RIGHTS-SRI LANKA: Guerilla Groups Urged to Eschew Mines

By Feizal Samath Reprint | | Print |

Feizal Samath

COLOMBO, Aug 28 1999 (IPS) - An international group fighting against the use of anti-personnel mines (APMs) hopes to get guerrilla groups to endorse a proposed convention banning the use of these destructive weapons next year.

The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) is planning to launch a new campaign titled ‘Geneva Call’ on January 1, 2000, said Sol Santos, ICBL coordinator for the Philippines.

“We are hoping that guerrilla groups, which are reluctant to sign the Ottawa Treaty, would indicate their willingness to endorse the Geneva Call,” he told IPS.

Santos was here for a regional seminar on landmines held at Wadduwa town, about 30 km south of Colombo, last week.

The ICBL, a coalition of over 1,300 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in 75 countries pioneered the landmark Ottawa Treaty in December 1997 banning the development, production, stockpiling, transfer and use of APMs.

Since its promulgation in Canada, 135 countries have signed or acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty up to March 31, 1999, according to official figures.

Landmines used by government and rebel groups in international and internal conflicts have killed or maimed millions people, including women and children, across the world.

Unlike other weapons of war which are aimed and fired, APMs are ‘victim’ actuated, says the Geneva-based International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) which works in conflict zones.

Anti-personnel mines are indiscriminate in their effects and, unless removed or detonated, are long lasting, an ICRC document says.

Groups like the ICBL, fighting to eliminate landmines, say there are more than 250 million APMs stored in the arsenals of 108 countries, which must be destroyed before they are laid.

According to ICRC estimates in 1996, 800 people are killed and 12,000 more wounded per month from mines. While mines are being removed from conflict zones, under removal programmes, new ones are being planted.

Last week’s meeting, organised by ICRC, drew foreign affairs and defence officials from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh and Bhutan and military and human rights experts from elsewhere.

The three-day meeting focused on the prohibition of mines on common borders and a ban on the transfer of APMs as a first move to eliminate them.

“This is the beginning of inter-governmental discussion between countries in South Asia as to what can be done towards the goal of eliminating landmines,” an offical said.

Within the region half of the states appear to be ready (to work towards the elimination of landmines), the other half is not opposed to that goal but have indicated that it will take longer.

In the South Asian region, only Bangladesh and the Maldives have signed the Ottawa treaty.

Sri Lankan officials defend their decision not to sign the treaty, saying the use of landmines is essential in the current conflict with militants fighting for a separate Tamil state in northern and eastern Sri Lanka.

Experts said northern Jaffna peninsula, was the most densely mined region in South Asia but could not give estimates of the number of mines on the ground.

Last month, the United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) sent mine experts and sniffer dogs to Jaffna under a programme to ferret out stray mines and demarcate minefields.

Santos, a lawyer and executive member of ICBL’s international working group told IPS that the group was reaching out to 165-odd rebel and liberation organisations across the world in an effort to get them to endorse the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty.

So far, ICBL has succeeded in persuading a dozen rebel groups from Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan and the Philippines to announce unilateral declarations on the non-use of anti-personnel mines.

“We are using persuasive methods to urge rebel groups to endorse the Ottawa Treaty,” he said adding that the Tamil Tiger rebels “looked a hard nut to crack.”

Santos identified some flaws in the Mine Ban Treaty, saying it,for one, lacked a middle-way path and did not allow for the useof APMs in a more responsible manner.

“This more or less can prevent state or non-state actors from agreeing to be signatories to the treaty,” he said.