US should reverse current policy and sign treaty banning landmines Commentary
US should reverse current policy and sign treaty banning landmines
Edited by:

Susannah Sirkin [Deputy Director, Physicians for Human Rights]: "As a founding member of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) was alarmed and deeply disappointed by a Department of State spokesperson's pronouncement on November 24 that President Obama does not intend to sign the landmark 1997 treaty banning the egregious weapon. However, an apparent reversal of the US position this week gives some signs of hope and follows an outcry from the landmine ban movement and Senator Patrick Leahy, among others. At the current five-year review of the Treaty convening in Cartagena, Colombia this week, the US observer has now stated that the US has begun a comprehensive landmine policy review. We hope that this review will be serious, transparent and include consultation with key non-governmental organizations as well as NATO allies, all of whom have joined the Treaty.

The arguments for total eradication of antipersonnel landmines are many. As PHR and the mine ban movement have demonstrated through decades of documentation and bearing witness, mines cannot distinguish between the step of a soldier and that of a child. They recognize no cease-fire; long after the fighting has stopped, they continue to devastate populations, threatening livelihoods and farm land, causing trauma and disability well into a post-war generation. It is estimated that half of landmine victims die of their injuries before they reach appropriate medical care. Over 90% of the victims today are civilians, largely the rural poor. One quarter are children, making landmines one of the six preventable major causes of death to the world's youth. A mine costs as little as $3 to manufacture, but as much as $1000 to uncover and remove from the ground.

A ban on this "weapon of mass destruction in slow motion" was called for by President Clinton in 1994 at the UN General Assembly. Sadly, since then, the US has withdrawn from the powerful global movement to eradicate the cruel epidemic of the antipersonnel mine. The 1997 Treaty, frequently referred to as the Ottawa Convention, is a comprehensive international instrument effectively banning the use, production and trade of antipersonnel landmines. It includes measures for stockpile destruction, mine clearance and victim assistance. Enlisting 122 nations for the Ottawa signing in 1997, and gaining the requisite 40th ratification two years later, the treaty became binding under international law more rapidly than any previous disarmament convention. By 2005, states parties to this unprecedented international agreement had destroyed close to 40 million stockpiled anti-personnel mines, cleared tens of thousands of square kilometers of mine-infested land, and provided hundreds of millions of dollars to support rehabilitation in over 50 countries for survivors.

The ban on mines is supported by virtually every major humanitarian and relief organization, religious denomination, disarmament group and medical association. Shortly before September 11, 2001, American ban supporters, including more than 50 state and national health professional associations, endorsed the US Campaign to Ban Landmines. Even without the support of the US, China and Russia, the Mine Ban Treaty has created an environment in which the trade and use of the weapon are effectively taboo. Now, the United States under the leadership of President Obama has an opportunity to join the majority of nations who are committed to ridding the world of this unconscionable scourge. It is still not too late."

Opinions expressed in JURIST Commentary are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, donors or the University of Pittsburgh.