

Cfu

nds

(EUR

)2.

100.

580

17.3

83.3

9180

0.00

012

.808

.030

13.9

90.0

007.

064.

220

54.1

46.2

21EC

min

eac

tion

budg

et(%

of54

.146

.221

)4%

32%

1%24

%26

%13

%10

0%AP

Lbu

dget

line

(EUR

)2.

000.

000

2.30

0.00

080

0.00

04.

286.

215

4.49

9.98

41.

250.

000

15.1

36.1

99AP

Lbu

dget

line

fund

s(%

of14

.976

.199

)13

%16

%5%

28%

30%

8%10

0%

TOTA

L 20

02-2

005

211.

425.

805

* Thi

sco

lum

nou

tline

sth

e Eu

rope

anCo

mm

unity

cont

ribut

ion

toth

ose

activ

ities

who

seac

tion

rath

erth

anlim

ited

toa

one

spec

ific

bene

ficia

ryco

untry

orre

gion

isou

treac

hing

insc

ope

and

geog

raph

ical

cove

rage

.

WORLDWIDE

89

2002 EC mine actionsTotal EC funds

2002 EC mine actionsAPL budget line funds







¢ Central/Latin America ¢ Asia ¢ Middle East ¢ Africa ¢ Europe ¢ Worldwide

3 %Central/Latin America

38 %Asia

29 %Africa

26 %Europe

5 %Worldwide


6 %Asia

24 %Africa

47 %Europe

15 %Worldwide

40 %Asia

3 %Worldwide

34 %Asia

37 %Africa

15 %Europe

18 %Middle East

7 %Europe

34 %Africa


19 %Asia

33 %Europe

5 %Worldwide

33 %Asia

46 %Africa

12 %Europe


6 %Worldwide

32 %Asia


1 %Middle East

26 %Europe

24 %Africa

13 %Worldwide


16 %Asia

5 %Middle East

28 %Africa

30 %Europe

8 %Worldwide

0 %Middle East

0 %Middle East


1 %Worldwide


11 %Middle East

0 %Middle East

0 %Middle East

38 %Africa

WORLDWIDE

European Commission

The European Union mine actions in the world — 2006

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

2006 — 89 pp. — 21 x 29.7 cm

ISBN 92-79-02094-3

ISSN 1683-6553

SALES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS

Publications for sale produced by the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities are available from our sales agents throughout the world.

How do I set about obtaining a publication?Once you have obtained the list of sales agents, contact the sales agent of your choice and place your order.

How do I obtain the list of sales agents?• Go to the Publications Office website http://publications.europa.eu/

• Or apply for a paper copy by fax (352) 2929-42758

NF-A

B-05-001-E

N-C

ISBN 92-79-02094-3

the european union mine actions in the...

Documents