First Conference of the High Contracting Parties to Protocol V on Explosive Remnants of War to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), November 5th, 2007

Report
Statements
Conference Documents

Report

Report on the First Conference on Protocol V to the CCW

The First Conference of the High Contracting Parties to Protocol V on Explosive Remnants of War to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) met in Geneva on 5 November 2007. Adopted on 28 November 2003, Protocol V obligates States Parties to mark and clear explosive remnants of war (ERW) after the cessation of armed conflicts, provide technical, material, and financial assistance for their removal in areas not in its direct control, or through a third party such as the UN or NGO. States must take “all feasible precautions” to protect civilians from the effects of ERW, provide warnings and risk education, and record and share information on ERW with the UN and other organizations. They must also provide assistance to the victims of ERW.

5 November was also the Global Day of Action on Cluster Munitions. Events highlighting the humanitarian suffering caused by cluster munitions and the urgent need to ban these indiscriminate weapons took place in 40 countries across the world. In Geneva, in the square outside the Palais de Nations, the sculpture of the Broken Chair was rededicated to the victims of cluster munitions during an event sponsored by Handicap International.

During the Conference, many High Contracting Parties and Observers made statements describing their national experiences with explosive remnants of war (ERW), ERW clearance, and the implementation of Protocol V. There was general agreement on the goal of increasing universalization of the Protocol. Currently, 35 countries have expressed their consent to be bound by Protocol V.

Message of the UN Secretary-General to the Conference

The Conference commenced with the delivery of a message from the UN Secretary General Mr. Ban Ki-Moon. He commended the 35 States Parties who have acceded to the Protocol while encouraging others to ratify and implement the Protocol without delay. “Explosive remnants of war—munitions that have failed to function as intended or which have been abandoned—are generated in every conflict. These horrendous and silent hazards pose particular risks to civilians. They continue to endanger lives long after hostilities have ended, and hinder the socio-economic reconstruction of societies struggling to emerge from the ravages of war,” he said.

National Reporting: Database to be established

The Conference decided to establish a database of national reports, as stipulated under Protocol V. The database will be accessible to High Contracting Parties, States not parties, and the general public. National reports cover issues pertaining to ERW under Protocol V, such as clearance, information exchange, civilian risk awareness programs, cooperation and assistance, and compliance measures. The reports are to be submitted annually.

Information Exchange: New template adopted

The Conference urged users and abandoners of ERW to record, retain, and transmit information on ERW to relevant recipients, in order to facilitate clearance and protect civilians and humanitarian workers. The Conference decided to adopt a new electronic template for reporting on a trial basis. A separate database will be created for requests for assistance, and for updated information on the status of ERW locations, clearance, destruction, rehabilitation and reintegration of victims, and risk awareness programs.

Implementation Mechanism to Come

The Conference also decided to establish a mechanism for consultation and cooperation consisting of informal meetings of experts, chaired by Coordinators. The next meeting of experts will take place from 2-4 July 2008 in Geneva.

ERW Contamination: Still Widespread

During the Conference, Ukraine and Croatia described their experiences with ERW clearance. Ukraine stated it has had three fires in three years on its territory, resulting in the accidental detonation of 60,000 tons of ammunition. Ukraine appealed for further assistance in clearing former Soviet ERW. Meanwhile, Croatia stated it wished the provisions of Protocol V were stronger, although it hopes that the new ERW database will act as a bridge between recipients and donors.

Mongolia, though not a High Contracting Party of Protocol V, described its needs for assistance in clearing unexploded ordnance (UXO) and abandoned ordnance (AXO) left on its territory from as long ago as WWII. Mongolia announced that it is working towards acceding to Protocol V and the Ottawa Convention.

Donors: Mine Action Assistance

Australia and the US gave statistics on funding to mine action assistance. Australia has made a 5 year $75 million dollar pledge to its Mine Action Strategy. $12 million has been allocated to landmine and ERW clearance in Cambodia, $1.5 million to Vietnam, and $2.5 million to Lebanon. The US stated it has pledged $83 million dollars to mine action assistance. Switzerland announced that it will invest bilaterally and multilaterally in providing for cooperation and assistance.

Working to Ratify: Russia, US, Morocco, Mongolia, Republic of Korea

Russia announced that it was in the final stages of the ratification process for Protocol V, and that it is already implementing many of its provisions. The US, Morocco, Mongolia, and the Republic of Korea also indicated they were working towards ratification of the Protocol.

Cluster Munitions: Pressure from the Oslo Process

Australia, India, and Russia referred to cluster munitions in their interventions. Australia stated it will “contribute strongly to efforts in the CCW, as well as in the Oslo Process” to address the humanitarian concerns caused by the use of cluster munitions. It urged the CCW Meeting of High Contracting Parties to adopt a negotiating mandate on cluster munitions.

India's delegation argued that cluster munitions are legitimate weapons with “distinct military advantages over other munitions in terms of economy of effort and wider area coverage in combat zone.” According to India, the use of cluster munitions is legitimate if existing international humanitarian law is taken into account. Humanitarian suffering is caused from the distinction between civilians and combatants not being made.

India stated that updating cluster munitions, or the “incorporation of ‘alternatives’ with advanced technical features for greater accuracy and reliability geometrically could increase the cost of these weapon systems, thereby negating the advantages that the other features have to offer.” India will weigh any proposed standards of accuracy and reliability for cluster munitions against its current technological threshold and the cost and time required to replace munitions, it's delegation said. India also noted that it views precision guided munitions and sensor fused munitions as “improved cluster munitions” and not alternative or new weapons. “Moreover,” India's delegate added, “states, especially developing ones, will have an incentive to move towards improved cluster munitions only if the higher costs are offset by access to the new technologies or by the development of other economically viable alternatives.”

Russia stated that it believed the humanitarian concerns relating from the use of cluster munitions could be addressed through the “strict and full implementation of Protocol V.”

Contrary to Russia’s remarks, civil society and a vast majority of States have  overwhelmingly agreed that Protocol V is insufficient to deal with the humanitarian suffering caused by the use of cluster munitions. Protocol V does not specifically address cluster munitions, has not had an impact on their use, and only addresses post-conflict issues. This past year, political will to create a new international instrument banning the use of cluster munitions has rapidly solidified under the Oslo Process, wherein States have committed themselves to negotiating a treaty by 2008. The roots of the Oslo Process lie in frustrations over the CCW’s inability to address the issue of cluster munitions. When discussions on cluster munitions proved fruitless at the 2006 Third Review Conference of the CCW, Norway launched an initiative to go outside of the CCW and negotiate a free-standing treaty.

During the meeting on Protocol V, Steve Goose of Human Rights Watch reminded participants of the urgency to negotiate a meaningful, legally-binding prohibition on cluster munitions, which cause unacceptable harm to civilians, under the deadline to complete negotiations by the end of 2008. “It remains to be seen how important Protocol V will be, and whether it will make any real difference in ERW-affected countries,” Goose said.

Statements:

Message of the UN Secretary-General, delivered by Mr. Timothy Caughley
Portugal on behalf of the EU, Mr. Jose Julio Pereira Gomes
Australia, Ambassador Caroline Millar
India, Ambassador Jayant Prasad
Ukraine
Russian Federation
Croatia
Switzerland
Austria
Morocco
United States
Lithuania
China
Republic of Korea
United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS)
ICRC
Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD)
Human Rights Watch (HRW)
Serbia
Mongolia

Conference Documents

Final Document
Summary Record

-Report by Katherine Harrison, 19 November 2007