Points for AVM Intervention

November 18, 2003
DRAFT

--Mr. Coordinator and distinguished colleagues:

--We believe it is clearly time to address the humanitarian problems posed by the irresponsible use of anti-vehicle mines (AVM) through negotiation and adoption of a new protocol to the CCW, starting next year.

--As the ICRC made clear the irresponsible use of these mines has "major humanitarian effects" in terms of denial of assistance and post-conflict reconstruction. Indeed, one only has to open a newspaper to know that this problem is also taking a direct humanitarian toll in terms of civilian death and injury: Somalia, October 28, five people died when their vehicle hit a landmine; October 30th, Kampala, a landmine destroys a truck and kills three people but there were many wounded as the truck carried 30 passengers; Angola, October 31st, a landmine blast destroys a lorry, kills two and halts the development project to build a new school and health facility.

--We, as representatives of states party to the CCW, have an opportunity to address this problem now.

--We can do so by adopting a clear and open-ended negotiating mandate on AVM for 2004 - a mandate to negotiate a new protocol to address the irresponsible use of MOTAPM. We hope that we can agree that the irresponsible use of AVM justifies such a negotiating mandate next year. We hope that this group can collectively recommend such a mandate to the conference of states parties which takes place next week.

--Individual states can take another important step right now. We hope delegations will consider joining other states in cosponsoring a specific proposal for a new protocol on AVM designed to protect against the damaging effects of irresponsibly-used AVM.

--As is well known, the US and Denmark two years ago introduced a proposed AVM protocol that now counts 18 co-sponsors

--The proposed protocol is balanced and straightforward. It would require that AVM, when used, be detectable so that they can be found and cleared. No such requirement currently exists.

--It would also require that AVM that are delivered by artillery or aircraft over long distances - so-called scatterable mines - have a self-destruction or self-neutralization mechanism so they don't remain a threat after the battle has ended.

--Our proposal would not affect the responsible use of long-lived AVM; would not require that stockpiles be modified (it affects only use); and would not prevent use of long-lived mines in border and security minefields.

--This proposal was known as the 15 nation proposal but now has 18 current cosponsors

--There are, of course, other proposals that merit attention.

--Cosponsoring the 18 nation proposal is one way to underscore the importance of doing something now about the humanitarian problems posed by AVM.

--The other way is simply to support a clear, open-ended negotiating mandate on AVM for next year. We are not asking for a mandate that gives particular priority to any one proposal.

--To our friends that have doubts about negotiations, the U.S. is fully committed to full, frank and direct discussions on all aspects of the AVM issue, technical and otherwise.

--Be assured we would not be proposing negotiations if we were not convinced that we can find a balance between legitimate security concerns, both today's and tomorrow's, and humanitarian interest.

--We are committed to finding that balance and doing so as partners.

--Mr. Coordinator, we thank you for your ongoing efforts and look forward to the work and discussions ahead under your guidance.

--Thank you.

Speech by Edward Cummings, Head of Delegation at the CCW Conference,
November 17-28, 2003