Justin Pearce
THE Department of Foreign Affairs insists that South Africa this week became a world leader in the move away from the use of landmines — but human rights activists are outraged at the government’s failure to support an outright ban on these weapons.
South Africa’s position came as a surprise to many who had expected the country to seize the moral high ground in the wake of growing international anti-mine sentiments, and support an all-out ban. According to sources close to the Cabinet, the issue caused a rift in the ANC Cabinet caucus between those ministers favouring an outright ban, and those who supported the more cautious position which was eventually adopted.
At a conference in Vienna this week, Foreign Affairs Deputy Director-General Abdul Minty announced South Africa’s proposals for amendments to the Convention on Prohibitions and Restrictions on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). The convention is widely considered to be inadequate following the proliferation of mines which has occurred since it was drafted in 1980, and is to be tightened up in accordance with submissions made at the present conference. Anti-landmine sentiments are growing worldwide in reponse to the devastating effects of mines even years after a war.
The controversy over South Africa’s submission centres on its support for the development of “short-life” landmines — mines which can be timed to self-destruct after a specified period of time. South Africa has suggested that the convention require member states to phase out existing landmines and replace them with “short-life” mines.
Supporters argue that short-life mines fulfil the defence role of existing mines without posing a threat to civilians for years after the end of a conflict. This would rule out a repetition of the current situation in Angola and Mozambique, where civilians are still maimed by the millions of mines which remain in these countries and which will cost millions to remove.
Ceasefire, which represents 40 South African organisations supporting the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, argues that short-life mines have the same destructive capabilities as the mines which are currently deployed.
“Whether landmines are ‘short-life’ or ‘long-life’, they are still incapable of discriminating between their victims, be they enemy or friendly soldiers, ordinary civilians or children,” said Ceasefire co- ordinator David Bruce.
Bruce warned that the continued acceptance of ‘short- life’ mines endorsed the acceptibility of landmines in general. This would encourage the continued use of “long-life” mines, especially by developing countries which could not afford the more technologically advanced “short-life” mines.
“The only way of reducing the use of landmines is challenging landmines as a legitimate weapon of war,” Bruce said.
Minty said that since few countries had as yet acceeded to the convention, it was important to have a convention worded in such a way that would not discourage more countries from acceeding, which might happen if the convention ruled out mines completely.
Minty pointed out that the South African submission contains numerous features designed to limit the use of landmines. If South Africa’s proposals are accepted, it will become illegal for treaty states to sell mines to non-treaty states, and non-detectable mines will be prohibited. Proposals also include restrictions on the use of mines, so as to minimise civilian casualties, and an extension of the convention to restrict the use of mines in civil war — it was a civil conflict which left Angola among the most severely mined countries in the world.
South Africa also proposed a new protocol to outlaw the use of laser weapons, which have been developed in recent years with the intention of causing permanent
Minty’s presentation to the Vienna conference makes it clear that the postition articulated by South Africa should be the first step on the road to an all-out ban on landmines.