Are Landmines Legal in War

Instead, a violation of these rules must be established on a case-by-case basis. Consider, for example, the rule of superfluous violation. A mine filled with X-ray-undetectable glass shards would cause unnecessary injury, as there is no military justification for using glass to harm the enemy. And with regard to the prohibition of indiscriminate weapons, non-persistent anti-personnel landmines can be targeted at military targets in certain operational contexts, and the effects of anti-personnel landmines can be controlled, for example, through self-defaction and self-destruction mechanisms. They are therefore not inherently blind. In fact, all landmines in the U.S. operational inventory contain such safety features to limit unintentional harm to civilians. The majority of States are parties to the Ottawa Convention, although, as we have already mentioned, there are important States that are not. In addition, it is important to note that some States Parties have reserved the right to conduct combined operations with States Parties that continue to use anti-personnel landmines. These reservations indicate that the States parties concerned do not consider the prohibition imposed on non-contracting States to be a customary obligation. If the ban were to be used, cooperation with States that use anti-personnel mines could expose States parties to responsibility for their role in the illegal use of a prohibited weapon. In fact, the International Committee of the Red Cross` in-depth study of customary rules indicates that « it cannot be said » that the prohibition on the use of anti-personnel mines reflects customary international law. Effective today, the administration is revoking the president`s anti-personnel landmine (PLA) policy in favor of a new U.S.

landmine policy overseen by the Department of Defense. The United States remains committed to minimizing the risks posed to civilians by landmines and explosive remnants of war. The United States remains fully committed to fulfilling its treaty obligations with respect to landmines and explosive remnants of war, as contained in amended Protocol II and Protocol V, which are annexed to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. Q: Why are landmines still needed in modern warfare? A: These zone denial systems are a « force multiplier » in important operational contexts; They can hinder, channel and delay/stop numerically superior opponents and prevent them from bypassing friendly forces. Critics of the new policy, such as the European Union, the International Committee of the Red Cross and various nongovernmental organizations, as well as some domestic lawmakers, have called on the Trump administration to change its position. The President of the Ottawa Convention, Ambassador Osman Abufatima Adam Mohammad, condemned the United States. Decision as « violating their long-standing commitment to work towards the elimination of the suffering caused by anti-personnel mines ». Those advocating a new overthrow in the United States are motivated by concerns about civilian mine victims and the debilitating effects of unexploded and persistent anti-personnel mines on communities. Most disheartening and urgent of all is that since 1997, landmines have killed or severely maimed more than 100,000 civilians. It is clear that further measures are needed to discourage their use. Today, Belgium is proposing to add an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court that would make the use of landmines an international war crime.

While the Trump administration`s anti-personnel mine policy has drawn significant international criticism, particularly of the growing movement to ban landmines, careful analysis concludes that it is in line with legal obligations that bind the United States. Despite the cessation of the use of anti-personnel landmines by a large majority of States, the total prohibition of anti-personnel landmines has not become customary international law, and the use of anti-personnel landmines is not in itself illegal under the usual rules of conduct of hostilities, as they are not intended to cause unnecessary injury and are not inherently indiscriminate. In addition, the parameters for the use of anti-personnel landmines announced in the Directive correspond to or exceed the protective measures set out in the amended Mine Protocol. In 1999, the United States became a party to Amended Protocol II to the Amended Protocol on Mines. Currently, 106 countries, including the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, are States Parties. The amended mining protocol regulates the use of landmines, but does not prohibit their use. Key elements of the Protocol include a ban on the use of land-based anti-personnel mines without self-destruction and self-defaction mechanisms, unless they are clearly marked, fenced and monitored; the requirement for remotely powered mines by aircraft or artillery to have self-destruct and self-defaction functions; and a condition that anti-personnel mines are detectable so that they can be safely located and removed. Q: Does the new policy distinguish between anti-personnel landmines and anti-vehicle landmines? A: No.

All landmines in the DOD operational inventory have safety features to limit unintentional harm to non-combatants; Therefore, this distinction, which was made in the previous directive, is not necessary. Q: Why not keep the landmine policy at the presidential level? A: The President has decided that landmine policy, like policy for all other conventional (non-nuclear) weapons, falls directly under the responsibility of the Secretary of Defense. Q: Does this change the U.S. government`s legal obligations regarding landmines? A: No, the U.S. international legal obligations have not changed. The new landmine policy provides civilians with greater protection than is required by Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. These efforts prove that the final clearance of landmines is not an impossible dream. But it`s time for the law to catch up. Explosive devices still kill civilians years after the end of the war, and much remains to be done to ensure that everyone can enjoy peace in safety.

A second ban, directly related to the use of anti-personnel mines, prohibits the use of inherently indiscriminate weapons against combatants, members of organized armed groups and civilians directly participating in hostilities. As mentioned in the Law of War Manual, the United States considers this prohibition to be a rule of customary law for armed conflict. The rule prohibits weapons that cannot be aimed at a military target or that have effects that cannot be limited, as required by the law of armed conflict – for example, because they necessarily cause disproportionate collateral damage. Shrapnel or bark or root abrasions caused by detonating mines can cause the slow death of trees and provide entry points for rotten wood mushrooms. When landmines make land unavailable for agriculture, residents reach the forests to meet all their survival needs. This exploitation promotes the loss of biodiversity. [69] In the 1980s, the use of anti-personnel landmines was regulated by the Treaty on the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. But many countries wanted a complete ban. Three-quarters of the world`s countries acceded to the subsequent Mining Ban Convention. Since its inception more than a decade ago, it has virtually halted the global production of anti-personnel mines and significantly reduced their use. More than 40 million stockpiled mines have been destroyed and assistance has been provided to survivors and the population in the affected areas. A large number of mined and presumed hazardous areas have been declared landmine-free and released for productive use.

As a result of these efforts, the number of victims has fallen sharply. Other encouraging trends include: increased national capacity to manage complex mining programs; the great strides made in developing support for victims in the broader context of disability; and the development of enhanced risk mitigation tools. The Convention on the Prohibition of Mine Action has served as a central framework for States to carry out mine action, which has led to all these remarkable achievements. Denying access can have a positive impact on the environment. When a mined area becomes a « no man`s land », plants and vegetation have a chance to grow and recover. For example, Nicaragua`s former arable land has become forests again and has remained intact after the construction of landmines.