U.S. plans continued use of landmines

Social justice news
March 2004

Catholic aid agencies receive historic $335 million grant
CRS calls for 'humanitarian corridor' in Haiti
Deep cuts in social spending predicted under Bush
U.S. bishops outline humane response to potential Haitian refugee crisis
USCCB report indicates widespread abuse/coverup
U.S. plans continued use of landmines
Vatican publishes report on sex abuse

U.S. plans continued use of landmines
On February 27, after more than two years of revew, the Bush Administration released a revised U.S. landmine policy. The new policy reverses the Clinton Administration's commitment to cease using antipersonnel landmines by 2006. Instead, it states that the U.S. will only "phase out" some types of mines by 2010 and allows the continued use of other types of mines indefinitely.

The long-awaited new policy, determined by the Department of Defense, Department of State, the National Security Council, and President Bush, abandons altogether plans for U.S. accession to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. The new policy also confirms the possibility that US troops may deploy antipersonnel landmines in Iraq or elsewhere.

"Though there are some positive aspects of this policy, on the whole it is a deeply disappointing step backward," said Senator Leahy of Vermont who has been a leader on this issue. "This is another squandered opportunity for U.S. leadership on a crucial arms control and humanitarian issue. Worst of all, in a sharp departure from past policy, it says the United States will continue using landmines indefinitely. We are by far the most powerful nation on earth, and the world looks to us for leadership on this issue. When we back away from the progress we have pledged to rid the world of these indiscriminate weapons, others will ask why they, with their much weaker armed forces, should stop using them."

The U.S. Conference for Catholic Bishops has previously urged the president to support the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty and to not use landmines in Iraq.

"This decision represents a further retreat from the international consensus to ban antipersonnel landmines, which kill and injure thousands of refugees and other innocent people each year," said Kenneth H. Bacon, former Pentagon spokesman and current president of Refugees International. "By contending that U.S. technology can prevent landmines from killing our own soldiers and innocent civilians, the U.S. is sending the wrong message to the U.S. military and to other countries that continue to use this indiscriminate and outmoded weapon."

The new White House policy announces a 50 percent increase in spending for mine eradiction programs for FY 2005 (over FY 2003 levels). The U.S. Campaign to Ban Landmines (USCBL) says the U.S. support for demining and victim assistance is very important and laudable, but not enough.

The new policy will lead to the destruction of older, "dumb" landmines, but not until 2010, four years after the previous deadline. Most disturbing, according to the USCBL, is that the U.S. claims the right to use self-deactivating or self-destructing antipersonnel (AP) "smart" landmines indefinitely.

"Self-deactivating or self-destructing antipersonnel landmines, while better than persistent 'dumb' mines, still put civilians—and sometimes our own forces—at risk," Bacon said. "That is why the majority of the world's nations, including all of our NATO allies, have banned all types of AP mines and why the US should do so as well."

Though set to self-deactivate or self-destruct, so-called "smart mines" will injure and kill civilians who come upon the weapons that are still active. Because these newer types of mines tend to be scattered by air by the thousands, they are difficult to mark and map. Demining teams must approach "smart" minefields with the same tremendous amount of time, resources, and caution as they would "dumb" minefields for fear of dud mines or inaccurate intelligence.

"U.S. refusal to join this treaty sets a dangerous, isolationist example to mine-using countries such as Russia, India, and Pakistan that have laid hundreds of thousands of mines in recent years with devastating consequences to civilians," said Gina Coplon-Newfield, Coordinator of the USCBL.

The U.S. military, which used antipersonnel mines during the Persian Gulf War in 1991, has brought antipersonnel mines to the Gulf region over the past year and a half for possible use in Iraq, but has reportedly not yet used them. In a letter to Bush soon after he took office, eight retired U.S. generals and admirals stated that antipersonnel landmines are "outmoded weapons that have, time and again, proved to be a liability to our own troops. We believe that the military, diplomatic and humanitarian advantages of speedy U.S. accession [to the Mine Ban Treaty] far outweigh the minimal military utility of these weapons."

The possible US use of mines in Iraq or elsewhere stands in stark contrast to the ever-growing worldwide acceptance of a comprehensive prohibition on the weapon. The Mine Ban Treaty came into force faster than any other modern, multilateral convention. Now, campaigners fear that US repudiation of the Mine Ban Treaty will lead certain countries that have recently given up use of the weapon, to resume mine-laying activities.

President Clinton failed to sign the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, which prohibits the use, trade, production, and stockpiling of antipersonnel landmines. In a 1998 Presidential Decision Directive, however, the former president instructed the U.S. military to search for alternatives to the weapon, phase out most of its use outside of Korea by 2003, and have the government join the treaty by 2006.

Since the early 1990s when the mine ban movement began in earnest, the number of mine producing countries has dropped from 54 to 14. Trade of the weapon has come almost to a halt, and more than 52 million antipersonnel landmines have been destroyed from the arsenals of the world. Nations have removed millions of landmines from communities devastated by the weapon and have provided medical and rehabilitative support to victims of landmines. Most importantly, say anti-landmine advocates, casualty rates from the weapon have dropped from approximately 26,000 people per year to 15,000-20,000 per year, though millions more continue to suffer the agricultural, economic, and psychological consequences wrought by the presence of the weapon in more than 80 countries worldwide.

For more information:
The USCCB on landmines

A statement in response to the new policy from the Landmine Survivors Network:

Landmine survivors around the world are deeply disappointed that the United States government has elected not to ban the use of antipersonnel mines or to join the 150 nations that have signed the historic 1997 Landmine Ban Treaty. All NATO allies, have already agreed to ban the use, manufacture, stockpiling and export of all types of antipersonnel mines. The United States and Cuba are the ONLY countries in the Western Hemisphere that have not yet banned landmines.

The Administration has decided to phase out traditional or "dumb" mines by 2010. "Dumb" mines can lay dormant underground for decades, blowing off limbs and taking lives long after conflict has ended. This new policy asks people living in mine-infested countries to wait six more years before these "dumb" mines are "phased out."

The Administration has decided to stockpile and retain the right to use so-called "smart" mines—mines that can be programmed to deactivate or self-destruct. It seems the new U.S. policy wants us to think that a "smart" mine is a "safe" mine. The real question is: "Would you let your child play in a soccer field that was littered with U.S. smart mines, even if you were told they were deactivated?" There is no such thing as a clean or safe minefield. In fact, nearly all minefields around the world contain a dangerous mixture of mines supplied by many countries over the years of a conflict.

In 1998, the United States promised to stop using all antipersonnel mines outside the Korean Peninsula by 2003, with a target date to join the global Mine Ban Treaty by 2006. Now, in 2004, the Administration is rolling back these promises. They're not only leaving the door open to using 'dumb' mines until 2010, but they want to use their "smart" mines whenever and wherever they deem appropriate, in perpetuity.

In essence, the Bush Administration policy is legitimizing the use of a weapon designed to maim and rip off body parts—a weapon most of the world deems excessively injurious, inhumane and indiscriminate in nature. The unintended consequence of this new legitimacy may be that an international market is created for American "smart mines" or copycat versions made in China, Russia or India, other countries that have not yet banned mines.

There is no such thing as a "smart" or "dumb" or "safe" landmine. Landmines, whatever their type, will never know the difference between a soldier's boot and a child's sandal. The humanitarian cost of this weapon is too high at any price.

How many of the US soldiers injured in Iraq or Afghanistan know if the weapon that took their leg, eye, or arm was "smart " or "dumb"? They, and other landmine survivors worldwide, only know that, if they're lucky enough to survive the blast, life will never be the same.

It is imperative that we let the U.S. leadership know that, in our opinion, this new U.S. landmine policy is shortsighted and wrong.

Survivors deserve better.

TAKE ACTION ONLINE
E-mail your concerns today to Assistant Secretary of State Lincoln Bloomfield at bloomfieldlp@state.gov. He is the President and Secretary of State's Special Representative for Mine Action. You may also address your concerns to Dermott O'Connell, Chief of Staff, Bureau Political-Military Affairs at o'connelldb@state.gov.

Send your message to the Commander in Chief in the White House at president@whitehouse.gov.
White House Switchboard: 202-456-1111
White House Fax: 202-456-2461

Find your senator's e-mail address at www.senate.gov.

Here are some questions the new U.S. policy does not address:

When will the US complete the destruction of its stockpile of old antipersonnel and anti-tank landmines?

Have US troops used antipersonnel mines since the 1991 Gulf War? If we haven't used these mines in Kosovo, Afghanistan or Iraq, when and where would we really need them?

Don't landmines pose a threat to US troops, given the record of past wars, where landmines (even US-made mines) were a leading cause of American casualties?

How do you expect other countries to respond to this US policy, as it goes against the wishes of the majority of the nations of the world that have banned mines?

How can our government effectively urge other countries to ban landmines at the same time as we insist on keeping millions of our own?

Speaking of military litter, will U.S. forces continue to use "cluster bombs" with a dud rate that leaves unexploded ordnance acting like dumb deadly landmines on the ground?

Given there are thousands of women and children who continue to be injured and killed by landmines, what is the US government commitment to War Victim Assistance and Survivor Recovery in the coming years?

How can we help ensure more money is spent on landmine clearance and on survivor assistance?

The newly announced U.S. landmine policy does not address these questions, and it raises many more. Please contact the authors of this new policy and ask your own questions. And, if you receive an answer to your queries, please forward it to Jerry@landminesurvivors.org

Back to page top