REVIEW CONFERENCE ON CONVENTION ON CERTAIN CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS CONCLUDES FIRST RESUMED SESSION, GENEVA, 15-19 JANUARY
Press Release
DC/2541
REVIEW CONFERENCE ON CONVENTION ON CERTAIN CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS CONCLUDES FIRST RESUMED SESSION, GENEVA, 15-19 JANUARY
19960122 Conference Defines Framework for Final Agreement On Land-mines; Will Resume Deliberations in Geneva, 22 April-3 MayGENEVA, 19 January (UN Information Service) -- The Review Conference of States Parties to the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons concluded a five-day resumed session today after defining what its President called a framework for a possible final agreement to place sharp restrictions on land-mines.
In a closing statement, Johan Molander (Sweden), President of the Conference, cautioned, however, that the 43 States parties and 33 observer States had much to do before an agreement could be reached that would effectively address what Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali has called a global "land-mine crisis".
The Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed To Be Excessively Injurious or To Have Indiscriminate Effects came into effect on 2 December 1983 and is currently undergoing its first review. In addition to the Protocol on land-mines (Protocol II), it contains Protocols on the prohibition of fragments which remain undetectable in the human body (Protocol I), and on incendiary weapons (Protocol III). A Protocol on blinding laser weapons (Protocol IV) was adopted at the Vienna session of the Review Conference, held from 25 September to 13 October 1995.
The main focus of the Vienna session was the Convention's Protocol on land- mines, which also encompasses the use of booby-traps. However, no agreement was reached on provisions to strengthen that Protocol because of the breadth and number of proposals that were advanced, and insufficient time to consider them. Since many of the difficulties concerned technical terminology, national military perspectives and existing stocks, it was agreed that the January session would discuss technical and military issues, focusing on detectability, self-destruction capabilities and the length of any transition periods. It was also decided that the second resumed session, scheduled for 22 April to 3 May in Geneva, would focus on all remaining aspects of the land-mines Protocol, including scope, implementation mechanisms and technical cooperation.
Statements at Concluding Session
Speaking in his capacity as President of the Conference, JOHAN MOLANDER (Sweden), said that while the work of this session had ended, the work of the Conference was far from over, and a general framework for changes to the land-mines Protocol had been spelled out in the revised President's text. While acknowledging that there were many compromises in that document, he said adoption would represent a significant step forward in international humanitarian law. He said he had incorporated into the text what he viewed as the current status of negotiations, with the expectation that its contents would be reviewed at the national level and be the subject of negotiations before the April Conference.
MARK MOHER (Canada) announced that his Government had adopted a unilateral ban on the production, export and operational use of anti-personnel land mines. Such measures would serve to complement efforts to strengthen efforts to eliminate anti-personnel land-mines and encouraged other countries to follow suit.
ANTONIO DE ICAZA (Mexico) said that although his country was neither a producer nor user of mines, it believed the only solution was a comprehensive ban on all mines. It was deplorable that no stronger action was contemplated. Mexico would, nevertheless, support all efforts towards consensus, as all efforts towards strengthened regulations and adherence were welcome.
JOERG WIMMERS, of the Mine Clearance and Policy Unit of the United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA), reminded delegates of the necessity to find a durable solution to the humanitarian aspects of the land-mine crisis. Speaking on behalf of DHA, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Food Programme (WFP), he said technical solutions did not adequately take those concerns into account and it was "high time for a bold political commitment" to end the proliferation of land-mines. Public opinion was increasingly expecting a solution from the international community and some 20 countries had already asked for a total ban. He urged all States parties to reinforce their commitment to that goal at the resumed session in April.
SALLY CURRY, Secretary-General for Humanity's Future, said land-mines were a flagrant violation of human rights, most specifically the rights of the child, and constituted a crime against humanity and the earth. Delegates needed to turn the discussion away from the search for more sophisticated technological weapons and towards means of initiating a massive clean-up and comprehensive ban on production, use, stockpiling and trade in mines.
STEPHEN GOOSE, of the International Campaign to Ban Land Mines, an umbrella coalition of some 400 non-governmental organizations in 36 countries, expressed his dismay that no solution had yet been found to the pressing issues under review. His organization did not believe in a technological solution and it
- 3 - Press Release DC/2541 22 January 1996
would be difficult to convince the 70 persons injured by land-mines each day -- "many of whom may never take another step" -- that such a step-by-step approach was effective. Citing Switzerland's support for a total ban, the announcement of Canada and the eight other nations which had proclaimed bans in the past four months, he said that number would continue to grow, pushing the discussion away from technology and towards a humanitarian solution. In the eyes of the non- governmental organization community, that would be progress.
Background
The first session of the Conference in Vienna was attended by 453 representatives of some 44 of the 49 States parties to the Convention, 40 observer nations and a large number of international and non-governmental organizations. The Vienna meeting had been charged with reviewing the 1980 Convention with an eye to strengthening international restrictions on the production, sale and use of land-mines and other weapons which strike indiscriminately.
A preparatory group of governmental experts had been assigned the task of proposing changes to the Convention and its Protocols and considering the possibility of adding new protocols. Following almost two years of extensive deliberations under the chairmanship of Mr. Molander, that body developed a "rolling text" which served as the basis for the Vienna review.
Despite intensive negotiations on the land-mines protocol (Protocol II) during the three-week Conference, no changes were made to it. However, some agreement was reached in broad terms in several areas including expanding the scope of the Protocol to include internal as well as international conflicts and introduction of regulations on transfers. There was also agreement that full responsibility for clearance of land-mines would be assigned to the mine-laying party and broad support for improved protection to humanitarian workers.
Delegates were able to agree on the addition of a fourth protocol to the Convention. The newly adopted Protocol IV bans the use and transfer of blinding laser weapons. By that instrument, all weapons which have blinding as a major combat function may not be used or transferred to any entity or State. While many delegations had wanted a more far-reaching ban, the new Protocol represents a unique step in humanitarian international law in that it is pre-emptive -- a weapon has been banned before it came into use.
The Vienna discussions stalled on the question of detectability of land-mines, their self-destruction capabilities and the amount of time which should be allotted for States parties to bring their mine stocks into line with new specifications. The decision was subsequently made to discuss only those issues at the January session. All other issues are to be considered in a third session in Geneva. It is expected that the revised Convention will be completed at that time.
- 4 - Press Release DC/2541 22 January 1996
Questions Examined in Geneva
Detectability: Some delegations believed that the overriding humanitarian principles guiding the Review Conference -- improved protection of civilians and improved demining capabilities -- could not be met without making all anti-personnel land-mines detectable. There appeared to be a strong trend towards making at least all anti-personnel mines detectable. However, no consensus was reached and questions remained open, including the amount of time which should be allotted for transition.
Anti-handling devices: Although an attempt was made to balance military capabilities with humanitarian concerns on the subject of anti-handling devices, delegations remained far from reaching consensus. One possible point of agreement, should discussions continue, could prove to be the injunction that the lifetime of an anti-handling device could not exceed the lifetime of the mine itself.
Anti-sensing activities: Delegates were able to agree on a strengthened "anti-sensing" clause to the technical annex of the President's rolling text. By that prohibition, detonation caused by non-contact detection with any "commonly available mine detector" would be expressly prohibited for all mines, booby-traps and other explosive devices.
Self-destruction: Unlike manually emplaced mines, remotely-delivered mines are dispersed from a distance, for example by plane or helicopter. Discussion continued on the reliability factor associated with self-destruction capabilities for remotely-delivered anti-personnel mines. There was general agreement that such a feature would be backed up by a self-deactivation feature (whereby a mine automatically becomes inoperable because an integral component becomes exhausted within an allotted time).
Delegations appeared prepared to accept a failure rate of no higher than 10 per cent, while many wanted that rate to be brought down to 5 per cent of mines. The outside time period for the potential lifetime of such mines ranged in discussions from 30 days (if the self-destruct mechanism functioned) to 120 days; at least one delegation wanted further testing before committing itself to a time-limit.
Transition period: No broad consensus was reached on the period of time which should be allotted for transition. That issue was complicated by a variety of considerations including the necessity to choose a starting time. Some delegations appeared to favour the date of adoption of the Protocol, while others endorsed the time at which the instrument enters into force. Several delegations expressed the view that they could make no decision on starting time without a fixed end-date. A few delegations believed that the amount of time required for transition would be dependent on the provision of technological support. The President's text recommends eight years, and figures put forward ranged from
- 5 - Press Release DC/2541 22 January 1996
three to 17 years. Additionally, the role of exceptions within a transition period was also not agreed upon.
Officers
Johan Molander (Sweden), continued as President of the Conference and Sohrab Kheradi, Deputy Director of the United Nations Centre for Disarmament Affairs, continued as Secretary-General of the Conference.
Participation
The Review Conference was attended by representatives of the following 43 States parties: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Malta, Mexico, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay.
Representatives of the following 33 countries took part as observers: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Bolivia, Brazil, Burundi, Chile, Colombia, Egypt, Holy See, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Libya, Luxembourg, Morocco, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, Syria, Thailand, Turkey, and Viet Nam.
Also in attendance were representatives of UNICEF, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), UNHCR, Department of Humanitarian Affairs, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, League of Arab States, International Committee of the Red Cross, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the Sovereign Order of Malta.
* *** *