Key
developments since March 1999: The U.S. contributed $81 million to mine
action in FY 1999, and estimates funding of $98 million in FY 2000. The U.S.
ratified CCW Amended Protocol II in May 1999. The U.S. reserved the right to
use antipersonnel mines during the NATO operation in Kosovo/Yugoslavia, but did
not do so. The Pentagon spent $21 million on its AP mines alternative program
in FY 1999 and expects that to increase to $94 million in FY 2001. The Pentagon
is pursuing two “alternatives” (RADAM and BOS) that would be
prohibited under the Mine Ban Treaty.
Mine Ban Policy
The U.S. has not joined the Mine Ban Treaty but has
committed to acceding to it in 2006 if alternatives to AP mines are identified
and fielded. On 6 October 1999, President Clinton stated that “one of the
biggest disappointments I've had as President, a bitter disappointment for me,
is that I could not sign in good conscience the treaty banning land
mines....”[1]
Current U.S. AP mine policy is guided by Presidential Decision Directive
(PDD) 64 issued on 23 June 1998. Although this document is classified,
officials have used details from it in many public forums and publications. The
content is also largely contained in a 15 May 1998 public letter from National
Security Advisor Samuel Berger to Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat, Vermont).
The letter states that “the United States will sign the Ottawa Convention
by 2006 if we succeed in identifying and fielding suitable alternatives to our
anti-personnel landmines and mixed anti-tank systems by then.” It also
states that the U.S. will end the use of AP mines outside of Korea by 2003 (not
including those in mixed systems),and will “aggressively
pursue the objective of having APL alternatives ready for Korea by 2006”
(including those in mixed
systems).[2] This built on the
previous U.S. policy announcement in September 1997 by (1) including AP mines in
mixed systems as part of the alternatives program and (2) stating for the first
time that the U.S. intended to sign the treaty, albeit only if the search for
alternatives were successful.[3]
The Pentagon has made clear that it considers the 2003 date as a
“deadline,” while the 2006 date is considered an “objective
dependent on the on-going search for
alternatives.”[4] The end
of reliance on AP mines in mixed systems is considered to be a
“goal” and the search for alternatives for them has “no
deadline.”[5]
The U.S. sent Ambassador Donald Steinberg (the president’s Special
Representative for Humanitarian Demining) as an unofficial observer to the First
Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty held in Maputo in May 1999.
President Clinton also sent a message to the meeting, which was read aloud
during the opening plenary. U.S. representatives have also participated as
unofficial observers in some of the intersessional standing committees of
experts meetings on mine clearance, victim assistance, and general status of the
treaty, held in December 1999, March 2000, and May 2000.
The United States ratified Amended Protocol II of CCW on 24 May 1999. The
U.S. participated in the First Annual Conference of States Parties to Amended
Protocol II held in Geneva from 15-17 December 1999. In its Article 13 report
submitted at this conference, the U.S. declared that it has taken all steps
required to be in compliance with the amended protocol. This included modifying
670,000 M14 AP mines by attaching metal washers to make them
detectable.[6] These mines are
designated for use in Korea.
At that meeting, as well as a subsequent meeting of governmental experts for
the amended protocol on 31 May 2000 in Geneva, the U.S. introduced a series of
proposals for strengthened restrictions on AP and antitank (antivehicle)
landmines. For AP mines, the U.S. proposed increasing the required reliability
rate for self-destruction from 90 percent up to 95 percent and for
self-deactivation from 99.9 percent up to 99.99 percent. The U.S. also proposed
that all antivehicle mines be detectable, and that remotely-delivered
antivehicle mines have self-destruct and self-deactivation features. The U.S.
also proposed adding compliance
procedures.[7]
In his statement to the conference, the head of the U.S. delegation Michael
Matheson of the State Department said, “In the view of the United States,
the Amended Protocol is an essential part of the strategy needed to deal with
the threat of indiscriminate use of landmines. This Protocol is an instrument
that can attract adherence of all states, including those which are not able to
accept a total prohibition on anti-personnel mines at this time.... [I]t has
been our strong hope and expectation that all states can be brought to support
and adhere to this Protocol, whether they are party to the Ottawa Convention or
not.”[8]
Since 1997, U.S.-backed efforts at negotiating any type of international
agreement on AP mines at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) have failed.
Predictably, no progress occurred during the 1999 session. U.S. Representative
to the CD Ambassador Robert Grey affirmed that the U.S. still seeks a
“role for the Conference in negotiating a comprehensive ban on the
transfer of AP
landmines.”[9]
Production
The United States has not banned or placed a
moratorium on the production of AP mines. The stockpile cap announced on 17
January 1997 does not preclude the production of new AP mines to replace those
used in future combat
operations.[10] Yet, there has
been no AP mine production in the U.S. since
1996,[11] and there are no known
plans for future production.
In April 2000, Human Rights Watch wrote to twenty-seven companies identified
in its 1997 report “Exposing the Source” as past producers of AP
landmines and their
components.[12] These companies
had refused to join nineteen other U.S. companies in 1996 and 1997 in renouncing
future involvement in mine
production.[13] One of these
twenty-seven companies, Quantic Industries Inc. (Hollister, California), has
since changed its position and declared that it has adopted “a policy of
not knowingly selling any product that is intended for use in an antipersonnel
mine.”[14]
In May 1996, the U.S. began a search for
alternatives to AP mines so that the military could completely eliminate their
use “as soon as possible.” A little more than a year later, a
target date of 2006 was established for fielding alternatives. However, the
deputy secretary of defense, in a March 1999 memorandum setting out the program
objectives for one of the alternatives programs stated that the effort should
“provide a range of system activation and target discrimination
capabilities.”[16] It did
not rule out target (victim) activated systems or explicitly instruct compliance
with the Mine Ban Treaty.
The Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year[17] (FY) 1999 required the
secretary of defense to submit to Congress an annual report describing the
progress made in identifying technologies and concepts for landmine
alternatives.[18] The first
report was submitted by 1 April 2000. Section 248 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for FY 1999 requires that the Pentagon enter into two
contracts with appropriate scientific organizations, to study existing and new
technologies and concepts that could serve as landmine
alternatives.[19] The National
Academy of Sciences is currently conducting one of the studies. Their report is
due by the end of 2000. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Los Alamos
National Laboratory are conducting the second study. The date for the
submission of their report is not known.
The Pentagon’s figures for current plans through FY 2005 indicate that
more than $300 million will be spent on research and development, and more than
$500 million on procurement of mine alternatives. The funding requests
contained in President Clinton’s budget for research, development, test,
and evaluation and procurement categories for each track of the AP landmine
alternatives program are presented
below.[20]
Funding for U.S. Landmine Alternatives Programs (in
thousands of dollars)
Track 1consists of two separate programs, RADAM and NSD-A.
RADAM combines seven AT mines from the Remote Anti-Armor Mine System (RAAMS)
with five AP mines from the Area Denial Antipersonnel Munition (ADAM) into one
projectile.[22] The Department
of Defense is pursuing this program because the use of ADAM AP mines alone will
be prohibited in 2003, but use of this new mixed system (and all other mixed
systems) will still be permitted by U.S. policy.
The Pentagon has conceded that RADAM “does not technically
comply” with the Mine Ban
Treaty.[23] In the opinion of
the USCBL, RADAM is a wasteful stopgap that, if current policy remains in
effect, would be banned in 2006. The U.S. would then have to spend considerable
sums to destroy RADAM or reconvert back to RAAMS.
In 1999, the Pentagon asked for $48.25 million for RADAM, but Congress
reduced the amount to $8 million, for pre-production engineering and
manufacturing development activities
only.[24] This year, the Army
has requested $47.7 million for RADAM procurement in its FY 2001 budget
request.[25] The total program
cost for RADAM is estimated to be $150 million for 337,000 munitions through FY
2004.[26] An acquisition
decision for RADAM may occur as early as the first quarter of FY 2001 and
deployment as early as the first quarter of
2002.[27]
The non-self-destruct (AP mine) alternative (NSD-A) program will result in a
“hand emplaced munition developed to meet the mission requirements
formerly accomplished by M14 and M16 non self-destruct antipersonnel
mines.”[28] The NSD-A
system consists of a munition (apparently an existing AP mine like the M16) with
a modified sensor/fuze package, a signal repeater unit, and a control unit to
activate the munition once the target has been confirmed as a combatant by a
U.S. soldier (“man-in-the-loop”). The Army awarded contracts
totaling nearly $70 million to Alliant Techsystems (Hopkins, Minnesota) and
Textron Defense Systems Corporation (Wilmington, Massachusetts) on 3 December
1998 for prototype development of the
NSD-A.[29] NSD-A underwent
accelerated prototype assessment testing in October 1999 at Fort Benning,
Georgia.
The Pentagon plans to eventually procure 523,000 munition systems between FY
2002 and FY 2005.[30] The
production decision for NSD-A is scheduled for the fourth quarter of FY
2002.[31] DoD is currently
developing a justification for combining the contract for a joint award to
Alliant and Textron for engineering support and qualification
testing.[32] Alliant and
Textron announced on 22 June 2000 an agreement to jointly develop and produce
NSD-A.[33]
The prototype NSD-A has a feature that allows the munition to function in a
target (victim) activated mode. The U.S. soldier would no longer be “in
the loop.” The munition would become an indiscriminate mine, ready to
explode at the footstep of a person, be it soldier or civilian. In a
presentation during a public session of the National Academy of Sciences
committee on landmine alternatives, Pentagon acquisition officials discussed
this feature as a “battlefield override system.” This has also been
referred to as a “command fire” and “command activation”
feature—confusing names since the munition would no longer be
command-detonated, that is, a soldier would no longer decide whether or not to
explode the weapon, but it instead would be triggered by the contact of a
person.[34]
Officials from the Department of Defense have stated that this feature is an
option separate from the basic man-in-the-loop operation and is merely being
explored in the engineering and manufacturing development of the NSD-A. On 28
February 2000, Senator Leahy wrote a letter to the Deputy Defense Secretary to
express concern about the battlefield override system. In response, Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy Walter Slocombe stated that “exploring
this [battlefield override] feature may provide as-of-yet-unforeseen insights in
developing suitable
alternatives.”[35]
Senator Leahy wrote back that he was “perplexed” by that statement,
since “it is clear to me that the feature is being included because some
field commanders have never accepted the Administration’s 1997 policy to
accede to the Ottawa Convention.” He further stated that his continued
support for the NSD-A program is dependent on the omission of the battlefield
override feature.[36] A final
decision regarding incorporation of a target-actuated feature into the final
NSD-A munition will occur prior to the final production
decision.[37]
Track 2
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is responsible for
Track 2 of the landmine alternatives program, which was initiated in October
1997. The first research and development procurement under Track 2 was released
by DARPA on 14 June 1999 for proposals for a “self-healing
minefield” wherein surface laid AT mines have the ability to move to close
breaches in AT minefields made by enemy forces. DARPA awarded the first
contract to Alliant Techsystems on 19 April 2000 for $5
million.[38] Another $6.5
million contract was awarded to Science Applications International Corporation
(San Diego, California) on 6 June
2000.[39] Another project being
undertaken by DARPA is to use microelectronic tags to identify targets for
direct and indirect fire systems, typically minimally guided
munitions.[40] Apparently,
these small tagging devices would act as “thistles” and attach
themselves to persons entering an area sown with them.
Track 3
Track 3 of the AP landmine alternatives program, the search for alternatives
to mixed mine systems, originated in PDD 64. Deputy Secretary of Defense Hamre
signed a directive authorizing concept exploration on 23 March 1999 and it is
anticipated that the Pentagon will spend $170 million through FY 2005. The U.S.
Army released a broad agency announcement (BAA) soliciting concepts for Track 3
in August 1999. This solicitation was withdrawn on 8 September 1999 for
unspecified reasons. The U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in
conjunction with the Communications and Electronics Command issued a BAA on 27
March 2000 to solicit submissions for component technology that may provide or
enhance near, mid, and far term solutions to the Track 3 program.
The Army released another BAA on 1 February 2000 for systems and operational
concepts for the Rapid Tactical Terrain Limiter (RATTLER) which apparently
replaced the August 1999 solicitation. In this BAA is the statement that the
“U.S. Government desires to be in a position to be considered compliant
with the Ottawa Convention by
2006.”[41] The Army
awarded a total of $800,000 to eight contractors for concept exploration studies
for RATTLER on 4 May 2000.
Stockpiling
The U.S. has more than 12 million AP mines in its
stockpile, including about 10 million self-destructing mines, more than one
million non-self-destructing mines, and about one million Claymore mines. More
specifically, the U.S. stockpile is believed to consist of ten types of AP
mines:
The U.S. has never declared the exact number of M14 and M16
non-self-destructing AP mines retained for training and research/development
purposes, but this stockpile is thought to be approximately
2,000.[44] These mines are used
for proficiency training in Korea and for testing mine detection and mine
clearance systems at military research and development
laboratories.[45] It is also
possible that AP mines of foreign manufacture are retained for similar
purposes.
Overseas Stocks
U.S. AP mines are stockpiled in at least ten
countries: Germany, Greece, Japan, Kuwait, Norway, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, South
Korea, Turkey, and the United Kingdom (at Diego Garcia, its Indian Ocean
territory). It also appears that the U.S. is planning to stockpile AP mines in
Bahrain and Oman, which have not signed the treaty, possibly for the first time
(see below). U.S. AP mines have been stored in Italy and Spain in the past, but
both countries have stated that U.S. mines have been removed, presumably in 1999
or 2000.
There is no publicly available official information regarding the current
on-hand balances of AP mines outside the U.S. Officials from the National
Security Council and Department of Defense, citing security concerns, refused to
comment on the types, locations, and quantities of U.S. AP mines that are stored
outside the continental United
States.[46] U.S. officials have
refused to discuss the status of any bilateral arrangements or any modifications
to Status of Forces Agreements that may allow the continued storage of U.S. AP
mines with countries who are party to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. One Department
of Defense official stated that the U.S. has “not pressured or
coerced” such
countries.[47]
While the quantities and locations of munitions are routinely changed by the
military, Landmine Monitor Report 1999 estimated that the U.S. had some
200,000 AP mines in mixed systems (Gator, Volcano, MOPMS) stored overseas, in
addition to 1.2 million M14 and M16 AP mines for
Korea.[48] There are also
artillery-delivered ADAM self-destruct AP mines stored outside the continental
U.S., perhaps numbering in the hundreds of thousands. For example, 7,776 ADAM
AP mines are stored in Qatar (see below). It is likely that ADAM AP mines are
also stockpiled in Germany, Japan, and Norway.
U.S. AP mines are stored in at least five states parties to the Mine Ban
Treaty (Germany, Japan, Norway, Qatar, and the U.K. at Diego Garcia), as well as
treaty signatory Greece. Some states parties have apparently determined that
U.S. mine stocks fall under their jurisdiction, not the U.S.’s, and thus
have required removal of the U.S. mines. At a recent meeting of Mine Ban Treaty
nations, officials from Italy and Spain said that all U.S. AP mines have been
withdrawn.[49] It is believed
that Norway has reached an agreement for the U.S. to remove stocks by 2003
(within the treaty’s four-year deadline). Other states parties have
apparently determined that U.S. mine stocks are under U.S. jurisdiction, and
thus the states parties do not feel obligated to have the U.S. mines removed or
destroyed. This seems to be the case with Germany, Japan, and the U.K. Just one
state party, Norway, has declared the presence of U.S. stockpiles in the ban
treaty’s Article 7 transparency measure reports submitted to the UN.
Revealed for the first time in 2000, the U.S. is currently stockpiling AP
mines in Qatar, a party to the Mine Ban Treaty. Two hundred sixteen ADAM
projectiles containing a total of 7,776 AP mines are currently stored at the Al
Karana area in Doha, Qatar as part of U.S. Army Pre-Positioned Stocks Five
(APS-5).[50]
Additionally, the U.S. apparently plans to introduce and stockpile Gator and
Claymore AP mines at the Al Udeid facility in Qatar. According to documents
from a recently awarded contract, it appears that one hundred forty-two Air
Force CBU-89 Gator mixed system units (a total of 3,124 AP mines) and one
hundred forty-one M18/M18A1 Claymore AP mines will be stockpiled in war reserve
ammunition stockpiles by the Air Force in Qatar, Bahrain, and
Oman.[51] The contract was
awarded to DynCorp Technical Services (Fort Worth, Texas) on 20 April 2000.
This would be the first publicly known instance of the U.S. stockpiling AP mines
in Bahrain and Oman.
The U.S. retains about 1.22 million non-self-destructing M14 and M16 AP mines
for use on the Korea
Peninsula.[52] It is unclear if
these are exclusively stored at facilities in the Republic of Korea. The
Department of Defense has stated that it does “not publicly reveal
specific types of munitions inventories or where they are
located.”[53]
Stockpile Destruction
The U.S. reported that it completed destruction
of 3.355 million M14 and M16 non-self-destructing AP mines on 30 June
1998.[54] The Department of
Defense also said that all non-self-destructing AP mines have been removed from
U.S.-flagged maritime pre-positioning ships like those docked in Norway and at
Diego Garcia.[55] The
destruction of the non-self-destructing AP mines was conducted by open
detonation at military facilities, and was carried out by the U.S. Army
Industrial Operations Command of the U.S. Army Materiel Command. The cost was
approximately $3.3 million.[56]
One problem facing the U.S. when the 16,000 PDM and 9.5 million ADAM AP mines
are destroyed (demilitarized) is the presence of trace amounts of depleted
uranium in the housing of these
mines.[57] Apparently, during
the development of ADAM, depleted uranium was used to improve their structural
strength to withstand the physical forces of being expelled from an artillery
tube. It is not known whether DoD has developed procedures to demilitarize
these mines and if the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved such
plans. The U.S. Army is responsible for demilitarizing AP mines and is spending
$6.4 million in research and development funds between 1999 and 2001 to develop
cryofracture methods--using extremely cold gas--for the disposal of AP
mines.[58] The Department of
Defense has estimated the total cost of destruction of ADAM and PDM mines at $32
to 44 million.[59]
U.S. Mine Stocks and the Mine Ban Treaty
U.S. ADAM, Gator, MOPMS, Volcano, GEMSS, PDM, M14, and M16 AP mines are
prohibited under the Mine Ban Treaty because they clearly meet the definition of
AP mine in the treaty.
Certain U.S. mines designated as antivehicle or antitank mines may also be
prohibited under the treaty. Antivehicle mines that function as an
antipersonnel mine – that can explode from an unintentional act of a
person – are considered AP mines and prohibited under the
treaty.[60] The U.S. possesses
a large number of antivehicle mines that may, as the result of intentional or
unintentional design consequences, cause them to function as an AP mine.
However, it is not possible to state with certainty which mines would be
prohibited and which not, both because ban treaty states parties have not
clarified what is meant by “an unintentional act” and because there
is insufficient data to render judgment regarding the stimuli or forces
necessary to activate the kill mechanism for these various antivehicle
mines.
It would seem clear that U.S. M15 and M21 antitank mines with M624 fuzes and
tilt rods would be prohibited. It is unclear if M15 and M19 antitank mines that
use M1, M1A1, M3, M5, and M142 firing devices as antihandling devices, as well
as M21 antitank mines using M142 firing devices, would be considered compliant.
Similarly, it is unclear if the 20 percent of RAAMS and M75 GEMSS antitank mines
that are equipped with antihandling devices would be considered
compliant.[61]
Even less clear is the case for U.S. antitank mines that have magnetic
influence fuzes like RAAMS, Gator, Volcano, MOPMS, and GEMSS. These mines are
“designed to detonate when straddled by a tank, which interrupts the
mine’s magnetic field. A person can walk on it and move it, but if picked
up quickly or rotated, it will
detonate.”[62]
Additionally, while Volcano, Gator, and MOPMS do not have an internal
antihandling device, the mine “may detonate when moved, because the mine
may sense a significant change from its original
orientation.”[63] The
M2/M4 Selectable Lightweight Attack Munition (SLAM) with an infrared sensor may
also be in this category of mines that are questionable due to overly sensitive
fuzes.
Transfer
The export of U.S. AP mines has been banned through
legislation since 23 October
1992.[64] Claymore mines were
exempted from this ban in 1996. This export ban has been extended several
times, most recently until
2003.[65] The Clinton
Administration announced in January 1997 that the U.S. “will observe a
permanent ban on the export and transfer of
APL.”[66] However,
Congress has not codified the permanent ban into law. Prior to the export ban,
the U.S. exported 4.4 million AP mines to 32 countries between 1969 and
1992.[67]
Use
There has been no
reported use of AP mines by U.S. armed forces since 1991 in the Gulf War. The
U.S. has banned the use of non-self-destruct AP mines since May 1996, except for
the defense of Korea until 2006 (or beyond if alternatives are not available).
Under current policy, the government will prohibit the use of “pure”
self-destructing AP mines (ADAM and PDM) globally in 2003, again except for
Korea until 2006. Under current policy, the use of AP mines in mixed systems is
not geographically or time restricted, but could be ended in 2006 if suitable
alternatives are identified and
fielded.[68]
AP mines were not employed by U.S. air or ground forces in Yugoslavia during
Operation Allied Force from 24 March to 10 June 1999. However, the U.S.
reserved the right to use AP mines if it deemed it
necessary.[69]
The U.S. states that it has made the necessary amendments to its doctrine and
training to comply with the requirements regarding mine use contained in Amended
Protocol II of CCW.[70] The
U.S. Army field manual governing mine warfare was revised in June 1998 to
incorporate policy and treaty-mandated changes since its last publication in
1992. Minor technical changes to it were made in June 1999.
The U.S. no longer classifies Claymores as AP mines, thus they are not part
of the U.S. policy to find alternatives and ban AP mines. According to
Department of Defense officials, U.S. forces are “not trained in the use
of tripwires and Claymore
mines.”[71] However, a
U.S. Army field manual indicates that tripwire fuzing for Claymore mines is
authorized for and applicable in
Korea.[72] Claymore mines with
M57 command detonating devices are routinely deployed in the basic combat
ammunition load of U.S. forces and are likely present during operations and
deployments to places such as Kosovo, Colombia, and the Persian Gulf.
The use of AP mines in minefields at the U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
ended in 1999. According to the Pentagon, all of the antipersonnel mines and
antitank mines have been removed from the minefields and destroyed. A
commercial contractor using mine-detecting dogs to insure that total clearance
has been achieved is checking the former
minefields.[73] Beginning in
1961, the U.S. used approximately 50,000 AP and AT mines along the perimeter of
its facilities at Guantanamo
Bay.[74]
Mine Action Funding
Between FY 1993 and FY
1999 the U.S. contribution for humanitarian mine action programs totaled $288
million, including $63 million in Pentagon research and development programs.
The total does not include funding for mine victim assistance programs because
mine victim-specific funding, as opposed to more general war victim funding, is
not identified by the U.S. government; it would likely amount to tens of
millions of dollars more.[75]
In FY 1999, U.S. mine action funding totaled $81 million, up from $63 million
the previous year. Funding is estimated at $98 million in FY 2000, and $78
million in FY 2001. Under current plans, U.S. expenditures on alternatives to
AP mines will exceed funding for mine action programs in FY 2001.
U.S. Government Humanitarian Demining Funding, FY 93
– FY 1999
(in millions of U.S. Dollars)
FY 93
FY 94
FY 95
FY 96
FY 97
FY 98
FY 99
Total funding
10.191
15.931
39.252
32.768
45.475
63.449
81.287
Number of Countries
7
9
12
14
15
22
34
U.S. Government Humanitarian Demining Funding (in
millions of U.S. Dollars)
According to the Department of State, “the steps by which a
mine-affected country requests U.S. assistance includes a formal request through
the U.S. embassy...which reviews and endorses the request and forwards it to the
IWG.... the IWG meets and determines whether to conduct a policy assessment. A
policy assessment visit evaluates both the nature of the mine problem and the
suitability of U.S. assistance.... Based on this assessment, the IWG may
approve the establishment of a formal program for the country. A typical U.S.
program involves assisting in the establishment of a mine action center, a mine
awareness program, and a demining training program. As the country develops its
mine clearance abilities, the IWG will periodically evaluate the development of
the program. When the program reaches the point of being self-sustaining, the
United States passes off its active role to the host nation, although some U.S.
funding may continue to sustain demining
efforts.”[80]
Beginning in 1998, U.S. financial assistance for humanitarian demining in
mine-affected countries in Southeast Europe has been channeled through the
Slovenian International Trust Fund (ITF) for Demining and Mine Victim
Assistance. Most if not all of these funds thus far have been used for programs
in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The ITF works with the national and regional mine
action centers to disperse funds for mine clearance projects, mine awareness
education, and victim assistance
efforts.[81]
Department of State
The Department of State is responsible for
assisting a recipient country in sustaining its national demining program. Once
a program is established, continued support of demining operations is the
responsibility of the Department of State's Office of Humanitarian Demining
Programs. Funding for the humanitarian demining programs run by the Department
of State is provided by the Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining and
Related programs (NADR) appropriation. NADR funding can be used to support the
programs of international organizations and NGOs or can be transferred to other
agencies.[82]
On 19 August 1999, the Department of State awarded an Integrated Mine Action
Support (IMAS) contract to a team of companies led by the RONCO Consulting
Corporation. The not-to-exceed $250 million over five years contract provides
for one base year plus four one-year options for extension. The IMAS contract
allows for RONCO and a team of seven other companies to provide mine clearance,
mine detecting dogs, logistics and supply services, and other program management
to countries receiving humanitarian demining
assistance.[83] As of May 2000,
approximately twenty task orders have been initiated or are in the procurement
process.[84]
In addition to country programs, the State Department also has allocated
$7.93 million in FY 2000 to fund a number of “cross-cutting
initiatives.” This includes $1.4 million to the Survey Action Center, a
$300,000 grant signed on 14 April 2000 to Saybrook Productions for a mine action
CD-ROM, $150,000 to Warner Brothers for the development of mine awareness comic
books, a $100,000 grant signed on 28 February 2000 to the UNDP for a training
study, $1.1 million to UNICEF for mine awareness programs, a $250,000 grant
signed on 7 April 2000 to the United Nations Association’s
Adopt-A-Minefield program, an $18,343 grant signed on 17 February 2000 to James
Madison University for a CD-ROM project, $75,000 to the IMAS contractors for a
measures of effectiveness study, $200,000 to the IMAS contractors for
information management support, and a $4,550 grant signed on 13 April 2000 to
the University of Denver’s Center for Teaching International Relations
curriculum project.[85]
On 2 September 1999, the Humanitarian Demining Interagency Working Group
(IWG) approved in principle, as a one-time confidence and security building
measure, a joint demining training exercise conducted by U.S. military personnel
for Azerbaijan and Armenia.[86]
Georgia was subsequently included in this initiative and the joint training
exercise will be conducted at a location in Georgia between September and
November 2000. The training will include a total of sixty deminers from
Armenia, Azerbaijian, and
Georgia.[87] This exercise is
unique because more than one country is involved and because of their history of
belligerence.
The Humanitarian Demining IWG modified existing informal policy on 9 December
1999 in response to renewed armed conflict and possible new use of mines in
countries receiving U.S. humanitarian demining assistance. Of particular
concern were Afghanistan and Angola. Decisions regarding continuation of
assistance are to be made on a case-by-case basis and assistance will only be
funneled to the people, not the government of the country, through programs
operated by NGOs and international organizations. Assistance will only be
allowed in areas where conflict has a low probability of recurrence, for the
purpose of clearing arable land or facilitating the resettlement of displaced
persons in areas thought to be mine-affected before the commencement of U.S.
demining assistance. It is felt that these restrictions would neither aid
belligerent parties nor commit the U.S. to assist in clearing newly mined
areas.[88]
The U.S. also intends to establish a Quick Reaction Demining Force of forty
deminers and eight mine-detecting dog teams. This group will conduct emergency
demining operations when directed by the State Department’s Office of
Humanitarian Demining Programs. The host country for this force has not been
determined but it is likely to be in a mine-affected
country.[89] Funding in FY 2000
for the force may reach $1.75 million from the State Department NADR
appropriation.[90]
Public-Private Partnerships for Mine Action
In January 1999 Ambassador Donald Steinberg took
over as the U.S. Special Representative of the President and the Secretary of
State for Global Humanitarian Demining. He leads the U.S. “Demining 2010
Initiative,” launched in November 1997 with the objective of identifying
and clearing landmines posing threats to civilians by the year 2010.
As part of the Demining 2010 initiative, the special representative has a
unique role in developing public-private initiatives for integrated mine action.
In addition to advising the executive branch agencies on the implementation of
humanitarian demining programs, the special representative’s mandate
includes fundraising for programs and initiatives. The list of programs and
initiatives and recipients is quite
varied.[91] It includes the
Survey Action Center, Adopt-A-Dog, Adopt-A-Minefield, Roots-for-Peace, DC Comics
mine awareness comic books, Warner Brothers mine awareness initiative, Landmine
Survivors Network, Mine Action Information Center at James Madison University,
Los Angeles Unified School District (mine awareness and education module), Army
Research Laboratory (landmine detection), Center for International
Rehabilitation, Huntington Associates (mine action CD-ROM), and more.
Department of Defense
Department of Defense Humanitarian Demining
programs are funded annually from the Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic
Aid (OHDACA) appropriation. OHDACA funded programs are coordinated with the
Department of State and approved by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The
Defense Security Cooperation Agency administers the funds while the regional
military commanders execute the programs. By law, U.S. military personnel are
prohibited from entering live minefields or removing mines as part of
humanitarian demining
programs.[92]
Use of OHDACA funds is restricted under Title 10, United States Code, Section
401. These funds can only be used to support U.S. forces participating in
humanitarian demining activities. According to a military planning document,
“the majority of the [OHDACA] funds are used to pay costs associated with
deployment of U.S. military trainers and support
personnel.”[93] Officers
from the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peacekeeping
and Humanitarian Assistance confirmed that as much as 80 percent of OHDACA
funding is spent on personnel allowances and the logistical costs of moving
personnel and equipment across the
world.[94] Purchase of
equipment, supplies, and services is permitted as long as it directly supports
U.S. military forces participating in humanitarian demining activities.
Donation of purchased equipment, supplies, and services can occur upon
completion of the program.
The DoD Humanitarian Demining R&D program researches, tests, and modifies
existing technology and equipment for immediate use in U.S. humanitarian
demining country programs. R&D accounts for nearly 22 percent of total U.S.
humanitarian mine action funding to date, not including victim assistance
funding. The budget for FY 1995-1999 was $63.6 million, including $18.172
million in FY 1999. For FY 2000 the estimated budget is $18.197 million and the
requested budget for FY 2001 is $12.728 million. Technologies and equipment
being developed under this program include improved protective gear for
deminers, minefield marking and mapping systems and survey equipment, vegetation
clearing devices, in-situ neutralization devices, mine awareness and training
materials, and mechanical clearance equipment for area clearance and quality
assurance purposes. The program will produce a “Consumer Reports”
style catalogue on the R&D findings for mine detection technologies sometime
in 2000.[95]
The Pentagon also plans to spend more than $215 million between FY 99 and FY
01 on research and development of military technologies to detect and neutralize
explosives, mines, and UXO. These programs are in separate areas of the budget
and are not specifically related to the humanitarian mine action totals. The
primary organizations conducting this research and development are the Army,
DARPA, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). It is possible that
the results of this military research may in the future find application in the
humanitarian demining area.[96]
The Defense Threat Reduction Agency is also exploring technologies for
airborne wide area AP landmine detection in arms control treaty compliance
monitoring.[97] Budget figures
for this project were not available. Research and development projects for
explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) projects are also not included in the above
figures.
Countries Receiving U.S. Demining Assistance
Between FY 1993 and FY 1999, the U.S. has
provided about $225 million in assistance to demining programs in thirty-four
countries.[98] The top
recipients of U.S. demining funds during this time are:
Bosnia
$40.5 million
(incl. Funds from Slovenia International Trust Fund)
Angola
$22.2 million
Afghanistan
$22.0 million
Mozambique
$20.3 million
Cambodia
$19.9 million
Laos
$14.0 million
Rwanda
$13.9 million
OAS
$9.1 million
(Honduras, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Guatemala)
Ethiopia
$8.8 million
Namibia
$8.3 million
The following table summarizes the country-by-country funding of Department
of State and Department of Defense humanitarian demining
programs.[99]
Recipient
Department of State NADR Funding
(in millions of U.S. dollars)
Department of Defense OHDACA Funding (in millions of U.S.
dollars)
Afghanistan Funding supports mine
awareness education, mine clearance, surveys, minefield marking, and training
coordinated by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance to
Afghanistan (UNOCHA) and continued operation of the UN’s Mine Action
Program for Afghanistan
(MAPA).[100] The U.S. committed
$1.5M in FY 99 funds to the HALO Trust to conduct demining operations in Vardak
Province.[101] In FY 00, the
NADR funding includes: $1.1M to the HALO Trust (grant signed 9 March 2000);
$1.3M for UNOCHA mine clearance; $0.5M for UNOCHA
equipment.[102]
Albania During the summer and fall of 1999, the Humanitarian
Demining IWG conducted a policy assessment of the situation in Albania to
ascertain efforts undertaken by the Albanian Government and possible areas of
U.S. assistance.[103] It is
possible that mine action funding for Albania will be channeled through the
Slovenian International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victim Assistance.
Algeria A request for humanitarian demining assistance from the
Government of Algeria was received on 6 December 1999. The request is currently
being reviewed by the Humanitarian Demining
IWG.[104]
Angola Assistance supports UN Demining Program in providing
training, equipment, and mine awareness education. Victim assistance programs
also funded.[105] Recently, the
U.S. agreed to assist the UN by providing nearly $2 million to purchase
“demining equipment such as communications gear, mine detectors,
protective suits, computers, explosives, mine probes, vehicles, and trauma
kits.”[106] In FY 00, the
NADR funding allocation includes: $0.399M to the HALO Trust (grant signed 11
April 2000); $0.697M to the German NGO MgM (grant signed 18 April 2000); $1.964M
to Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) (grant signed 1 May
2000).[107]
Armenia Armenia requested humanitarian demining assistance in late
1999, noting that there are landmines along the Armenia-Azerbaijan border
(excluding occupied territory). Armenia also has agreed to participate in
demining training as part of the Beecroft initiative. On 9 December 1999, the
U.S. Humanitarian Demining IWG authorized an assessment visit to Armenia in
2000.[108]
Azerbaijan Azerbaijan was formally approved into the U.S.
humanitarian demining program on 12 December 1999. An assessment of
requirements will be conducted in early
2000.[109] Training of deminers
will take place as part of the Beecroft initiative. The entire amount of FY 00
NADR funds is proposed for a grant to the
UNDP.[110]
Bosnia Herzegovina Beginning in 1998, all U.S. financial assistance
for humanitarian demining in mine-affected countries in Southeast Europe has
been channeled through the Slovenian International Trust Fund (ITF) for Demining
and Mine Victim Assistance. The ITF works with the national and regional mine
action centers to disperse funds for mine clearance projects, mine awareness
education, and victim assistance
efforts.[111] Prior to the
establishment of the ITF, the U.S. had spent over $26M in funds on a wide range
of mine action activities including the training and equipping of 450 military
deminers, produced mine awareness comic books and other activities in
conjunction with UNICEF and the World
Bank.[112] The Department of
Defense officially completed its demining training program in February
2000.[113]
Cambodia U.S. funding is given in the form of grants to
international NGOs or channeled through the Cambodian Mine Action Center (CMAC).
From FY 1993-1998, U.S. funding for mine action in Cambodia totaled nearly $17M.
Prior to the suspension of OHDACA funding in July 1997, DoD personnel equipped
and trained 1,221 CMAC deminers and another 537 military engineers through the
UNDP Trust Fund. Victim assistance programs by the VVAF and other NGO are also
funded by USAID through the War Victims
Fund.[114] For FY 00, NADR
funding allocation is planned to include: $0.250M grant to CARE; $1.2M grant to
the HALO Trust; $0.2M grant to the Mines Advisory Group; $0.12M to Handicap
International; $0.78M donation to
CMAC.[115]
Chad Prior to 1 October 1999, the U.S. had provided $1.9M in
assistance to Chad to support and sustain the training of approximately 200
military engineer personnel as deminers. Additionally, U.S. funding supports
the operation of a national mine action center, establishment of a regional
demining office in the northern part of country, mine awareness education, and
the collection of historical
data.[116] U.S. military
trainers will re-qualify Chadian demining personnel in
2000.[117] FY 00 NADR funding
allocation includes: an IMAS task order for the provision of commodities and
equipment; $0.210 for the purchase of vehicles; $0.011M to purchase radios;
$0.196M grant to UNDP to contract aerial medical evacuation services; $0.012M
for repairs to the deminer’s building in Faya; $0.108M for the purchase of
spare parts for C-130 aircraft supporting demining operations (handled as a U.S.
foreign military sales
case).[118]
Croatia Following an assessment mission in January 2000, the U.S.
announced that it will provide an additional $360,000 to support ongoing
demining efforts in Croatia, in cooperation with the Croatian Mine Action Center
(CROMAC) and the Slovenian International Trust Fund. The new grant apparently
will fund the procurement of MRV3 demining flail machines manufactured by the
Croatian firm of Doking D.O.O. Ltd. The terms of the grant also include
demining approximately sixty hectares of land in 2000. The U.S. provided $1.7M
in humanitarian demining assistance in FY
99.[119]
Djibouti The Humanitarian Demining IWG approved Djibouti's request
for humanitarian demining assistance on 12 December 1999. U.S. military
trainers and the IMAS contractor will apparently be used to establish a complete
demining program including training, equipment, and facilities for demining
training. A survey of requirements will be conducted sometime in
2000.[120]
Ecuador Ecuador was included in the U.S. humanitarian demining
program on 22 February 1999. The first U.S. training program was conducted late
in 1999 and another is scheduled to occur between April and June 2000. The same
training is provided to deminers in
Peru.[121] The U.S. has
committed to providing long-term demining training and possibly a mine detection
dog program in Ecuador. Near-term objectives include the establishment of a
national demining
office.[122]
Egypt Egypt requested U.S. assistance to supplement its national
demining program in 1997. Egypt was accepted into the U.S. humanitarian
demining program on 2 September 1998. The U.S. initially intended to conduct
train-the-trainer programs and establish a national demining center. It is
unclear whether a formal memorandum of understanding has been developed to
assure that the intended use for donated equipment, supplies, and services is
solely for humanitarian demining purposes. While not a requirement of the U.S.
program, the U.S. is requesting that Egypt establish a civilian-led national
demining organization. This is a necessity in order to receive assistance from
the international donor community. There is concern whether the NGO presented
by the Egyptian Government as part of this structure is actually independent of
the government or if it existed prior to the government’s
announcement.[123] Apparently,
no additional funding has been approved to provide long-term support in Egypt.
The Humanitarian Demining IWG has refused to allocate any NADR funds to Egypt in
light of the $1.3 billion of Foreign Military Financing funds Egypt receives
from the U.S. and the apparent reluctance on the part of the Egyptian government
to support its own demining effort with this assistance. In the FY 2001 State
Department Budget request, Egypt is eligible to receive Excess Defense Article
(EDA) under section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act. The supporting State
Department budget justification materials note that in FY 2001 EDA funds will be
used to supply spare parts to outdated U.S. M-60 tanks that will be specially
outfitted for use in Egypt's ongoing demining efforts. It is also possible that
USAID funding will be used to support some aspects of the Egyptian national
demining program such as victim assistance
programs.[124]
Eritrea From 1993 to 1998, the U.S. provided approximately $8.0M in
funds for training and equipping of nearly 400 military deminers and a wide
array of mine action activities. On 22 June 1998 most elements of the U.S.
humanitarian demining program in Eritrea were temporarily suspended due to the
conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea. While continued U.S. assistance is
predicated on the conclusion and implementation of a peace accord, planning is
ongoing for the immediate resumption of the
program.[125] Upon resumption
of this program, the $1.117M in NADR funds programmed for FY 00 would be spent
deploying a mine detecting dog capability, training in explosive ordnance
disposal and mine clearance, and the purchase of
equipment.[126]
Estonia Estonia was accepted into the U.S. humanitarian demining
program on 1 June 1998. U.S. assistance includes providing modern protective
clothing and demining equipment, the establishment of a mine action center, and
a mine awareness campaign.[127]
U.S. military personnel provided training in Estonia between April and June
2000. Another training mission is scheduled to occur in FY
01.[128]
Ethiopia Since 1993, the U.S. provided approximately $8.0M for
training and equipping of military deminers and a wide array of mine action
activities. On 22 June 1998 elements of the U.S. program were temporarily
suspended due to the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Future U.S.
demining assistance is predicated on the conclusion and implementation of a
peace accord.[129] Upon
resumption of this program, the $1.117M in NADR funds programmed for FY 00 would
be spent deploying a mine detecting dog capability, training in explosive
ordnance disposal and mine clearance, and the purchase of
equipment.[130]
Georgia In 1999, the Government of Georgia requested U.S.
humanitarian demining assistance to “clear protective minefields
surrounding two ex-Soviet military bases in Georgia so that the areas may be
returned to civilian
use.”[131] The
Humanitarian Demining IWG is currently considering this request. Georgia will
host the joint training exercise resulting from the Beecroft Initiative in
September to November 2000.[132]
The $0.997M in FY 00 NADR funds may possibly be granted to HALO
Abkhazia.[133]
Guinea Bissau The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
submitted a request for U.S. humanitarian demining equipment for its regional
peacekeeping force (ECOMOG) in
Guinea-Bissau.[134] The
Humanitarian Demining IWG did not approve this request. While the U.S. is
studying the feasibility of using emergency demining funds for deploying
contractor mine-detecting dogs, the Humanitarian Demining IWG is apparently
deferring a decision pending the completion of a study of the landmine problem
in Guinea Bissau.[135]
Jordan U.S. military cooperation for humanitarian demining with
Jordan began in 1997. The U.S. has assisted in establishing the national
demining coordination office, conducted training of Jordanian military
engineers, and provided equipment including mechanical clearance mini-flails.
Additionally, the U.S. has provided computer based planning, management, and
training tools. The Royal Jordanian Armed Forces maintains a force of 380
combat engineers dedicated to demining. Future funds for humanitarian demining
will be used to fund on-going programs to remove landmines in the Jordan River
Valley, along the Jordan-Syrian border, and in the Rift Valley with emphasis on
providing heavy engineering equipment and bulldozers, mine detecting dogs, and
experimental mechanical mine removal
systems.[136] The FY 00 NADR
funds are planned to be used to provide demining equipment ($0.411M), demining
technologies ($0.943M), and vehicles
($0.155M).[137]
Kosovo In response to the crisis in the spring of 1999 and the laying
of new mines in the area, the U.S. funded, through UNICEF, a mine awareness
campaign in the refugee camps in Albania and Macedonia.[138] Additionally, on June 11, the
State Department modified an existing contract with RONCO to clear mines and
unexploded ordnance in Kosovo. The contract provided short-term emergency
demining assistance at a total cost of approximately $1.6 million, funded from
the Support for Eastern Europe Democracy
account.[139] The status of
plans to fund a similar contract for 2000 and 2001 at an estimated cost of $3.5
million per year is unknown. According to the U.S. European Command,
“KFOR continues to perform only ‘mission-essential’ demining,
with the exact definition of ‘mission-essential’ determined on the
ground.”[140]
Laos Laos began receiving U.S. assistance in 1994 and the total
amount of aid reached $11.4M through 30 September 1998. Training by U.S.
military personnel has occurred with personnel from the Lao national
coordinating agency for demining and UXO clearance. U.S. funds are also used in
victim assistance programs in Laos. The FY 00 NADR funds will apparently be
channeled through the IMAS contract to purchase equipment ($0.726M) and vehicles
($0.760M).[141] In the past,
the U.S. has provided funds for mine awareness education and some historical
data regarding bombing
patterns.[142] According to a
Department of Defense official all “render safe” procedures that can
be released have, or are in the process of, been released to deminers operating
in Laos.[143]
Lebanon U.S. funding of demining programs in Lebanon was initiated
in 1998. U.S. military personnel have conducted train-the-trainer programs with
military engineers in-country and twenty-two Lebanese military personnel have
attended a one-time advanced humanitarian demining training at Fort Leonard
Wood. Other U.S. military personnel have assisted establishing the national
demining center and developing a mine awareness campaign. Further funds will be
used to finance other on-going programs to remove mines throughout
Lebanon.[144] Spending plans
for FY 00 NADR funds include: $0.4M for mechanical equipment through the IMAS
contract; $0.057 for unspecified services; $0.2M for ambulances; $0.11M for
World Rehabilitation Fund mine awareness programs; $0.09M for support to the
national demining
office.[145]
Macedonia, The Humanitarian Demining IWG is conducting a policy
assessment regarding the landmine situation in Macedonia and possible areas of
U.S. assistance.[146]
Mauritania Mauritania was accepted into the U.S. humanitarian
demining program on 10 December 1998. Initially, U.S. efforts were directed at
surveying mine affected regions. Other objectives of the program include
developing an indigenous demining capability and a mine awareness program.
Training of Mauritanian military deminers is expected to begin in
2000.[147] In FY 00, $0.460M in
NADR funds will be spent through the IMAS contract to procure
vehicles.[148]
Moldova The Humanitarian Demining IWG approved Moldova for
humanitarian demining assistance on 2 September 1999. According to the U.S.
assessment of the landmine problem in Moldova, “the problem is limited to
one minefield. The National Army of Moldova previously cleared the other six
minefields from the 1992 internal conflict with the Transnistrian separatist
region. The remaining minefield was emplaced in a haphazard manner, and mine
clearance operations caused unacceptable
casualties.”[149]
Department of Defense assistance goes solely toward the procurement of demining
and support equipment.[150]
Mongolia The U.S. Government received a request for humanitarian
demining assistance in early 1999 and the Demining IWG approved the dispatch of
an assessment team. The extent of the landmine problem in Mongolia is unknown
but it is possible that UXO are more of a
concern.[151]
Mozambique U.S. assistance to Mozambique has totaled nearly $27
million since its inception in 1993 and has included the full spectrum of mine
action activities permitted under U.S. law. This has included extensive USAID
funded mine clearance projects and victim assistance efforts. The U.S. military
has conducted extensive train-the-trainer activities, provided computer and
communications equipment, and assisted the establishment and operation of the
National Demining Commission. Department of Defense’s role and funding
will be curtailed as the program was “handed off” to the Department
of State in April 1999. The U.S. provided $2.0 million in additional demining
equipment on 11 May 2000 in response to recent natural disasters in
mine-affected regions of Mozambique. The planned allocation of FY 00 NADR
includes: $2.9M for operational demining through the IMAS contract; $0.118M for
vehicles and equipment through the IMAS contract; a $0.343M grant to the HALO
Trust for demining in the northern part of the country; $0.2M to refurbish the
Buquisso demining
camp.[152]
Namibia From 1995 to 1998 over $3.6M in U.S. military assistance was
used in train-the-trainer programs, establishment and operation of a national
demining office, the purchase of equipment, and mine awareness education
programs. The U.S. also provided prototype machinery called a “berm
processor” to mechanically clear landmines from berms surrounding 409
electrical pylons. The DoD training program was completed in February 2000 and
the entire program has been transferred to Department of State management.
Future U.S. funded efforts will sustain the technical expertise and logistical
support to the national program, completing the berm project, and accomplishing
minefield clearance quality assurance via a commercial
contract.[153] The $0.3M in FY
00 has been dedicated to an IMAS contract task order to perform the pylon
quality assurance project.[154]
Organization of American States/Inter-American Defense Board (OAS/IADB)
(Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua) Beginning in 1993, nearly
$6.5M of U.S. assistance has been provided for demining in Central America
through the OAS/IADB through 30 September 1998. The OAS has been coordinating a
regional demining effort in Central America since that time. U.S. funds are
used for training, equipment procurement, and mine awareness. U.S. funding also
supports the multinational mine clearance organization named MARMINCA. U.S.
military personnel have trained over 1,000 deminers for MARMINCA. The OAS
requested and the U.S. demining IWG has agreed to support a mine-detecting dog
program for Central America. The four recipient governments, with the full
support of donors, have set 2002 as a target to make their states “mine
safe.”[155] The projected
allocation of FY 00 NADR funding includes: $1.237M for a mine detection dog
contract; $0.166M for communications equipment; $0.2M for victims assistance and
mine awareness
projects.[156]
Oman The Humanitarian Demining IWG provisionally approved Oman's
request for humanitarian demining assistance on 9 December 2000. A survey will
be conducted sometime in 2000 to establish the training and equipment
requirements needed to bring Oman's current demining units up to international
standards. U.S. training of Omani deminers is scheduled to occur in February
2001. It is also possible that the U.S. will provide a mine-detecting dog
capability as part of the overall country
program.[157] A decision
whether to formally include Oman in the U.S. program was deferred until sometime
in 2000.[158]
Peru Peru was formally included in the U.S. humanitarian demining
program on 22 February 1999. A survey of requirements followed this decision
along with the purchase of some equipment. The first U.S. training program was
conducted late in 1999 and another is scheduled to occur between April and June
2000. The same training is provided to deminers in
Ecuador.[159] The establishment
of a national demining center and demining operations to clear mine-affected
border regions are near-term priorities of the
program.[160]
Rwanda U.S. demining assistance to Rwanda began in 1994 with
extensive military support to establish a national demining office, basic mine
awareness training, the establishment of a computer based data collection and
records management system, and a train-the-trainer
program.[161] According to the
Department of State, “the country program is proceeding with one region of
the country (the northeast) complete and the second region (the northwest) now
sufficiently secure to conduct demining operations. The extent of the problem in
the northwest is not yet known. USAID plans use some portion of its development
assistance operations to fund mine action activities in the near
future.”[162] The
Department of Defense completed its demining training program in February
2000.[163] The planned
allocation of FY 00 NADR funds includes: $0.001M for the local purchase of auto
parts; an IMAS contract task order for unspecified equipment, commodities and
services.[164]
Somalia A U.S. delegation visited northwestern Somalia in late April
1999 and found that the unrecognized republic of “Somaliland”
suffers from a severe landmine/UXO problem. The U.S. is providing funding for a
HALO Trust project that will clear landmines in western Somaliland and the city
of Burao. Additionally, the U.S. has provided $0.343M to fund a CARE effort to
conduct Level One and Level Two survey projects and to provide mine awareness
training. While making progress, CARE’s project may be forced to suspend
its operations due to the European Union's unexplained failure to provide its
share of funding for the
project.[165] The planned
allocation of FY 00 NADR funds includes $1.3M for HALO Trust activities (grant
signed 27 March 2000) and an unspecified $0.1M reimbursement for the HALO Trust
project.[166]
Swaziland The Humanitarian Demining IWG approved Swaziland for
humanitarian demining assistance on 1 June 1998. Swaziland has a single
minefield, 10 kilometer long and 50-100 meters wide, along part of its border
with Mozambique. The focus of the U.S. program has been on training military
demining personnel, providing equipment and equipment operator
training.[167]
Thailand Thailand was approved for humanitarian demining assistance
in November 1999. Funding will establish a national mine action center, a
demining school, and mine awareness program. Additionally, funding will be used
to purchase demining equipment, protective clothing, and vehicles. According to
State Department budget justification materials, “FY 2001 funds will
complete the planned three-year cycle to fully train the Thai demining trainers
and equip six demining platoons with trucks, computers, and demining gear,
building the capacity Thailand needs to address the landmine problem along its
borders with Cambodia and
Burma.”[168] The second
round of Department of Defense train-the-trainer programs was conducted between
April and June 2000.[169] The
planned allocation of FY 00 NADR funds includes: $0.1M for Level Two Survey
activities; $0.5M for an unspecified mine detecting dog program; $0.5M for
equipment and vehicles; $0.07 for facilities refurbishment; $0.05 for an
unspecified regional
initiative.[170]
Vietnam The U.S. demining program is in a nascent stage. U.S.
personnel have traveled to Vietnam on an assessment mission and engaged in
discussions regarding the types of assistance that can be provided as part of a
bilateral demining assistance
program.[171] The U.S.
announced on 20 June 2000 that an agreement had been reached with Vietnam to
provide demining equipment.
Yemen The U.S. program in Yemen was initiated in October 1997 and
approximately $4.0M has been allocated prior to 1 October 1998. U.S. Central
Command deployed a twenty five member humanitarian demining training team on 20
March 1999 to conduct train-the-trainer operations with Yemeni military
engineers. Other U.S. funded activities include establishment of a central
demining office in Sa’naa and a regional demining office in Aden, and the
provision of equipment.[172]
The planned allocation of FY 00 NADR funds includes: $0.813M for vehicles and
equipment; $0.015 for computers; $0.046 for office support; $0.36M for
unspecified “sustainment”
activities.[173]
Zambia The Humanitarian Demining IWG authorized an assessment visits
to Zambia in March
2000.[174]
Zimbabwe Zimbabwe was approved for inclusion in the U.S. humanitarian
demining program on 5 February 1998. Prior to 1 October 1998, Zimbabwe received
$2.3M in U.S. assistance. U.S. military personnel trained Zimbabwe soldiers in
August and September 1999 on techniques for minefield survey, mine clearance,
and advanced medical training. While a national demining center and a mine
awareness campaign have been initiated, the focus of the U.S. program seems to
be on the provision of heavy equipment and the training necessary to operate and
maintain this equipment in demining operations. Apparently, the U.S. and the
European Union explored the possibility of jointly demonstrating new demining
equipment at Victoria Falls, one of the Government of Zimbabwe's highest
priorities.[175]
Survivor Assistance
The primary vehicle for U.S. government funding for
landmine survivor assistance is the Patrick J. Leahy War Victims Fund (WVF)
administered by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The WVF
provides prosthetic assistance for victims who have lost limbs as a result of
landmines and other war-related injuries. Since 1989, the WVF has provided $60
million in support for victims of war in sixteen countries. The approximate FY
2000 budget is $12 million.[176]
Expenditures for landmine victims are not separated out from those for war
victims overall, thus it is not possible to give a precise value to U.S.
spending on mine victim assistance programs.
The WVF is dedicated to improving the mobility, health, and social
integration of adults and children who have sustained physical disabilities as a
direct or indirect result of war or civil strife. These programs focus on
medical care and physical rehabilitation. This includes the expanding of
cost-effective, quality prosthetic services and setting up well equipped,
self-sustainable local medical facilities. Related services, such as gaining
access to education and employment opportunities are also funded to promote the
economic and social rehabilitation of the victims. These programs can be funded
in a variety of ways. Country-based projects meeting criteria are mostly funded
through grants to organizations that work closely with host governments and that
are registered with USAID. Funds are normally negotiated and managed directly
from USAID’s overseas missions. Specific WVF projects
include:[177]
Angola $3.033 million has been given to the Vietnam Veterans of
America Foundation since September 1996 for the “Angolan Regional
Rehabilitation Project.” This money funded the construction of a
rehabilitation center that provides orthopedic devices to disabled Angolans as
well as funding the training of thirty-three Angolans as orthopedic technicians,
physiotherapists, and administrators. The clinic has fitted 360 Angolans with
prostheses, the majority of whom are landmine victims.
Cambodia $500,000 will be allocated between 1998-2001 to Handicap
International for the purpose of establishing the Disability Action Council in
Cambodia. This body has coordinated, promoted, and monitored services for
disabled Cambodians, as well as implemented a communication network between
itself, government agencies, international organizations, and NGOs.
Cambodia $7.778 million will be allocated between 1996-2001 to the
Vietnam Veterans of American Foundation for the “Cambodia Prosthetics and
Rehabilitation Program.” The program has treated more than 8,000 patients
with prostheses and wheelchairs, and has provided socioeconomic assistance and
employment training to Cambodians with disabilities. A Cambodian staff has been
trained and the planning of satellite workshops in eastern Cambodia is
underway.
Central America For the period 2000-2002, $500,000 will be allocated
to the Pan American Health Organization in support of the “Central
American Tripartite Land Mine Initiative.” The purpose of this initiative
is to improve the physical, social, and economic development of persons disabled
by landmines in El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua.
Ethiopia Since July 1998, $1 million has been given to the
International Committee of the Red Cross for the “Special Fund for the
Disabled’s Polypropylene Prosthetic Training Centre” to train
African technicians in the production and use of prosthetic components.
Thousands of components have since been made in Addis Ababa.
Laos $2.118 million has been granted to “The Consortium”
(World Education, World Learning, Save the Children/USA) for the War Victims
Assistance Project. These funds have provided medical equipment and renovations
for six hospitals as well as the training of three hundred medical staff.
Seventy-nine landmine victims have been treated. The funds have also gone
towards landmine education programs under which 43,000 students are currently
studying.
Lebanon $1.390 million has been allocated to the World
Rehabilitation Fund since June 1998 for the “Preventing Land Mine Injuries
and Managing the Social Burden of Land Mines in Lebanon” project. The
project has initiated a survey to identify minefields and victims. It has also
increased involvement from NGO and community-based organizations in addressing
the needs of landmine victims as well as provided training and the necessary
technology for these organizations.
Liberia $1.474 million has been allocated to UNICEF since September
1994 for the “Physical Rehabilitation of War Victims Project.”
Rehabilitation centers were established in five counties with trained staff.
And orthopedic workshop was completed, equipped, and staffed by trained
technicians. Seventy-five prostheses are now produced manually each year and
over 800 disabled Liberians have been assisted.
Mozambique Since November 1995, $2.755 million has been provided to
Prosthetic and Orthotic Worldwide Education and Relief for their Prosthetics
Assistance Project. This project has trained local people in the production of
prosthetic and orthotic devices for war victims. Thousands have since been
produced under an organized management system.
Sierra Leone $60,764 allocated since November 1999 to the Vietnam
Veterans of America Foundation for supporting the “Emergency Assistance
for P & O in Sierra Leone: Training and Components Provision” project.
The funds are allocated for a technical specialist on a short-term basis to
provide prosthetic assistance to war victims and to train four nationals as
prosthetic technicians. Enough prosthetic limbs have been produced for one
hundred amputees and need for further assistance is being assessed.
Sri Lanka $1.175 million has been given since October 1991 to the
Friend-in-Need Society for their “Citizens Participation Project” to
rehabilitate war victims and integrate them into mainstream society. More than
1,200 prosthetic limbs have been produced and three technicians trained.
Tanzania $300,000 allocated since September 1998 to the World Health
Organization for “The Tanzanian Training Center for Orthopedic
Technologists.” This grant supports prosthetics training courses for
qualified African applicants.
Vietnam $900,508 allocated since September 1992 to the Health
Volunteers Overseas organization for its Vietnam Rehabilitation Project. This
project has promoted the professional development of healthcare providers by
introducing new physical therapy curriculums, conducting workshops, and
facilitating national acceptance of the Vietnamese Nursing Association. A new
discussion forum was also formed for organizations working on related
issues.
Since February 1998, $100,000 has been granted to the
Prosthetic Outreach Foundation for the “Outreach Prosthetic Services and
Prosthetic Component Development” program. A national prosthetic
manufacturing center was opened and more than 9,000 prosthesis have been
delivered to patients.
Beginning in September 1998, $1,435,510 has been given to Viet-Nam Assistance
for the Handicapped (VNAH) for the “Can Tho and Thu Duc Prosthetic and
Rehabilitation Project.” This project promotes disability access to
public buildings, including the Hanoi international airport. It has also
provided 2,000 new prostheses.
Since March 1998, $1 million has been granted to the Vietnam Veterans of
America Foundation for the “Thermoplastic Orthotics Rehabilitation Program
for Vietnam” to promote extensive and sustainable production of
thermoplastic orthoses to help rehabilitate the disabled. A new orthotics
workshop was constructed and equipped, a monitoring unit was trained, new
services were provided and more than 3,000 orthoses were provided for
children.
Since August 1998, $801,000 has been provided to World Vision for the
“Prosthetics and Orthotics Rehabilitation Project” to upgrade the
indigenous health care system to meet the needs of handicapped individuals.
High quality prosthetic production rates and outreach services to beneficiaries
have increased since several rehabilitation centers were handed over to the
Vietnamese Ministry of Labor, Invalids, and Social Affairs.
A small number of private organizations fund victim assistance programs in
mine-affected countries. For example, the Prosthetics Outreach Foundation
conducts programs in Vietnam that are entirely funded from private sources.
Another private organization, PeaceTrees Vietnam, a project of the Earthstewards
Network, has funded mine clearance and mine awareness in Vietnam’s Quang
Tri province since 1996 with $595,000 in privately raised monies.
Most private organizations are using a mix of private and public funds in
their programs. The biggest source of public funds is USAID through the WVF.
Examples of such victims assistance programs in Vietnam include Catholic Relief
Services, Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, Vietnam Assistance for the
Handicapped, and World Vision. Some organizations in the U.S. raise funds and
then pool resources at an international level to support programs that may or
may not be administered from the original U.S. group. Jesuit Relief
Services-USA and CARE are examples of organizations that provide this type of
assistance.
[1] The White House, Office of the Press
Secretary, Remarks by the President at Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Event, 6
October 1999. [2] Letter from National
Security Advisor Samuel Berger to Senator Patrick Leahy, 15 May
1998. [3] The White House, Office of the
Press Secretary, Fact Sheet: “U.S. Efforts to Address the Problem of
Anti-Personnel Landmines,” 17 September
1997. [4] Interview with Dr. James A.
Schear, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian
Assistance, Office of Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, 10 May
2000. Also in attendance were staff members of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the Joint Staff.
Hereafter cited as “DoD Interviews, 10 May
2000.” [5] DoD Interviews, 10 May
2000. [6] United States of America,
“National Annual Report CCW/AP.II/CONF.1/NAR.13,” 5 November 1999,
p. 4. [7] U.S. “non-paper”
titled “Possible Improvements to the Convention on Conventional
Weapons,” obtained by Human Rights Watch, 27 October 1999. See also, U.S.
Information Service, “U.S. Wants to Strengthen Landmine Protocol to Make
Mines More Detectable,” 1 June
2000. [8] Statement of Michael J.
Matheson to the First Annual Conference of Parties to the Amended Mines
Protocol, 15 December 1999. [9] UN
Office Geneva, Press Release, 17 February
2000. [10] DoD Interviews, 10 May
2000. [11] Information obtained from
search of database at
http://www4.ioc.army.mil/ac/enter.htm [12]
For the complete list of companies that continue not to renounce AP mine
production see, Human Rights Watch, “Clinton’s Landmine
Legacy,” A Human Rights Watch Short Report, vol. 12, no. 3 (G), July 2000,
p. 13. [13] Human Rights Watch Arms
Project, “Exposing the Source: U.S. Companies and the Production of AP
Mines,” A Human Rights Watch Short Report, vol. 9, no. 2 (G), April 1997.
Among the companies renouncing are Motorola, Hughes Aircraft, Olin Ordnance, and
Dyno Nobel. [14] Letter to Human Rights
Watch from Robert Valenti, President, Quantic Industries, Inc., 1 May
2000. [15] See Human Rights Watch
Backgrounder, “U.S. Programs to Develop Alternatives to Antipersonnel
Mines,” April 2000. [16] Deputy
Secretary of Defense, “Memorandum: Landmine Alternatives,” 23 March
1999 obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request, 16 May
2000. [17] U.S. Government fiscal years
(FY) begin on the first day of October in the previous calendar year and end on
the last day of September of the current calendar
year. [18] Public Law 105-261, p. 112
STAT. 1958. [19]
Ibid. [20] All data extracted from
DoD-wide and Army FY 2000 and FY 2001 Research and Development Descriptive
Summary (RDDS) for Program Element (PE) 0604808A and PE 0602702E, February 1999,
February 2000. [21] DARPA Track 2
project costs for FY 2002-2005 are not separately broken out in its budget
justification documents and are not reported here. They likely amount to tens
of millions of dollars. [22]
“Anti-Personnel Landmine Alternatives (APL-A)” a briefing by Major
Ted Jennings, Office of the Project Manager for Mines, Countermine and
Demolitions presented at the National Defense Industrial Association’s
International Infantry and Small Arms Symposium and Exhibition, 21-24 June 1999,
slide 19. [23] Department of Defense,
“Landmines Information Paper,” 3 March 1999, p.
8. [24] These activities will be carried
out at Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant, a government owned facility in
Texarkana, Texas operated by Day and Zimmerman (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).
RADAM will undergo testing at Yuma Proving Ground (Yuma,
Arizona). [25] Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), “National Defense Budget Estimates for
Fiscal Year 2001, Procurement Programs (P-1),” February 2000, p.
A-14. [26] Assistant Secretary of the
Army for Financial Management and Comptroller, “Appropriation: 2034
Procurement of Army Ammunition, FYDP Procurement Annex,” 14 February 2000,
p. 26. The 337,000 RADAM systems would include 1,685,000 ADAM AP mines and
2,359,000 RAAMS antitank mines. [27]
Department of the Army, “RDDS, PE 0604808A: Landmine Warfare,”
February 2000, p. 1069. [28]
“Anti-Personnel Landmine Alternatives (APL-A),” a briefing delivered
by Colonel Thomas Dresen, the Project Manager for Mines, Countermine, and
Demolitions to the National Defense Industrial Association’s Forty-third
Annual Fuze Conference, 7 April 1999, slide
10. [29] U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC,
Procurement Award Notices DAAE30-99-C-1010 and DAAE30-99-C-1011, 3 December
1998. [30] U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC,
Solicitation Notice DAAE30-99-R-0108, 29 February
2000. [31] Department of the Army, RDDS,
PE 0604808A, February 2000, p.
1069. [32] U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC,
Solicitation Notice DAAE30-99-R-0108, 29 February
2000. [33] Alliant Integrated Defense
Company, Press Release, 22 June
2000. [34] “Strategic and Tactical
Landmine Usage Overview,” a briefing presented to the National Academy of
Sciences Committee to Examine Alternative Technologies to Replace Anti-Personnel
Landmines, 9-11 December 1999, Arlington, Virginia by Greg Bornhoft (BRTRC
Technology Research Corporation), representing the U.S. Army Engineer
School. [35] Letter to Senator Leahy
from Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Walter Slocombe, 25 April
2000. [36] Letter to the Under Secretary
of Defense for Policy Walter Slocombe from Senator Leahy, 10 May
2000. [37] DoD interviews, 10 May
2000. [38] U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC,
Procurement Award Notice DAAE30-00-C-1047, 19 April
2000. [39] U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC,
Procurement Award Notice DAAE30-00-C-1055, 6 June
2000. [40] DARPA, RDDS, PE 0602702E,
February 2000, p. 93. [41] U.S. Army
TACOM-ARDEC, Rapid Tactical Terrain Limiter (RATTLER) solicitation package
DAAE30-00-BAA-0100, 1 February 2000, p.
1. [42] See Landmine Monitor Report
1999, p. 330. Please note that these are the number of individual AP mines, not
the number of delivery systems like artillery projectiles or air-delivered
munitions dispensers. The U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency provided
these figures, except for the M14 and M18A1 mines, as of 1997. The numbers
today are likely to be similar. The M14 number is an approximation contained in
the 1999 U.S. report required under the CCW amended Protocol II (and is 63,093
less than reported by ACDA). The Claymore number comes from a symposium paper
presented by two DoD officials: Harry Hambric and William Schneck, “The AP
Mine Threat: A Historical Perspective,” Symposium on Technology and the
Mine Problem, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, 12-18 November
1996, p. 29. [43] Organization of
American States, “OAS Register of Anti-Personnel Land-Mines: Summary Table
of Information Submitted by Member States for the Period 1997-1999,”
CP/CSH-168/99, rev. 1, 21 May 1999. [44]
Department of Defense, “Landmines Information Paper,” 3 March 1999,
p. 4. [45] Letter from Dr. George R.
Schneiter, Director, Strategic and Tactical Systems, Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, to Human Rights
Watch, 21 March 2000. Hereafter cited as “Schneiter Letter, 21 March
2000.” [46] DoD interviews, 10 May
2000. [47]
Ibid. [48] Landmine Monitor Report 1999,
pp. 333-334. Based on Air Force and other U.S. government sources from 1997 and
1998, the report cited 50,000 Gator and Volcano mines in South Korea, 49,610
Gator mines in Saudi Arabia, 33,000 Gator mines in Italy, and smaller numbers
for Germany, Diego Garcia (U.K.), Japan, Turkey, Greece, and
Spain. [49] Oral remarks by Italian and
Spanish delegations to the Standing Committee of Experts on Stockpile
Destruction, Geneva, Switzerland, 22-23 May 2000. This has been confirmed by
other Spanish officials (see LM report on Spain), but no confirmation has yet
been received from Italy. [50] U.S. Army
Operations Support Command, Solicitation DAAA09-99-R-0118: “Maintenance
and Supply/Service for Army Pre-Positioned Stocks (APS-5) Equipment in Doha,
Qatar,” 21 January 2000. Exhibit N, Technical Exhibit no. 11 of this
solicitation is titled “Ammunition in Qatar” and shows the presence
of 27 M691 ADAM projectiles (forty-eight hour self-destruct time) and 189 M731
ADAM projectiles (four hour self-destruct time). Each ADAM projectile contains
36 AP mines. [51] U.S. Air Force Air
Combat Command, Solicitation F44650-99-R0007: “Operation, Maintenance, And
Support of Pre-positioned War Reserve Materiel in Southwest Asia” 9 August
1999. Section E, Appendix 1, Enclosure 5 shows the planned on-hand balances of
munitions stored at facilities in each of these countries to include 142 CBU-89
Gator units and 141 M18A1 Claymore
mines. [52] Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy, “Report to the Secretary of Defense on
the Status of DoD’s Implementation of the U.S. Policy on Anti-Personnel
Landmines,” May 1997, p. 11. [53]
Schneiter Letter, 21 March 2000. [54]
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs), News Release:
“Destruction of Last Non-Self-Destructing Anti-Personnel Landmines in
U.S.-Based Stockpile,” 25 June 1998; Schneiter letter, 21 March
2000. [55] DoD Interviews, 10 May
2000. [56] DoD estimate given in March
1998. “Annual Report to Congress on Use by Armed Forces of AP
Landmines,” March 1998, p.
iii. [57] U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC,
Energetics Systems Process Division, “Demilitarization Plan for Non
Self-Destruct and Self-Destruct AP Landmines,” August 1998, p.
1. [58] Department of the Army,
“RDDS, PE 0605805A: Munitions Standardization Effectiveness and
Safety,” February 2000, pp.
4-5. [59] Department of Defense,
“Annual Report to Congress on Use by Armed Forces of Anti-Personnel
Landmines,” March 1998, p. iii and p.
15. [60] This was reconfirmed by
numerous States Parties at the January 2000 and May 2000 meetings of the
Standing Committee of Experts on the General Status and Operation of the
Convention. See also, Human Rights Watch Fact Sheet, “Antivehicle Mines
with Antihandling Devices,” January
2000. [61] Data extracted from
Department of the Army, Field Manual (FM) 20-32, Mine/Countermine Operations, 29
May 1998, chapters 3, 4, and 5; Landmine Monitor Report 1999, pp.
325-326. [62] Landmine Monitor Report
1999, p. 326. [63] Department of the
Army, Field Manual (FM) 20-32, Mine/Countermine Operations, 29 May 1998, chapter
3. [64] Public Law 102-484, Section
1365; 22 U.S.C., 2778 note. [65]
Conference Report on H.R. 3194, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2000, Sec.
553. [66] The White House, Office of the
Press Secretary, Fact Sheet: “U.S. Initiatives on Anti-Personnel
Landmines,” 17 January 1997. [67]
Landmine Monitor Report 1999, p.
328. [68] The White House, Office of the
Press Secretary, Fact Sheet: “U.S. Efforts to Address the Problem of
Anti-Personnel Landmines,” 17 September
1997. [69] Air Force officials told
Human Rights Watch in early April 1999 that war plans included possible use of
AP mines. A State Department official told Human Rights Watch on 13 April 1999
that AP mines remained “an arrow in the quiver” of the United
States. A number of diplomats from other NATO countries also told ICBL members
in Maputo in May that the U.S. insisted on the right to use AP mines. See also,
Edith Lederer, “Land Mine Coalition Demands NATO Ban Use of Mines in
Yugoslavia,” Associated Press, United Nations, 21 May
1999. [70] United States of America,
National Annual Report CCW/AP.II/CONF.1/NAR.13, 5 November 1999, p.
3. [71] DoD Interviews, 10 May
2000. [72] Department of the Army, Field
Manual (FM) 20-32, Mine/Countermine Operations, 29 May 1998, Chapter
4. [73] Schneiter Letter, 21 March 2000;
the fact that antitank mines were also to be removed was disclosed at a DoD News
Briefing on 20 January 1998. [74] DoD
News Briefing, 20 January 1998. [75]
“FY 00 NADR Project Status” provided by the Department of State,
Office of Humanitarian Demining Program, 5 May 2000. Numbers reflect funding
for Department of Defense, Department of State, and some Agency for
International Development programs. In addition, the U.S. contributed $2.2
million to the UN Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine Clearance between
October 1994 and September 1999. [76]
U.S. Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001,” 15 March
2000. [77] Defense Security Cooperation
Agency, “FY 2001 Budget Estimate: Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and
Civic Aid Appropriation,” February 2000, pp.
1-17. [78] U.S. Department of Defense,
“RDDS, PE 0603920D8Z: Humanitarian Demining,” February
2000. [79]
http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/pm/hdp/policy.html [80]
U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of
Humanitarian Demining Programs, Fact Sheet: “U.S. Humanitarian Demining
Program,” 9 July 1999. [81] U.S.
Department of State, Office of the Spokesman, “Review of U.S. Government
Humanitarian Demining Assistance To Bosnia and Herzegovina Since the End of the
1992-1995 Conflict,” 17 April
2000. [82] U.S. Department of State,
“U.S. Humanitarian Demining Program Fact Sheet,” 9 July
1999. [83] U.S. Department of State,
Press Statement by James P. Rubin, Spokesman, 20 August
1999. [84] Interview with the Director
of the Office of Humanitarian Demining Programs, Department of State, Washington
D.C., 5 May 2000. [85] “FY 00 NADR
Project Status” provided by the Department of State, Office of
Humanitarian Demining Programs, 5 May 2000, pp. 5-6. Hereafter cited as
“U.S. Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project
Status.” [86] U.S. Department of
State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Humanitarian Demining
Programs, Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency Working Group on
Demining, 2 September 1999.” Hereafter cited as “U.S. Department of
State, 2 September 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet.” [87] Interview with the
Director of the Office of Humanitarian Demining Programs, Department of State,
Washington D.C., 5 May 2000. [88] U.S.
Department of State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of
Humanitarian Demining Programs, Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency
Working Group on Demining, 9 December 1999.” Hereafter cited as
“U.S. Department of State, 9 December 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet.” [89] U.S. Department of
State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Humanitarian Demining
Programs, Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency Working Group on
Demining, 30 March 2000.” Hereafter cited as “U.S. Department of
State, 30 March 2000 IWG Fact
Sheet.” [90] U.S. Department of
State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
5. [91] For details see: Office of the
Special Representative of the President and Secretary of State for Global
Humanitarian Demining, “Public-Private Partnerships for Global
Humanitarian Demining: Toward a Mine-Safe World,” Washington D.C., January
2000. [92] 10 U.S. Code, Section
401. [93] U.S. Central Command,
“U.S. Government Humanitarian Demining Country Plan for the Arab Republic
of Egypt (FY 2000 & 2001),” 13 July
1999. [94] DoD Interviews, 10 May
2000. [95] U.S. Department of Defense,
“RDDS, PE 0603920D8Z: Humanitarian Demining,” February 2000, pp.
1-3. [96] All data from Army and
Defense-wide RDDS for PE’s 0602702E, 0602712A, 0604808A, 0603606A,
0603619A, 0603858D8Z, 0603750D8Z, 0602709A, February 2000. For details see Human
Rights Watch, “Clinton’s Landmine Legacy” A Human Rights Watch
Short Report, Vol. 12, No. 3 (G), p.
26. [97] Defense Threat Reduction
Agency, RDDS PE 0603711BR, February
2000. [98] Figure extracted from
“FY 00 NADR Status” country programs with funds for demining
research and development and “cross cutting initiatives”
removed. [99] U.S. Department of State,
“Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY
2001,” 15 March 2000 and NADR Country Funding for Humanitarian Demining
Assistance at http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/pm/hdp/budget.html and
“Demining Program Financing History” provided by the Department of
State, Office of Humanitarian Demining Programs, 5 May 2000; Office of the
Director for Humanitarian Assistance and Anti-Personnel Landmine Policy of the
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low
Intensity Conflict, “Information Paper,” 8 April 1999. Hereafter
cited as “SOLIC, Information
Paper.” [100] U.S. Department of
State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bureau of South Asia,” 15 March 2000; U.S. Department of State,
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p.
17. [101] U.S. Department of State,
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p.
17. [102] U.S. Department of State, FY
00 NADR Project Status, p.1. [103] U.S.
Department of State, 2 September 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [104] U.S. Department of State,
Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Humanitarian Demining Programs,
Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency Working Group on Demining 9
December 1999.” Hereafter cited as “U.S. Department of State, 9
December 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet.” [105] U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p.
7. [106] Speech by Pat Patierno,
Director, Office of Humanitarian Demining Programs, Bureau of Political Military
Affairs, U.S. Department of State, 7 April
2000. [107] U.S. Department of State, FY
00 NADR Project Status, p. 1. [108] U.S.
Department of State, 9 December 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [109]
Ibid. [110] U.S. Department of State, FY
00 NADR Project Status, p. 1. [111] U.S.
Department of State, Office of the Spokesman, “Review of U.S. Government
Humanitarian Demining Assistance To Bosnia and Herzegovina Since the End of the
1992-1995 Conflict,” 17 April
2000. [112] SOLIC Information Paper;
U.S. Department of State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999,
p. 21. [113] Descriptive summaries of
Department of Defense demining programs provided by the Office of the Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Assistance, 10
May 2000. Hereafter cited as “DoD Descriptive
Summaries.” [114] U.S. Department
of State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 18; U.S.
Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs,” 15
March 2000; SOLIC Information
Paper. [115] U.S. Department of State,
U.S. Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
1. [116] SOLIC Information Paper;
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p.
8. [117] DoD Descriptive
Summaries. [118] U.S. Department of
State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
1. [119] U.S. Department of State,
Office of the Spokesman, “State Department Grants Humanitarian Demining
Assistance to Croatia,” 28 January
2000. [120] U.S. Department of State, 9
December 1999 IWG Fact Sheet [121] DoD
Descriptive Summaries. [122] U.S.
Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs,” 15
March 2000; U.S. Department of State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,”
April 1999, p. 27; U.S. Department of State, 18 March 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [123] Interview with Ayman
Sorour, Executive Director of the Landmine Struggle Center, Cairo, 10 April
2000. [124] U.S. Central Command,
“U.S. Government Humanitarian Demining Country Plan for the Arab Republic
of Egypt (FY 2000 & 2001),” 13 July 1999; U.S. Department of State,
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 28; U.S. Department of
State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs,” 15 March 2000; SOLIC Information
Paper; Interviews conducted in Cairo 9-11 April
2000. [125] U.S. Central Command,
“U.S. Government Humanitarian Demining Country Plan for Eritrea
(Conditional, FY 2001 & 2002),” 23 February 2000; U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 9; U.S.
Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of African Affairs,” 15 March 2000;
SOLIC Information Paper. [126] U.S.
Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
2. [127] U.S. Department of State,
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 22; U.S. Department of
State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Humanitarian Demining
Programs, Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency Working Group on
Demining, 1 June 1998.” Hereafter cited as “U.S. Department of
State, 1 June 1998 IWG Fact
Sheet.” [128] DoD Descriptive
Summaries. [129] U.S. Central Command,
“U.S. Government Humanitarian Demining Country Plan for Ethiopia
(Conditional, FY2001 & 2002),” 24 February 2000; U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 10; U.S.
Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of African Affairs,” 15 March 2000;
SOLIC Information Paper. [130] U.S.
Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
2. [131] U.S. Department of State, 2
September 1999 IWG Fact Sheet. [132]
Interview with the Director of the Office of Humanitarian Demining Programs,
Department of State, Washington D.C., 5 May
2000. [133] U.S. Department of State, FY
00 NADR Project Status, p. 2. [134] U.S.
Department of State, 18 March 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [135] DoD Interviews, 10 May
2000; U.S. Department of State, 30 March 2000 IWG Fact
Sheet. [136] U.S. Central Command,
“U.S. Government Humanitarian Demining Country Plan for the Hashemite
Kingdom of Jordan (FY 2001 & 2002),” 12 April 2000; U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 29; U.S.
Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs,” 15 March
2000; SOLIC Information Paper. [137]
U.S. Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
2. [138] U.S. Department of State,
Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Humanitarian Demining Programs,
Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency Working Group on Demining, 17 June
1999.” Hereafter cited as “U.S. Department of State, 17 June 1999
IWG Fact Sheet.” [139] U.S.
Information Service, “Ambassador Steinberg Outlines U.S. Humanitarian
Demining Efforts in Kosovo,” 21 June
1999. [140] U.S. Department of State, 2
September 1999 IWG Fact Sheet. [141]
U.S. Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
3. [142] U.S. Department of State,
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 19; U.S. Department of
State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs,” 15 March 2000; SOLIC
Information Paper. [143] DoD Interviews,
10 May 2000. [144] U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 30; U.S.
Department of State “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs,” 10 March
2000; SOLIC Information Paper. [145]
U.S. Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
3. [146] U.S. Department of State, 2
September 1999 IWG Fact Sheet. [147]
U.S. Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of African Affairs,” 15 March 2000;
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 11; U.S. Department of
State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Humanitarian Demining
Programs, Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency Working Group on
Demining 10 December 1998.” Hereafter cited as “U.S. Department of
State, 10 December 1998 IWG Fact
Sheet.” [148] U.S. Department of
State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
3. [149] U.S. Department of State, 2
September 1999 IWG Fact Sheet. [150] DoD
Interviews, 10 May 2000. [151] U.S.
Department of State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of
Humanitarian Demining Programs, Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency
Working Group on Demining, 18 March 1999.” Hereafter cited as “U.S.
Department of State, 18 March 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet.” [152] U.S. Department of
State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
3. [153] U.S. Department of State,
“Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bureau of African Affairs,” 15 March 2000; U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 13; SOLIC
Information Paper; U.S. Department of State, 17 June 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [154] U.S. Department of State,
FY 00 NADR Project Status, p. 3. [155]
U.S. Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs,” 15
March 2000; U.S. Department of State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,”
April 1999, pp. 23-26; U.S. Department of State, 18 March 1999 IWG Fact Sheet;
U.S. Department of State, 1 June 1998 IWG Fact
Sheet. [156] U.S. Department of State,
FY 00 NADR Project Status, p. 4. [157]
DoD Descriptive Summaries. [158] U.S.
Department of State, 9 December 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [159] DoD Descriptive
Summaries. [160] U.S. Department of
State, “Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs,” 15 March 2000; U.S.
Department of State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p.
27; U.S. Department of State, 18 March 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [161] U.S. Department of State,
“Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bureau of African Affairs,” 15 March 2000; U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 14; SOLIC
Information Paper. [162] U.S. Department
of State, 17 June 1999 IWG Fact
Sheet. [163] DoD Descriptive
Summaries. [164] U.S. Department of
State FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
3. [165] U.S. Department of State, 17
June 1999 IWG Fact Sheet; U.S. Department of State, “Congressional Budget
Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of African
Affairs,” 15 March 2000. [166]
U.S. Department of State FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
3. [167] U.S. Department of State,
“To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 15; U.S. Department of
State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Humanitarian Demining
Programs, Fact Sheet: “Meeting of the Interagency Working Group on
Demining 1 June 1998.” [168] U.S.
Department of State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p.
120; U.S. Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justification for
Foreign Operations, FY 2001 – Bureau of East Asian and Pacific
Affairs,” 15 March 2000. [169] DoD
Descriptive Summaries. [170] U.S.
Department of State, FY 00 NADR Project Status, p.
4. [171] U.S. Department of State, 17
June 1999 IWG Fact Sheet. [172] U.S.
Central Command, “Humanitarian Demining Country Plan For The Republic of
Yemen,” 19 July 1999; U.S. Department of State, “To Walk the Earth
in Safety,” April 1999, p. 31; U.S. Department of State,
“Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs,” 15 March 2000; SOLIC Information
Paper. [173] U.S. Department of State,
FY 00 NADR Project Status, p. 4. [174]
U.S. Department of State, 30 March 2000 IWG Fact
Sheet. [175] U.S. Department of State,
“Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY 2001
– Bvureau of African Affairs,” 15 March 2000; U.S. Department of
State, “To Walk the Earth in Safety,” April 1999, p. 16; SOLIC
Information Paper; U.S. Department of State, 2 September 1998 IWG Fact Sheet;
U.S. European Command Press Release, 28 July
1999. [176]
http://www.info.usaid.gov/press/releases/fs991101.html [177]
All subsequent descriptive summaries of WVF programs taken from United States
Agency for International Development, “Patrick J. Leahy War Victims Fund,
Portfolio Synopsis,” Spring 2000.
About Us
Our Research Products