Vietnamese child shows injuries caused by a land mine explosion. Photo: James Hathaway – Flickr CC BY 2.0

Treaties are voluntary agreements in which states consent to follow a given set of rules. Once signed and ratified, treaties commit states to specific obligations. They are neither ad hoc, spur-of-the-moment accords nor are they directly forced on any country. How then to accept that five countries have announced that they will withdraw from the 1997 Anti-Personnel Mine Treaty which forbids the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of anti-personnel landmines? Russia’s 2002 invasion of Ukraine has certainly changed the geopolitical context that existed when the Mine Ban Treaty was signed. But a country should not make a commitment only when the situation is favorable to that country.

Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Finland have announced that they are opting out of the Ottawa Treaty. All five countries border either Russia or Belarus. (Ukrainian President Zelensky has vowed to leave the Treaty as well.) The use of anti-personnel landmines can be seen as a defensive military action against Russia. Norway, however, which has a 121 mile land border with Russia, remains committed to its anti-mine obligations.

The withdrawals represent a serious weakening of disarmament treaties that have humanitarian objectives as well as respect for international law. The five-country withdrawals could be setting a precedent that could see countries withdraw from other treaties such as those banning biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons as well as withdrawals from international institutions.

The Uniqueness........

© CounterPunch