10 years with the Mine Ban Treaty - Human Security is the way forward

Statement from Civil Society organizations to States celebrating the 10 year anniversary of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty - Oslo 18 September 2007
Reliefweb

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/EVOD-776HUP?OpenDocument

Presented by Forum for Environment and Development (ForUM), International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and the Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC)

Ten years ago, here in Oslo, states responded to the challenge raised by civil society and agreed to outlaw a class of weapons that killed and maimed civilians all over the world every day. Today 155 states have adhered to the anti-personnel mine ban treaty, agreeing never again to use, produce, sell or stockpile that horrific weapon. The convention has put an effective stop to the use of anti-personnel mines globally, and has led to the demining of hundreds of square kilometres of land, the destruction of over 40 million antipersonnel mines, and the provision of assistance to thousands of mine-affected communities and individuals. The world has become a better place, but the struggle against landmines and other deadly explosive remnants of war is not over. There are still landmines in the ground that need to be cleared, still mine victims requiring basic assistance and cluster munitions continue to kill and maim civilians during attacks and long after fighting has ended.

Today we celebrate the mine ban convention and the tremendous efforts that made it happen. Civil society, led by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, demanded that states act on their responsibility to protect civilians in wars. When out-dated diplomatic processes failed to deliver the only relevant response – a total ban on antipersonnel landmines - civil society and progressive states joined forces to find new and efficient ways of working together, keeping the focus on the realities on the ground rather than on protocol. The result was a victory for true multilateralism that put the security of people first and has meant a safer future for millions of people all over the world.

Now we need to examine how we can best use the lessons we have learned to continue to make this world a safer place for all of us. At the heart of the movement to ban landmines is a concept of security using those most exposed to threats as the reference point, coupled with a universal idea of human solidarity across borders and continents, and firmly based on core principles of International Humanitarian Law. We are convinced that this is the way forward. We must move away from an interpretation of security that sanctions and justifies the killing of civilians and the potential destruction of our societies, and move towards a “human security” concept - one that tackles the real daily threats to human beings such as climate change, poverty, hunger, overpopulation, terrorism, organised crime, and trafficking in drugs, people and arms.

The past decade has not been without other successes. The establishment of the International Criminal Court, the Protocol on Child Soldiers and the UN Security Council Resolution 1325, and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities can serve as illustrations of what civil society and governments can achieve together. They are also examples of the diversity of approaches towards advancing human security – a type of security that cannot be achieved by acquiring new weapons systems, or by undermining basic human rights or international humanitarian law.

We in civil society will continue to advocate for changes that improve the real security for real people. But we need states to demonstrate true leadership on key security issues that have lingered for too long. We have documented how small arms are the real weapons of mass destruction, killing and wounding hundreds of thousands of people every year and threatening sustainable development around the world, but still this issue has met with a feeble international response. Conflict goods that fuel wars, repression and environmental damage are traded on our markets unhindered. And we are now witnessing another escalation of the nuclear arms race.

Responses to these critical security issues are within our range – but they require leadership and action from you – governments truly concerned with security, development and human rights for all people, regardless of their nationality.

Allow us to mention just three concrete processes where government action is needed:

- On Small Arms – states should immediately implement the United Nations Programme of Action, and support the development of an effective Arms Trade Treaty. These are two key ways we can hope to tackle the broad security threat small arms represent to hundreds of thousands of people and their communities.

- On Nuclear Arms – we need more states to support the Nuclear Weapons Convention, an idea so far backed by 125 UN Member states, but in dire need of concrete action. Nuclear weapons are futile against any of today's real security threats. The NWC would provide for the elimination of nuclear weapons in much the same way comparable treaties have banned landmines and chemical and biological weapons. True human security, and the survival of our planet, will never be guranteed until such weapons are eliminated.

- On cluster munitions - 80 states are participating in a new multilateral process based on the Oslo declaration calling for a ban on cluster munitions by 2008. We urge those who have not joined this call to do so, and call on those of you already on board to continue to support a cluster ban treaty that will put an effective halt to the use of these weapons and ensure assistance to, and inclusion of, affected communities and individuals.

Many states have joined forces with us on these and other issues. But while the equal partnership between civil society and states has been recognized as a key factor in the success of the Ottawa Process, we are concerned that this partnership is under threat in other fora. Many governments prefer to conduct security negotiations away from the public eye, and have little interest in inviting us in civil society to participate as partners. Our partnership was crucial to achieve the landmine convention and is working well so far in the process to ban cluster munitions. If states move away from this model now, we are concerned that occasions like this will be few in the future.

We in civil society will continue to advocate for a security concept that puts real people’s security first, towards a world were people can live free from the fear of being killed, maimed, raped, enslaved, tortured or obliterated by the use of mines, cluster munitions, small arms or nuclear weapons. We ask states to make use of grassroots experiences and lend your ears to the individuals and communities affected by landmines, cluster munitions and inhumane weapons. We challenge governments to engage in responsible partnerships with civil society and to make use of our diversity, knowledge, resources and commitment.

We have demonstrated that together we are strong and can achieve our common aims. We are ready to work with you again. It would be a shame to let the chance pass.