Landmine Monitor 2002

Humanitarian Mine Action


With the approaching five-year anniversary of the negotiation and signing of the Mine Ban Treaty, it is useful to note the broad developments that have occurred in the field of humanitarian mine action. Indeed, mine clearance has evolved over the past decade from a strictly military activity to a more sophisticated and systematic humanitarian and developmental initiative. This has occurred in the wake of the establishment of pioneering humanitarian mine action (HMA) programs in Afghanistan, Cambodia, and northern Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan). Survey and assessment, mine risk education, and survivor assistance activities are becoming more integrated with humanitarian mine clearance programs as HMA’s focus has progressively become more community-oriented. Greater emphasis is now placed on alleviating the impact of the presence of mines and unexploded ordnance (UXO) on communities. Socio-economic factors are increasingly taken into consideration during the processes that allocate resources, plan, and implement mine action operations.[58]

Some key developments in the evolution of HMA over the past decade include:

  • More non-profit HMA operators in the field, including indigenous/national entities;
  • More commercial practitioners operating in accordance with humanitarian priorities;
  • Increased coordination between mine action practitioners, donors and governments of mine-affected countries;
  • A recognition of the need for timely and appropriate HMA assistance in emergency situations;
  • Increasing attention paid to management skills and professional development of mine action practitioners;
  • An increasingly broad and diverse range of tools are now available to mine action practitioners; 
  • The development of the International Mine Action Standards (IMAS);
  • Tasking priorities are increasingly based on impact, and program output is increasingly measured in more qualitative terms;
  • A growing understanding of the need to balance subsistence needs and priorities at the local level with the infrastructure needs and priorities at the regional and national levels;
  • The gradual inclusion of systems to secure post-clearance plans and to ensure that cleared lands are used as intended.

The number of humanitarian NGOs engaged in HMA, originally just a handful, has more than tripled over the past decade. At the same time, more and more responsibility for HMA is being placed on national bodies, through the creation of national mine action centers (MACs). This shows a higher level of commitment and active involvement in the landmine issue. Increasingly, commercial practitioners are operating in accordance with humanitarian priorities as demanded by donors and the affected countries. 

Increased coordination at the national, regional and global level has developed over the past decade. The Inter-Agency Coordination Group on Mine Action (IAGG) meets monthly as the coordinating mechanism for United Nations entities engaged in HMA, while this group of agencies together with key partners such as the ICBL forms the Steering Committee on Mine Action (SCMA). The Mine Action Support Group (MASG) brings together major donors to optimize existing tools for resource mobilization. 

The biannual meetings of the Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee for Mine Clearance, Mine Awareness, and Mine Clearance Technologies have increased opportunities for interaction among various HMA actors, especially government representatives of mine-affected countries. In 2002, the Standing Committee recognized that coordination among various actors and transparency of activities could be further enhanced by examining mine action programs in major mine-affected countries. The January 2002 meeting included a session on Afghanistan, which was followed by a session on Mozambique in May 2002. Many actors have taken advantage of regular Mine Ban Treaty meetings to hold informal discussions, using the facilities available at the Geneva International Center for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD). 

Emergency mine action was required in 2001 and 2002 in a number of places, most notably Afghanistan. Concurrently, an Emergency Response Plan (ERP) is under development by the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) in collaboration with other UN mine action partners. The ERP was developed as a response to two recent humanitarian emergencies – Kosovo in 1999 and Eritrea in 2000 -- and the goal is to develop a system that will allow the international community to respond “in a timely and affective manner to the mine action components of humanitarian and peacekeeping emergencies. The ERP will address the immediate mine action priorities of a humanitarian emergency and will not attempt to plan beyond this stage of an operation.”[59] In addition, the U.S. has sponsored the creation of a “Quick Reaction Demining Force,” based in Mozambique. 

As HMA expands and evolves, the need for more practitioners equipped with professional management skills becomes even more urgent. The UNDP is coordinating efforts in management training as well as establishing staff exchanges between the various national MACs, as part of its capacity-building mandate. At the same time, more attention is being paid to thematic research into new and developing areas of HMA, as recorded by recent GICHD studies into socio-economic aspects of HMA. 

A positive development in the field application of mine action technologies is the increased use of the "toolbox" concept by mine action practitioners. The toolbox concept provides for the use of a range of methods such as manual, mechanical, and mine detection dogs in mine clearance activities, depending on what is most suitable in the area needing clearance. One example is area reduction where mechanical means and dogs are used in order to verify areas and set boundaries of the areas where manual deminers are required. An obvious result of this is the increased speed of mine clearance operations, which means more cost-effective clearance operations, and land handed over to the civilian population in shorter time.

The development of International Mine Action Standards has resulted in greater safety and efficiency by providing guidance, establishing principles, and also in some cases, by defining international requirements and specifications. 

There is now an increased appreciation and acceptance among donors of key developments in HMA. This is demonstrated by higher demands and by more rigid and diversified requirements on the output and return of their financial contributions to mine action. More and more governments are increasingly concerned with and involved in the program design and objective setting of mine clearance. Both donor countries and mine-affected countries are reviewing and renewing strategies and policies for program support. 

Over a decade of operational experience has stimulated the need to collect and evaluate activities to ensure that objectives are being met. Country program evaluations published in the past year include “Willing to Listen: An Evaluation of the United Nations Mine Action Program in Kosovo” by the Praxis Group, and the World Bank’s “Socio-economic Impact of Mine Action in Afghanistan; a Cost-Benefit Analysis.” These types of evaluations are taking place along side internal assessments by NGOs like DanChurch Aid (in Kosovo), Handicap International (in Ethiopia), Handicap International Belgium (in Afghanistan), and Norwegian People’s Aid (in Angola and Mozambique).


Despite these positive developments over the past decade, it remains to be seen whether the HMA community will be able to complete the task at hand and meet its goal of a mine-free world. This daunting challenge is perhaps even more difficult than that faced by the ban movement with respect to universalization of the treaty. 

At the 2002 Standing Committee meetings the ICBL’s Mine Action Working Group (MAWG) drew the attention of States Parties to the capacity of mine-affected States Parties to meet the ten-year obligation to clear emplaced mines stipulated by Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty. As of 31 July 2002, 47 of the 125 States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty were mine-affected and would need to comply with Article 5. As the first deadline for some states of 2009 draws nearer, the MAWG said it was important to acknowledge this deadline and redouble efforts by addressing the need for: realistic and appropriate funding to mine action; more and appropriate information for decision-making, priority setting and tasking in humanitarian mine clearance operations; and, national strategic mine action plans. 

An examination of statistical clearance outputs and funding levels over the past five years makes it quite evident that a number of States Parties will not be able to meet the Article 5 obligation to clear emplaced antipersonnel mines. An extension of up to ten years can be requested in cases where the clearance deadlines are not met, and Article 6 (International Cooperation and Assistance) stipulates the right of each State Party to seek cooperation and assistance from other States Parties “in a position to do so.” The request for an extension must contain a detailed explanation of the reasons for the proposed extension, including: preparation and status of work conducted under national demining programs; financial and technical means available to the State Party for clearance and destruction of all antipersonnel mines; and, circumstances that impede the ability of the State Party to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas. A request for an extension must be approved by a majority of States Parties present at the Meeting of States Parties or the Review Conference at which the request is presented. An extension may be renewed.


Landmine Monitor finds that 90 countries are affected with mines and unexploded ordnance (UXO).[60]In addition, Landmine Monitor lists eleven other areas (noted in italics in the chart) that are not internationally recognized states, but which Landmine Monitor researches and reports on because of their particular mine-affected status. Antipersonnel mines are often found in combination with antivehicle mines and UXO in many of these countries. A handful of these countries suffer solely from the legacy of the explosive remnants of war (ERW) dating back to conflicts in the first half of the last century. The enduring threat of landmines and UXO in these countries still puts the civilian population at risk. 

Landmine/UXO Problem in the World Today

Central Asia
Middle East/
North Africa
Rep. of Congo
DR Congo 
Sierra Leone
Costa Rica
El Salvador
Burma (Myanmar)
Korea, North
Korea, South
Sri Lanka
Czech Republic
Macedonia FYR
Northern Iraq
Western Sahara


The scope and knowledge of the mine problem varies greatly from country-to-country. Surveys and assessments are necessary tools in systematically establishing both the location of suspected mined areas and the impact mines have on civilians and their daily lives. 

Landmine Impact Surveys (LIS) enable donors, national authorities, and clearance organizations to prioritize mine clearance based on humanitarian aspects and cost efficiency.[61] The Survey Action Center (SAC) serves as a coordination organization for most LIS operations.[62] SAC and its contracted implementing partners are currently engaged in or planning for LIS in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Somalia (Somaliland). The Mines Advisory Group (MAG) and the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation (VVAF) are engaged in an LIS in Lebanon, and VVAF is awaiting approval from the government of Vietnam to undertake an LIS there. In 2000 and 2001, Landmine Impact Surveys were completed in Cambodia, Chad, Mozambique, Thailand, and Yemen, as well as a modified Level One Impact Survey in Kosovo. 

Other general surveys and assessments are underway in several countries. These surveys are conducted by a number of actors including NGOs, international organizations, national demining offices, and military organizations, often in combination.  Landmine Monitor Report 2001 counted some kind of survey or assessment activity in 30 countries in the year 2000. This total has increased to 34 in 2001 and the first half of 2002. Survey or assessment activities have taken place in the following countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Chad, Croatia, Ecuador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Iran, Jordan, Laos, Lebanon, Macedonia FYR, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Somalia, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Uganda, Ukraine, Vietnam, FR Yugoslavia, and Zimbabwe, as well as in Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Northern Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan), and Somaliland. 

Landmine Monitor Report 2001 listed eleven assessments conducted by the United Nations Mine Action Service between May 2000 and May 2001. Since May 2001, new UNMAS assessments have been reported in Cyprus, Mauritania, and Sudan.

The Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA) combines a relational database with a geographical information system (GIS) and provides mine action managers with up-to-date information on affected areas, sites of operation, mine casualties and other relevant information. In 2001, IMSMA was installed in twenty-two countries including: Albania, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Cambodia, Chad, Cyprus, Ecuador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Estonia, Lebanon, Macedonia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Peru, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Thailand, and Yemen, as well as Kosovo, Northern Ossetia (Russia), and Somaliland. In the half of 2002, the GICHD established its first Regional Support Centre in Managua, Nicaragua in order to assist IMSMA users throughout Latin America.

In comparison, Landmine Monitor reported IMSMA installments in a total of thirteen mine action programs in 2000. Between January and April 2002 new IMSMA programs were installed in Colombia, DR Congo, Guatemala and Sudan. 

In September 2001, UNMAS launched its E-MINE system (Electronic Mine Information Network), a website for up-to-date mine-related data developed as support to global mine action efforts. E-MINE was further developed throughout 2002, building on a large number of databases, information systems and websites.

A total of 31 of the 47 mine-affected States Parties had submitted transparency reports as required under Article 7 of the Mine Ban Treaty as of 31 July 2002. Forms C, F and G of the Article 7 report format all relate to reporting on mine action. States Parties use Form C of the Article 7 reporting format to report on the location of mined areas in their territory. From a review of submitted reports, Landmine Monitor found that three countries (El Salvador, Kenya and Uganda) did not report important information on the location of mined areas. Several States Parties, including Yemen, have attached their LIS findings to Form C. 

One reason for the inconsistent use of Form C could be the limited number of assessments and surveys undertaken. Only nine of the mine-affected countries have had any kind of assessment or survey carried out, which would shed some light on the extent and characteristics of the country’s landmine problem and facilitate reporting. 


Some form of mine clearance was reported to have taken place in 2001 and the first half of 2002 in 74 countries and ten other areas. This includes mine clearance for humanitarian, economic, or military purposes. No mine clearance of any type was noted in 2001 in sixteen mine-affected countries: Armenia, China, Cuba, Iraq (excluding northern Iraq), Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Mongolia, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia (excluding Somaliland), Swaziland, and Uganda.

New information on mine clearance in FR Yugoslavia was received. Three countries that reportedly had clearance operations in 2000, reported no activities in 2001: Bangladesh, Namibia, and Pakistan. 

In the case of Kosovo, the internationally coordinated Mine Action Center ceased operations at the end of 2001 after declaring that the clearance of known mine-affected areas was concluded to international accepted standards. Small-scale clearance continues and there is an indigenous capacity to clear any mines and UXO subsequently discovered. 

In many cases, the only mine clearance recorded in this reporting period involved the military and other entities, such as explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) units of national police, responding to emergencies necessitating the clearance of landmines or UXO. The military undertook mine clearance operations in Djibouti, Kenya, Senegal, Yugoslavia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. In Uzbekistan, there are unconfirmed reports of limited clearance by the Uzbek Army, however, there are no plans for clearance of its mines on the Tajik border. In Sri Lanka, the military and rebel forces conducted mine clearance with training from international NGOs and assistance from elements of the U.S. “Quick Reaction Demining Force” based in Mozambique. Some countries during this reporting period conducted mine clearance operations to facilitate military operations. Limited military mine clearance for tactical purposes was noted in Chechnya, Colombia, India, and the Philippines. 

International or national NGOs are operating in twenty-four countries or regions: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Chad, Costa Rica, Croatia, DR Congo, Eritrea, Guatemala, Honduras, Laos, Lebanon, Macedonia FYR, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Vietnam, as well as Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, northern Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan), and Somaliland. New humanitarian mine clearance programs by NGOs commenced in Albania and Macedonia FYR. 

While not the sole indicator of progress in humanitarian mine action, the amount of land cleared in 2001 in some key mine-affected countries includes the following:

  • The UN Mine Action Program in Afghanistan reports that its implementing partners cleared nearly 15.6 million square meters of mined area and 81.2 million square meters of former battlefields.
  • In Bosnia and Herzegovina, some 5.5 million square meters was cleared.
  • Cambodia reports the clearance of 24.85 million square meters of land. 
  • In Chad, 645,663 square meters of land was demined. 
  • In Croatia some 13.6 million square meters of land was cleared in 2001.
  • The total amount of cleared land in Kosovo was 8.1 million square meters.
  • A total of 9,712 square meters was cleared in Rwanda. 
  • The Thailand Mine Action Center reported 4.4 million square meters of land cleared from July 2000 to June 2002. 
  • In Yemen a total of 2.2 million square meters were cleared between May 2001 to Feb 2002 by mine action teams which are deployed in four of the 14 highest priority areas based on results from the LIS conducted in 1999-2000. 

In spite of the presence of national demining bodies with planning and coordinating mandates in other countries it proved difficult to obtain accurate numbers on both surveyed and cleared land in 2001. In several instances, the amount of cleared land reported by national mine action centers differed significantly from those provided by the various mine clearance organizations. In some cases, the statistics reported by the national body conflicted with other figures provided by the same body. 

In Angola the national demining institute INAROEE reported three different figures, all taken from its annual report “Mine Accidents and Survey Report 2001,” which indicates the total amount of cleared land in 2001 was either 2.48 million square meters, 3.06 million square meters, or 6.5 million square meters. The total amount of cleared land in 2001 reported to Landmine Monitor by major operators in Angola was 6.8 million square meters. 

In Mozambique, the National Institute for Demining reported clearance in 2001 of 12.41 million square meters in one instance, and 7.88 million square meters in another. This contrasts with the 8.88 million square meters total calculated by Landmine Monitor from reports by various field-based operators.

Article 7’s Form F is used to report on the status of any mine action program relevant to the mine-affected country. In the reporting period, eight mine-affected States Parties did not include any information on the status of mine action programs or activities (Denmark, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kenya, the Philippines, Rwanda, Tajikistan, and Uganda). Form G should contain information of the clearance of emplaced mines from mined areas after entry into force, but eleven of the 31 mine-affected States Parties reporting did not include information on clearance in their Article 7 reports (Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kenya, Mauritania, the Philippines, Rwanda, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia.). 

In 2001 and the first half of 2002, incidents during clearance operations or in training exercises caused casualties among deminers in: Abkhazia, Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Cambodia, Colombia, Croatia, Eritrea, Estonia, Greece, Jordan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, and Yemen. There were unconfirmed reports of demining casualties in several other countries.


At best, in the absence of information, any national-level planning and coordination of mine action activities becomes ad hoc. Only in the cases of Croatia, Mozambique, and Yemen have survey information, other relevant landmine data and socio-economic information led to the development of a national strategic mine action plan, outlining the landmine problem, priorities, capacities, and needs. Efforts to integrate survey data into national plans are ongoing in Cambodia, Chad, and Thailand. SAC is developing a mechanism to integrate strategic planning with national bodies into all future socio-economic impact surveys.

In order to be able to report on both mined areas and on plans for destruction of antipersonnel mines in mined areas, there is a clear need for surveys and assessments to identify the scale and location of the problem. More and improved coordination by national authorities within the country is necessary, including the mandate to plan and prioritize mine clearance. 

A total of 40 countries and areas reported a body for national-level coordination activities in 2001 and early 2002. That represents an increase of 5 countries since 2000. In some mine/UXO-affected countries the establishment of a mine action center (MAC) is announced, but it takes time for the MAC to become operational. In some cases the military dominate the MAC, for example in Egypt and Jordan.

A total of 27 countries and areas reported some kind of a mine action plan. This is an increase from the 20 countries and regions that reported last year. New plans were reported in Angola, DR Congo, and Guinea-Bissau, among others.

The UN Development Programme was active in supporting and developing national mine action coordination or planning capacities in the following mine-affected countries in 2001: Albania, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Chad, Croatia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Laos, Lebanon, Mozambique, Somalia (Somaliland), Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Yemen.


The Standing Committee meetings in January and May 2002 recognized a growing understanding of the importance of establishing closer links between the research and development community and field practitioners. Landmine Monitor has identified various research and development projects in a number of countries, but has found it difficult to ascertain the use or results of these projects in the field by mine action practitioners. Various R&D projects are described in the country reports of the donor nations (as well as the EC), and in some cases in the country report where projects are being tested. 



  • In Angola a peace agreement was signed in April 2002, and Angola subsequently ratified the Mine Ban Treaty on 5 July 2002 leading to hopes that mine action funding will be restored as donors regain confidence that no more antipersonnel mines will be laid. On 28 July 2001, a new Intersectoral Commission on Demining and Humanitarian Assistance was established in response to a lack of donor support for the existing national mine action institution. According to the mine action NGOs operating in Angola, 6.7 million square meters of land were cleared during 2001. 
  • In Chad, 645,663 square meters of land was cleared, and the recently completed LIS has led to the development of a national strategic mine action plan for the country. 
  • The DR Congo acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty on 2 May 2002 and a Mine Action Coordination Center was established in Kinshasa, with a regional office planned for Kisangani. 
  • In Guinea-Bissau, a National Commission for Humanitarian Demining was established on 10 September 2001. 
  • In Mozambique, the National Demining Institute produced its first Five Year National Mine Action Plan (2002-2006). The final conclusions of the LIS were published in September 2001, which identified some 791 communities affected by 1,374 suspected mined areas. 
  • In Rwanda, some 20 of the more than 35 mined areas in the country have been cleared, including a total of 9,712 square meters cleared in 2001.
  • A comprehensive LIS began in Somaliland in May 2002, which is due for completion in February 2003. 


  • Chile ratified the Mine Ban Treaty on 10 September 2001 and a National Demining Commission was established on 3 October 2001.[63]
  • At least 256 of Colombia’s 1,097 municipalities in 28 of the 31 departments in the country are believed to be mine-affected. CINAMA, the first government agency responsible for overall coordination of mine action in Colombia, was established on 8 October 2001.[64]
  • The demining program in Costa Rica has suffered a serious financial crisis since December 2001, which has resulted in a disruption and suspension of operations. 
  • As of June 2002, Nicaragua had cleared more than 2.5 million square meters of land, including 78,374 mines. 
  • In June 2002, the Peruvian Army completed mine clearance along 18 kilometers of the Zarumilla Canal on the border with Ecuador. Peru has a draft Mine Action Plan on clearance within the national army.
  • The OAS has continued its coordination and supervision of the Assistance Program for Demining in Central America, in Honduras, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, despite challenges in raising the necessary funds.[65]


  • The UN Mine Action Program in Afghanistan reports that its implementing partners cleared nearly 15.6 million square meters of mined area and 81.2 million square meters of former battlefields.
  • As part of a new plan to “fence the country,” the Burmese Army gave its troops orders to lay mines along the Thai-Burma border. 
  • The Cambodia LIS was completed in April 2002 and revealed that nearly half of all villages are either known or suspected contaminated by mines or UXO. In 2001, a total of 21.8 million square meters of land was cleared, including 29,358 antipersonnel mines. 
  • As part of the military buildup since December 2001, both Pakistan and India have emplaced large numbers of antipersonnel mines along their common border in what is apparently one of the largest mine-laying operations anywhere in the world in years. 
  • In 2001, the Republic of Korea cleared 840 mines and 850,000 square meters of land in the inter-Korean transportation routes south of the demilitarized zone. 
  • In Sri Lanka, a 23 February 2002 cease-fire may enable significant mine action activities to get underway.
  • The Thailand Mine Action Center reported that 4.4 million square meters of land has been cleared as of June 2002.
  • In Vietnam, mine action activities by NGOs continue to expand, including outside of Quang Tri province for the first time. 


  • From 1998 through February 2002, HALO Trust cleared a total of 945,868 square meters of land in Abkhazia.
  • The Armenian National Mine Action Center was officially opened in March 2002 and two 80-person companies are being trained in HMA. 
  • A general survey was carried out in 11 districts of Azerbaijan which found that 50 million square meters of land is affected by mines and UXO, and just 84 minefields were identified and marked. 
  • In Bosnia and Herzegovina some 5.5 million square meters of mine-affected land was cleared in 2001, and 73.5 million square meters of land was surveyed.
  • In Croatia some 13.6 million square meters of land was cleared in 2001.
  • The government of Cyprus reported that it has cleared and destroyed more that 11,000 mines during the last two years and announced plans to clear the heavily mined buffer zone that divides the island, starting unilaterally if necessary. 
  • Greece reported that clearance of all minefields on the Greek-Bulgarian border was completed in December 2001, which included the destruction of 25,000 antipersonnel and antitank mines. 
  • In Hungary, an increasing amount of information has been reported on the considerable quantities of unexploded ordnance, including mines, from World War II and later Soviet occupation. 
  • In December 2001, the United Nations Mine Action Coordination Center stated that the clearance of all known minefields and cluster munition strike sites in Kosovo had been completed and it handed over responsibility for mine action to UNMIK and local bodies. The total amount of land cleared in Kosovo was 8.1 million square meters. 
  • In September 2001, UNMAS opened a Mine Action Office in Skopje, Macedonia FYR to coordinate mine action responses by various agencies and to develop a strategy for rapid implementation of mine action. 
  • Russian forces continued to use antipersonnel mines in Chechnya, while at the same time Russia increased its participation in international mine action programs. 


  • Egyptian deminers were trained by the United States in the period from May to August 2001. 
  • Since the national demining program began in Jordan in 1993, 116 minefields containing 84,157 mines and covering 8 million square meters of land have been cleared. 
  • In 2001, the Lebanese Army cleared more than 1.5 million square meters of land; NGOs and foreign armies cleared additional land. UNIFIL completed a technical survey in South Lebanon in 2002 and MAG began a national LIS in March 2002. 
  • Iraqi government delays and refusals to grant visas for essential mine action personnel continued to hinder the UN mine clearance program in northern Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan). From 1998 to mid-2002, over 9.7 million square meters of land were cleared under the UN Mine Action Program. In 2001, MAG and NPA cleared more than one million square meters of mine-affected land. 
  • In Western Sahara there have been no HMA programs since May 2000. 
  • In Yemen a total of 2.2 million square meters were cleared between May 2001 to February 2002 by mine action teams deployed in four of the 14 highest priority areas, based on results from the LIS conducted in 1999-2000. 

[58] Funding for mine action programs is not addressed in this overview. See the individual country studies in this report, and for an overview see the Executive Summary of the Landmine Monitor Report 2002.
[59] See statement by the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) at the Standing Committee on Mine Clearance, Mine Awareness and Mine Action Technologies, Geneva, 29 January 2002 at
[60] This is the same number as recorded last year. However, Hungary has been added because of increased information about the extent of contamination from World War II UXO and mines, and Tanzania has been dropped as evidence indicates the mine problem is limited to the Burundi side of the border.
[61] Landmine Impact Surveys were earlier described as Level One Impact Surveys. Level Two technical surveys verify the presence of mines and establish the outer perimeter of minefields to facilitate the marking of danger areas. These types of surveys also gather other relevant data for the technical planning of mine clearance operations.
[62] See SAC contribution to the Appendices of this report. 
[63] National Demining Commission (Comisión Nacional del Desminado, CNAD).
[64] National Interministerial Commission on Antipersonnel Mine Action (Comisión Nacional Intersectorial para la Acción contra las Minas Antipersonal).
[65] Programa de Asistencia al Desminado en Centroamérica, (PADCA).