Security Council meeting 3689

The President

I should like to inform the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Argentina, Australia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Hungary, India, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ireland, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Ukraine and Uruguay, in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The President

In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council's prior consultations, if I hear no objection, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend an invitation to the Permanent Observer of Switzerland to the United Nations to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The President

In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council's prior consultations, if I hear no objection, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to Mr. Peter Küng, Head of the delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross to the United Nations.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda, "Demining in the context of United Nations peace-keeping". The Security Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations.

I should like to draw the attention of the members of the Council to document S/1996/621, which contains the text of a letter dated 24 July 1996 from the Permanent Representative of Germany to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General.

Before calling on the first speaker, I should like to appeal to all speakers to observe the newly agreed-upon practice according to which expressions of congratulations to the President of the Council should be dispensed with in order to save time. In the same spirit, the President of the Council for the month of July has graciously indicated that expressions of appreciation to the past President may also be dispensed with.

Mr. Fulci (Italy)

First of all, allow me to express my full agreement with, and support for, the statement that the distinguished Permanent Representative of Ireland, Ambassador John Campbell, is going to make later as President of, and on behalf of, the European Union.

More than 100 million mines are scattered throughout the villages, fields and roads of one third of the Member States of the United Nations. Every day 66 persons are killed, maimed or scarred by this lethal weapon: an instrument of barbarity rather than of war, of revenge rather than of defence. Its primary victims are innocent civilians, the unarmed and children.

The economic devastation and terrible emotional and physical toll of this indiscriminate weapon often obstruct reconciliation, the peace process, reconstruction and the reintegration of refugees. The spread of anti-personnel land-mines jeopardizes regional stability, security and development. It demonstrates the vital link between international security and economic development.

Many men and women of good will and vision have been crusading against this scourge. I want to pay homage to one of them: American Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, who came here so many times to persuade ambassadors and delegations that something had to be done -- and done quickly -- to carry out demining and to stop mine production and export. Ever since, the ranks of those opposing this threat have greatly increased in number.

Italy wants to be second to none in stressing the need for every country in the world to stop manufacturing and exporting land-mines. As early as December 1993 my country joined the moratorium on the export of anti-personnel land-mines, and in early 1994 Italy ceased production of land-mines altogether. As a member of the European Union we actively promoted a joint action in 1995, and as President of the European Union during the first semester of this year my country contributed to the Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions of Certain Conventional Weapons -- only a first step, but a step in the right direction.

That is why Italy supports the extension of that agreement to every type of conflict and is convinced that an effective and binding verification mechanism is needed for every aspect of its implementation. May I take this opportunity to draw the Council's attention to documents A/49/275 of 2 November 1994 and A/51/139 of 20 May 1996, which state the Italian national position and the European position at the time of our presidency.

As the President of the Council mentioned at the beginning, today's public debate is very rightly focused on demining in connection with peace-keeping operations. The Secretary-General stresses two main goals: first, to provide a secure environment for peace-keeping forces and personnel and, secondly, to implement wider mandates -- such as elections and freedom of movement -- for which huge mine-clearing programmes are prerequisite. In fact, mines constitute one of the most significant dangers for the deployment of any peace-keeping force. Two hundred and seventy-three peace-keepers have been victims of anti-personnel land-mines; 60 lost their lives and 213 were wounded. To prevent such casualties we need not only more sophisticated equipment, but above all better training focused on detection, recognition and reporting of mines.

Experience in Cambodia, Mozambique, Afghanistan, El Salvador and Bosnia and Herzegovina shows that, particularly in demining activities, peace-keeping and humanitarian assistance must be very closely coordinated. More resources should be allocated to the Secretariat, the Department of Peace-keeping Operations (DPKO) and the Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA) for demining programmes.

Demining stand-by capacity has been envisaged for the DHA; but stand-by modules should also be used for peace-keeping operations. Italy has made an effort, both through bilateral and multilateral programmes, and has hosted training courses in Italy for Egyptian, Pakistani and Kuwaiti personnel. Courses have also been organized in Turin by the International Labour Organization to train the trainers for Afghanistan. We think this is an example of the valuable programmes that can be pursued by the Staff College in Turin.

The resources that the international community allocates to demining also belong to post-conflict peacebuilding activities. We have pledged more than $600,000 to the trust fund for Angola and $1.1 million for Mozambique, through the United Nations Office for Humanitarian Assistance Cooperation and the United Nations Development Programme. Italy has also meaningfully contributed to the European Union's financing for Angola, Mozambique, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia. Believe me, we will try to do as much as we can, because we think this field is really a priority.

Demining is crucial to international peace and security and, hence, must also remain a priority issue for the Security Council.

Mr. Inderfurth (United States)

The widespread use of land-mines is one of the most critical challenges facing the international community today and tomorrow. In addition to the thousands of civilian lives that land-mines take every year -- and the thousands more injured -- they also cripple important international peace-keeping operations and humanitarian relief actions.

Despite efforts by the United States and many of the countries represented here today, the anti-personnel land-mine problem is getting worse. The simple fact is that far more land-mines are deployed in conflicts worldwide every year than are removed by mine clearance personnel. We estimate that some 64 countries are affected by the worldwide land-mine crisis, littered with up to 110 million of these weapons. Approximately half of these -- about 65 million mines -- have been laid since 1978.

These mines remaining deadly and active long after conflicts cease, kill or maim an estimated 500 people, mostly innocent civilians, per week -- 26,000 people every year.

The burden imposed by the proliferation and indiscriminate use of land-mines is beyond calculation. In the last several years the nature of the land-mine problem has changed dramatically. Land-mines have become the weapon of choice for many government and insurgent groups: they are cheap, easy to manufacture and use, difficult to detect and expensive and dangerous to remove. They can be used as weapons of terror against civilian populations to generate fear, inhibit refugee return, disrupt economic reconstruction and, as we will discuss today, hinder peace-keeping operations.

Land-mines are a major impediment to peace-keeping operations in every part of the world. Land-mines are often the greatest physical danger the peace-keepers face. Parties in conflict often use land-mines to hinder the peace process by effectively blocking the movement of people and resources.

Let me now focus on three cases where land-mines have directly hindered peace-keeping operations.

First, in Bosnia, a country with an estimated 2 million to 3 million mines, United Nations peace-keeping missions sustained more than 200 land-mine casualties, including 20 deaths since l992. Bosnia ranks with the most heavily mined countries in the world -- Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia and Mozambique. The uncertainty about the location of the mines in Bosnia denies much of the country to civilian use. Peace-keepers have been required to clear mines as part of their mission, thus diverting scarce resources from other mandated tasks. Mines impeded United Nations patrols and delayed or halted humanitarian relief operations. The Implementation Force of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (IFOR) has been a victim as well. To date, IFOR personnel have been involved in 47 mine incidents, resulting in 55 casualties, including 10 deaths and 45 wounded. The first United States casualty in IFOR was the victim of a land-mine.

Secondly, in Angola, on 27 July two Zimbabwean peace-keepers were killed and four were injured when their truck ran over a land-mine. The peace-keepers were returning from the opening of a UNITA site in the Lunda North province. More broadly, the deployment of the United Nations Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM III) was delayed for months as United Nations peace-keepers had to secure the key basing and patrolling areas for the bulk of the forces.

Angola has paid a terrible price because of the threat posed by land-mines: 70,000 amputees, 300,000 refugees, and over 10 million unexploded land-mines. In addition to peace-keeping costs, the humanitarian and social costs to Angola will be staggering as Angolans attempt to remove mines and repair their society. As land-mines continue to take their tragic toll even after the conflict has been resolved, they may well be the last, most tragic legacy of Angola's decades of strife. We applaud the fact that both the Government of Angola and UNITA have agreed to begin destroying their stockpiles of land-mines.

Thirdly, in Georgia, the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) has literally been stopped dead in its tracks. UMOMIG is mandated to monitor and verify the cease-fire in the conflict in Georgia through observation and patrolling. But UNOMIG is not patrolling in the most critical regions due to the threat of land-mines. On 9 March, a UNOMIG patrol vehicle drove onto an anti-tank mine in the Gali sector, instantly killing the driver, a military observer from Bangladesh. The other passengers, a Hungarian military observer and a local interpreter, were also injured. Other mine incidents were narrowly averted. Mines have also killed local civilians and members of the peace-keeping forces of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

We do not know who is laying the mines, but it is clear that they are people who prefer conflict and death to a peaceful resolution. Missions under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter, such as UNOMIG, are unarmed and depend for their security on the good faith of the parties. The United Nations is taking steps to counter the land-mine threat at enormous expense in spite of its limited resources.

But the mines which interfere with the UNOMIG and CIS peace-keeping effort is only a small part of the story. Mines have also been laid in areas where they threaten civilians and block peaceful economic activity. But humanitarian demining cannot even begin until the conflict is fully resolved. We encourage the Department of Political Affairs (DPA) and the Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA), as well as the Georgians, the Abkhaz and other neighbours, to plan for the day when they can begin that other demining job.

It is all too common that combatants do not remove land-mines after a conflict ends. They are left for civilian populations and peace-keepers to deal with. Although international law now requires minefield recording and measures to protect civilians in internal as well as international conflicts, most mine-plagued countries are not party to Protocol II of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW).

The United States, joining with others in the international community, has taken a leading role in conducting demining efforts worldwide. Since 1993, the United States Government has worked with non-governmental organizations and private voluntary organizations, supported United Nations activities carried out by the Department of Humanitarian Affairs, the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), and encouraged indigenous mine-clearance centres to develop demining assistance programmes. President Clinton's recently announced land-mine policy directs the United States to expand its current humanitarian demining programme and begin work on developing new technologies to aid in land-mine detection and removal.

The United States has spent approximately $91 million from 1993 to the present on mine awareness and demining training programmes in 14 countries with serious land-mine problems, including, most recently, Bosnia. In June of this year, President Clinton announced a new United States initiative in Bosnia, committing up to $15 million to develop an indigenous demining capability. In addition to assisting peace-keeping operations there, the ultimate goal is to give the Bosnians the skills and equipment to locate and destroy the mines themselves. At the centre of the strategy is the headquarters, a Mine Action Centre, designed to coordinate all mine-clearance, mine-awareness, and mine-data-gathering activities in Bosnia. Operating temporarily under a United Nations mandate, the Mine Action Centre and three regional offices will eventually become an entity of the post-election Bosnian Government.

The United States provided $3.5 million to establish the Centre and will contribute up to $15 million towards continuing demining operations during fiscal year 1997. This American effort is in conjunction with those of the United Nations, the High Representative, the World Bank, the European Union, NATO's IFOR and other nations to establish a sustainable demining programme in Bosnia. Together, all these groups are combining resources, personnel and equipment to fund the longer-term mine-clearance operations and training of Bosnian deminers.

In 1997 the United States Government plans to provide approximately $50 million for research and development and demining assistance programmes. These programmes will assist humanitarian programmes and peace-keeping operations in several countries. Among the recipients are Afghanistan, Angola, Bosnia, Cambodia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Jordan, Laos, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, and a regional Central American programme administered through the Organization of American States and the Inter-American Defence Board for Costa Rica, Honduras and Nicaragua.

Demining assistance by the international community is critical to addressing the land-mine crisis. But it is not enough. These weapons must be banned. The United States has been and will continue to be a leader in the fight to eliminate anti-personnel land-mines.

In September 1994, President Clinton, addressing the General Assembly, called for the eventual elimination of anti-personnel land-mines and asked nations to join us in concluding an agreement to reduce their number and availability. He also called for Member States to adopt export moratoria on land-mines -- an effort that 32 nations have now joined.

The President took another major step towards that goal by announcing on 16 May that

"the United States will aggressively pursue an international agreement to ban the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel land-mines, with a view to completing the negotiation as soon as possible."

The United States is dedicated to eliminating these weapons, while taking into account our global responsibilities and concern for the safety of our soldiers.

A global anti-personnel land-mine ban can happen only with the leadership of all Security Council members and support from Member States. We are committed to initiating an international negotiation towards that end and are now consulting with other States on what would be the best forum for negotiations. We also intend to propose a resolution this fall at the fifty-first session of the General Assembly, urging States to begin work on negotiating an international agreement to achieve a worldwide ban, and we hope the United States can count on the support of all Governments in this forum.

Finally, let me take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the German presidency of the Security Council this month for convening this important meeting on such a vital subject. May I also express my Government's congratulations to the German Government for its seven-point programme on anti-personnel mines presented by Foreign Minister Kinkel on 18 July. In dealing with the worldwide land-mine crisis, every step, by all of us speaking here today, draws us that much closer to our goal -- a world free of the terrible threat posed by anti-personnel land-mines.

The President

I thank the representative of the United States for his words of appreciation addressed to my Government.

Mr. Qin Huasun (China)

In recent years United Nations peace-keeping operations have made great efforts and achieved positive results in promoting the peaceful settlement of conflicts under different mandates of the Security Council. However, they are also confronted with many grave challenges, among which is the arduous task of demining in the theatres of operation of United Nations peace-keeping personnel. We therefore welcome the open debate on this question by the Council today and believe that it will contribute to more effective demining in the context of United Nations peace-keeping operations.

One of the important factors contributing to the success or failure of United Nations peace-keeping operations is whether or not the parties concerned can cooperate closely with the United Nations and ensure the safety and freedom of movement of United Nations peace-keeping personnel.

From the hinterland of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Inguri River of Georgia, from the rugged mountain paths of Angola to the Djeletovci oil field in Eastern Slavonia in Croatia, large numbers of mines have not only severely hampered United Nations peace-keeping operations, but also posed a serious threat to the safety of United Nations peace-keeping personnel and the local people, as well as to economic reconstruction in these areas. This situation has already drawn widespread attention from the international community, and demining has become an important component of many peace-keeping operations.

Demining is a time-consuming undertaking that calls, first, for close cooperation by the parties concerned, as well as for adequate expertise and funds. The international community and Member States should therefore provide the necessary human, financial and material support for demining in the context of United Nations peace-keeping operations. At the same time, training for local demining personnel should be accelerated. We hope that, with the joint efforts of the international community and the close cooperation of the parties concerned, demining will be accomplished as successfully as other aspects of the mandates of United Nations peace-keeping operations.

We also wish to point out that the discussion we are having today deals only with demining in the context of peace-keeping operations. Other issues relating to land-mines fall in the category of disarmament and should therefore be discussed and considered by other United Nations bodies.

Mr. Wisnumurti (Indonesia)

I would like to express my delegation's appreciation to you, Mr. President, for convening this formal meeting to address a rapidly growing issue: demining in the context of United Nations peace-keeping. In this regard, some of the approaches outlined in document S/1996/621 call for our careful consideration.

Discussing this problem highlights the manner in which conflicts are being transformed and how the United Nations is responding to the challenges posed by humanitarian needs versus military imperatives. Indonesia participated in the international Meeting on Mine-clearance in Geneva in July 1995, reflecting its keen interest in the dilemma land-mines pose to countries immersed in or emerging from conflicts. We therefore welcome this debate and exchange of views, which will hopefully permit a better grasp of the issues at stake and enhance our knowledge of how Member States can respond to the need for demining.

Demining involves both humanitarian and disarmament aspects and in terms of the Charter remains the purview of the General Assembly. It is to be recalled that the General Assembly has deal with these aspects in the past, and adopted resolutions on them. The involvement of peace-keeping forces in mine-clearance does not in itself warrant a shift of responsibility from the General Assembly to the Security Council.

The gravity of the problems attendant upon land-mines and related devices has long been self-evident. With more than 20,000 people across the planet being killed or maimed in 1995 by mines, and considering that 85 million to 100 million land-mines remain uncleared in 65 countries, it seems that humanitarian tragedies are just waiting to happen, particularly given the fact that 20 times as many mines have been laid as have been removed. Indeed, the use of land-mines is not a static problem but a problem that continues to grow. In 1995, if 100,000 land-mines were removed another 2 million to 5 million were newly laid.

The impact of land-mines is such that it affects all facets of national life. It is a dilemma for countries which are often already underdeveloped and where life cannot return to normal because of these deadly devices. Consequently, it has become a global dilemma. The loss of lives and destitution which the civilian populations have suffered during years of debilitating conflict is only perpetuated through the continued risks they endure as they try to return to their daily lives and rebuild their communities and their countries. Mines threaten all aspects of the socio-economic life of innocent people: arable land infested with mines is rendered useless; electrical plants, water sites and infrastructures are inaccessible; maimed victims, in addition to their own suffering, become burdens to their families and tax the often insufficient medical services; children make up more than half of the victims of land-mines; refugees cannot return to their homes and villages; new groups of displaced persons are created and humanitarian aid cannot reach the populations in need. The obstruction to national reconstruction that mines create is a long-term problem. Given the circumstances I have described, my delegation welcomes the decisions of several States to impose a moratorium or ban on the production, export and operational use of these weapons. In this regard, my delegation believes that the review process of the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons is essential because it offers the appropriate modality for dealing with land-mines and related devices.

Indeed, the process of demining is a long term, dangerous and expensive process which may take decades. According to International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) sources, it would cost $33 billion to rid the world of land-mines at this stage.

The United Nations has legitimately called the world community's attention to the need for mine-clearance. In this regard, we are strongly supportive of the initiative to create the Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine-clearance. The pledging of $22 million has rendered it operational. Such a fund permits a rapid disbursement of funds with a great deal of flexibility and efficiency to projects of an urgent nature. We contributed to this fund following the International Meeting on Mine-Clearance, held in Geneva in July 1995, and welcome its positive development. The Organization's basic approach to land-mine-clearance has been the principle of capacity-building which is sustainable once United Nations agencies and peace-keeping forces have withdrawn from the region. The issue of mine-clearance is indeed complex, involving technical, financial, political and administrative facets. In dealing with the disastrous impact of land-mines on innocent civilians, my delegation considers the three approaches which warrant our careful scrutiny: international law, financial assistance and technical aid.

The link between peace-keeping operations and humanitarian programmes is fundamental since they both function within the framework of peacemaking and post-conflict peace-building. Indonesia supports the inclusion in peace-keeping operation mandates of provisions relating to mine-clearance work. Such operations have in the past coordinated their activities with other United Nations departments and agencies. First and foremost, the Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA) has been the focal point for demining. An integrated approach to mine-clearance permits numerous agencies to coordinate their activities through the central office of DHA in order to operate effectively in the field. Other United Nations agencies, such as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), and the World Health Organization (WHO), also play fundamental roles in demining activities, which Indonesia fully supports.

In the past year the United Nations has engaged in the implementation of demining in nine countries. Mine Action Centres were established in different countries by DHA. The mine-clearance operations in Afghanistan and Cambodia are among the most successful. Since setting up the process for mine-clearance and training can be lengthy, it is not surprising that the best results were evident in the programmes of longest standing. In Angola, the United Nations Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM III) has set up a demining school which will become the core of the mine-clearance programme. In other areas there has been resistance: in Abkhazia, in Georgia, peace-keepers have encountered a great deal of resistance from the Abkhaz authorities, which has inhibited their ability to undertake mine-clearance and also carry out their mandate. It remains important that mine-clearance activities in the context of peace-keeping operations are linked closely to humanitarian activities from the very beginning in order to ensure a coordinated approach to the land-mine problem and the continuance of mine-related activities following the peace-keeping mandate.

Demining efforts encounter many obstacles. The lack of adequate mapping of the layout of minefields is a serious handicap to demining teams. Time is needed to build national capacities for demining, and often teams have to use a case-by-case approach for the different countries in which they operate, since geography and mine types can vary drastically. The political will of the local authorities to cooperate with demining programmes can also seriously hinder or help in eliminating mines. Finally, the capacity to train locals to establish sustainable demining capacities will be the only way to reduce the long-term effects of mines.

The need for research in mine technology remains the area where the greatest efforts must be placed. The technology in use for mine detection and clearance is clearly outdated. The international community can undeniably contribute to the provision of properly trained and experienced instructors, trained manpower needed to carry out demining, training for local populations and appropriate and modern equipment to locate and destroy land-mines. We fully support all efforts in this context.

The disastrous effects of land-mines can be curbed through technical and financial assistance to demining activities and programmes. For this to materialize, international consensus and concerted political will among the States of the global community are imperative in order to deal with the problem at its source.

Mr. Park (Republic of Korea)

Land-mines pose a global challenge to the international community, less because of their explosive power than because of the indiscriminate and inhumane manner in which they have been used. Brutal anti-personnel mines have been deployed with appalling frequency against civilians, maiming or killing 25,000 people per year. Moreover, mines laid during a conflict remain armed and dangerous long after the guns fall silent, threatening reconciliation efforts and undermining economic recovery. Land-mines truly are, as one commentator has called them, "weapons of mass destruction in slow motion".

The ready availability of land-mines only exacerbates the problem. Easy to produce, and with an ample number of suppliers, land-mines are very inexpensive. Not only are land-mines easy to acquire, but they are also easy to emplace. If we combine these factors with the painstakingly slow, dangerous and expensive process of mine removal, the conundrum we face is clear. The average anti-personnel mine costs as little as $3 to produce, and yet costs up to $1,000 to remove.

Demining methods, meanwhile, have advanced little since the Second World War. The net result is that land-mines are being laid far faster than they can be cleared. We now face more than 100 million mines in 65 different countries worldwide, and the figure is increasing by up to 1 million new mines per year.

My delegation believes that coping with the land-mine scourge will require the international community to make concerted efforts from two directions.

First, any comprehensive effort to solve the problem must eventually address the supply side of the equation, including through restrictions on production, export and modifications in design, such as the inclusion of self-neutralizing timers. The Republic of Korea has played a part in this effort, announcing a unilateral year-long moratorium on land-mine exports last year. The large number of land-mine producers, however, and the divergence of views on the efficacy of production and export controls, means that a consensus on supply-side issues will not come easily.

Secondly, in the meantime, there is a pressing need for the international community to focus on the end-user side of the equation, such as through demining and restrictions on the use of land-mines. What I believe we need to focus on today, in our discussion of the role of demining in peace-keeping operations, is how to enhance the capacity and efficiency of mine-clearance in affected countries.

It is against this background that I would now like to elaborate on why demining is a particularly pressing concern in the context of United Nations peace-keeping.

First, the vast majority of peace-keeping missions launched since the end of the cold war have been in response to intra-State conflicts, and it is in precisely those conflicts that land-mine emplacement is particularly widespread.

Secondly, in those peace-keeping missions, uncleared land-mines often prevent peace-keepers from fulfilling their mandate. Clearly, land-mines endanger peace-keepers, just as they do the local population. Mines stand in the way of the efforts to achieve other parts of a peace-keeper's mandate, such as distributing humanitarian aid, repatriating refugees, or ensuring fair elections.

Thirdly, land-mines can jeopardize an affected country's post-conflict economic and psychological recovery. Not surprisingly, fields will lie fallow and factories idle until farmers and workers feel safe enough to return to their jobs. Mines paralyse agriculture, render roads and bridges impassable, and impose staggering medical and psychological costs on the population.

Clearly, for all these reasons, peace-keeping operations in mine-ridden countries cannot succeed without proper demining. Now how can we ensure that mine-clearance efforts in peace-keeping are effective? My delegation is of the view that there are several concrete steps that we can take towards this end.

First, we must ensure that demining be made an integral part of United Nations peace-keeping operations whenever deemed necessary. In this regard, we wish to suggest that the Security Council should review the scope of the mandates of existing peace-keeping missions to make sure that authorization for demining is adequately provided for. Moreover, we believe that demining operations coordinated by the United Nations should be granted a mandate to continue even after the actual peace-keeping operation has ended.

Secondly, in carrying out demining tasks, we should concentrate on nourishing the indigenous capacity for safe, fast and effective mine-clearance in order to help affected countries help themselves in the long run. Ultimately, the primary responsibility for demining lies with the country affected. After all, complete demining will almost certainly require a longer time-frame than the mandate of peace-keeping missions can sustain. Before their time expires, however, United Nations peace-keepers can give affected countries a jump-start along the long road to recovery by helping them develop their own repository of demining expertise. This knowledge can then be continuously drawn upon, even after the "Blue Helmets" have returned home.

Efforts by peace-keepers to foster indigenous demining capacity will have to include the following steps: land-mine assessment, followed by training in mine-awareness; education and training in mine-clearance; and finally, transition of authority to the host Government. The transfer of demining technology and the provision of essential equipment are clearly no less important steps. In this regard, my delegation wishes to point to the valiant work of the Cambodia Mine Action Centre (CMAC) as a useful model. Founded by the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) in 1992, CMAC was later reconstituted as an official organ of the Cambodian Government upon UNTAC's withdrawal. The CMAC demining programme is making extraordinary progress through the training of local deminers and such innovative concepts as a village demining programme involving selected village residents.

Thirdly, in addition to peace-keeping missions, we should strengthen the capacity and resources of the United Nations to provide rapid demining assistance on an ad hoc basis, whenever the need arises. To this end, it would be worthwhile to further explore how we can strengthen the United Nations demining standby capacity programme and expand the United Nations Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine-clearance. In this vein, my delegation wishes to note that the Government of the Republic of Korea has been a recent contributor to the Fund.

No country can ignore the horrendous magnitude of the land-mine problem. It has become a global crisis warranting a global response. It is only appropriate, therefore, that the United Nations should have played a major role in seeking a solution. The United Nations should continue to lead us in the quest for a comprehensive answer to this global crisis. My delegation firmly believes that we will be able to find such an answer only when the whole spectrum of land-mine problems, ranging from humanitarian concerns to disarmament imperatives is fully addressed.

In tandem with many other ongoing efforts by the international community towards the eventual eradication of this scourge, United Nations peace-keeping operations give us the opportunity to contribute to the management of a more immediate danger by actively cultivating the ability of stricken nations to clear already-laid land-mines. We must help mine-ridden nations, particularly those in the developing world, help themselves in shaking off this danger, so that civilians can once again farm their fields and walk the roads of their countries without fear.

I wish finally to take this opportunity to express my delegation's sincere thanks to you, Mr. President, for having taken the initiative to organize this open meeting devoted to the discussion of the issue of demining in the context of peace-keeping, and for your Government's outstanding contribution towards the resolution of this issue.

The President

I thank the representative of the Republic of Korea for the words of appreciation he addressed to my Government.

Mr. Martínez Blanco (Honduras)

The international community has come to see the presence of land-mines and other unexploded munitions in various parts of the world as an enormous humanitarian problem with serious economic and social consequences for the populations of the countries facing these threats, which prevent refugees and displaced persons from returning to their homes and hamper humanitarian programmes and operations, national-reconstruction activities and economic development.

Every year, thousands of people die or are maimed by the explosion of uncleared land-mines. Every day, tens of millions of mines in 65 countries threaten life and limb, especially of the rural population and of children. With increasing frequency, owing to the presence of land-mines, it is hardly possible to deliver humanitarian assistance to those affected by armed conflicts, and in the worst of cases it is halted altogether. More and more, the continued manufacture and export of mines is worsening humanitarian crises and makes it urgently necessary that the international community step up mine-clearance activities and its support for national demining arrangements, and agree on a total ban on anti-personnel mines.

This is a worldwide crisis, and my delegation hails the endeavours of the United Nations through the Department of Humanitarian Affairs, the Department of Peace-keeping Operations, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the United Nations Children's Fund and other agencies and programmes. We cannot fail also to acknowledge the active work of the International Committee of the Red Cross in the treatment and rehabilitation of the wounded, as well as the informational activities of numerous non-governmental organizations concerning the dangers posed by unexploded land-mines.

In his "An Agenda for Peace" and his Agenda for Development, the Secretary-General has laid stress on the fundamental relationship between peace and development. It is a fact that disputes and armed conflicts frequently stem from poor economic and social conditions; it is also a fact that unless the foundations for economic and social development are laid before a conflict is brought to a formal conclusion, peace will be unable to take root. Thus, efforts towards peace and security must not only focus on humanitarian relief but must also include activities that promote development.

This approach is clearly reflected in the multidimensional nature of peace-keeping operations carried out by the United Nations since 1989. Current peace-keeping operations include not only military and humanitarian relief components, but also elements for maintaining law and order, safeguarding human rights, strengthening political institutions, making possible the return of refugees and displaced persons, holding free and fair elections, and helping rebuild the national infrastructure and carry out economic and social development projects; they also include an element that has come to be very important in the discharge of peace-keeping mandates: mine-clearance.

The inclusion of this element among the functions of peace-keeping operations needs no justification. Without mine-clearance, social and economic stability cannot be restored after armed conflicts. Without mine-clearance, agriculture cannot resume, the infrastructure providing basic services cannot be repaired, transportation is impossible, the delivery of humanitarian assistance is interrupted, and refugees and displaced persons cannot return home. In other words, without mine-clearance the consolidation of peace in a nation after a conflict cannot occur.

On the basis of the experiences of Cambodia, Somalia, Mozambique, Angola, Afghanistan and Bosnia and Herzegovina, the importance of having peace-keeping forces actively participate in mine-clearance programmes as part of their mandates has been recognized, because this contributes to the establishment of a safe environment and, most importantly, helps create or improve national mine-clearance capacities, which is central to the assistance provided by the United Nations in this field.

My delegation strongly supports the inclusion of this element in peace-keeping operations. At the same time, we emphasize that demining alone does not constitute a comprehensive solution to all the problems relating to land-mines. The only possible solution remains their total eradication. How many more lives must be lost? How many more people must be maimed before the international community completely bans the production, stockpiling, use and export of these death-dealing devices? When will there be consensus among Governments that a ban is the only solution to this tremendous humanitarian crisis? For all those whose lives have already been destroyed by mines, there are no answers. It is already too late.

Mr. Fedotov (Russia)

With the end of the cold war and the emergence of a whole range of conflicts spawned by the new instability, the international community is faced with a gamut of problems in demining and in overcoming the dangerous consequences of mines, which are hampering both the socio-economic reconstruction of countries affected by conflicts and the achievement of solutions to their numerous humanitarian problems.

Unexploded land-mines, which have been laid in abundance by parties to regional conflicts, continue to take the lives of thousands of people even after relative stability has been achieved. The countries that have suffered most in this respect are Angola, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Mozambique, Rwanda, Somalia and the former Yugoslavia. Mines have been used extensively in the conflict in Abkhazia, in the Republic of Georgia.

The problem of land-mines is particularly critical in the context of carrying out United Nations peace-keeping operations: United Nations forces are often deployed in places where mines continue to pose a serious threat, and quite a few United Nations peace-keepers are killed or maimed by mines. The widespread profusion of mines seriously hinders the movement of United Nations troops, demobilization, the escorting of humanitarian convoys and so on. In addition, the actual ability of the United Nations to effectively carry out its peace-keeping functions is jeopardized.

Similarly, the threat of mines does not allow the operational activities of humanitarian missions to be carried out as necessary. Particularly affected in this way are such United Nations specialized agencies as the World Food Programme, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). We are convinced of the urgency of intensifying the international community's efforts to more fully realize United Nations potential for demining in zones of regional conflict.

To an increasing extent, demining is becoming an essential part of peace-keeping operations. When required, it should be included, as it is already being included, in the mandate of the relevant United Nations missions. Alternatively, machinery should be provided for exploiting the potential of regional and non-governmental organizations in this respect.

One key issue, in our view, is the coordination of the activities of various United Nations bodies and the full use of their knowledge and resources in the implementation of demining programmes, both during United Nations peace-keeping operations and at the stage of post-conflict reconstruction. We see this as a good reason for the Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA) of the United Nations Secretariat to keep its role as a centre for the coordination of programmes to render assistance in demining.

Here we would be grateful to the United Nations Secretariat for clarification as to the division of functions between the Department of Peace-Keeping Operations (DPKO) and the DHA; their correlation and interaction. It might be a good idea for an informal paper on this subject to be prepared for Member States. We hope that the special Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine Clearance, established by the Secretary-General, will enjoy more considerable resources than it does today and will be able to play a more active and leading role in financing programmes aimed at scientific and research work in demining, in the training of experts and specialists and in educating populations regarding safety measures to decrease the dangers of mines.

It is also important that the coordinating role of the United Nations in rendering technical assistance and in organizing national potential to implement demining locally be strengthened. Fruitful interaction has been established between the United Nations, regional organizations and individual States. We note with satisfaction the drafting in the United Nations of standard rules for the conduct of demining operations. We also consider important the establishment of a central database on questions of demining, to which all information on problems of land-mines would be channelled. Work is now under way in the Russian Federation to conclude the special federal programme on demining on the basis of the relevant programmes of individual regions affected by the problem of mines. For us, interactions with the United Nations, exchanging experience and receiving technical assistance are matters of practical importance. In the course of the implementation of peace-keeping operations on the territory of the States of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), complex and expensive problems are being solved in demining. In the zone of the Abkhaz conflict alone, CIS peace-keepers have neutralized more than 21,000 explosive objects. The increasing danger of mines in the zone of the Abkhaz conflict and the exacerbation of this conflict, since March of this year, have affected the security conditions of the local populations, refugees and displaced persons, as well as that of the personnel of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG). This is seriously hampering peace-keepers of the United Nations and of the CIS in the implementation of their mandates. We have proposals to resolve this problem, which we are now discussing with the United Nations Secretariat.

We view the question of a total ban on anti-personnel mines, which has been raised by several delegations, as a subject for separate and substantive consideration and as is well known, it is being dealt with in other formats.

We believe that the international community's position on this question has been given form in the new version of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II) to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects. Work on that was concluded on 3 May of this year in Geneva.

On the basis that progress towards a full ban on anti-personnel mines is possible only through the emergence of real alternatives to that type of weapon, the Protocol raises the idea of an extremely far-ranging task; the implementation within a reasonable time-frame of a switch to more predictable anti-personnel mines. There is the risk that a ban on the production of anti-personnel mines, under present conditions, would lead to the flourishing of an illegal mine trade, which then might be capable of offering simplified -- and therefore more barbarous -- mine weapons.

We believe that the implementation of the provisions of that Protocol and its full implementation -- and by as broad a group of countries as possible -- would significantly diminish the problems of demining and would create more reliable protection from the danger of mines, including during peace-keeping operations.

Mr. Nkgowe (Botswana)

My delegation is grateful to you, Mr. President, for the timely initiative you have taken in choosing this very important subject for our orientation debate today. Anti-personnel mines are the scourge of human society in most, if not all, conflict situations. They are a cowardly and indiscriminate instrument of war. They mercilessly kill and main their victims without warning and without determining whether they are friendly or enemy forces, unsuspecting civilian population or United Nations peace-keepers. Moreover, land-mines remain hidden and ready to claim new victims long after war has ended. Thus, land-mines have a long-lasting and traumatic psychological impact on whole populations.

The United Nations is always faced with the task of facilitating the return and resettlement of refugees and displaced persons in every peace-keeping operation. Land-mines are, however, an impediment to this process. Travelling by road to return home becomes a nightmare because of the omnipresence of land-mines. The resumption of economic activity for subsistence purposes becomes a perilous exercise. The land cannot be tilled because it is already planted with these invisible death traps. In short, all economic activity literally comes to a standstill as the roads and pathways to cities, villages, fields and watering points become impassable due to land-mines. This is the harsh reality that innocent victims of armed conflicts have to contend with long after the torturous ordeal of war has supposedly come to an end. Obviously, this deeply frustrates the hopes and aspirations of civilian populations that want nothing but the rebuilding of their shattered lives in a peaceful atmosphere free from the deleterious effects of war.

It is evident from these comments that land-mines are a menace to human life during and long after conflict situations. The international community must find effective ways of preventing conflicts, as they result in the laying of the diabolical land-mines. Where a conflict erupts, every effort must first be made to raise awareness about land-mines, and all mine-producing and mine-exporting countries should restrict the sale of these weapons to the belligerents.

Secondly, the response to a conflict that proves not amenable to preventive measures must be an automatic land-mine embargo.

Thirdly, it is not in the long-term interests of any side in a conflict to lay mines, because, much as the psychology of war obviously dictates inflicting maximum destruction on the enemy by whatever means available, land-mines are too costly to live with after war, in both human and material terms. The warring parties must therefore always appreciate that they will still have a country to share and must live together as neighbours at the end of conflict, and that land-mines do not allow the wounds of war to heal easily and quickly.

Fourthly, and most importantly for today's debate, when a cease-fire has been established or a decision has been reached to establish a peace-keeping mission, the mandate of such an operation must automatically include demining at the top of its agenda, as has already been done in some cases.

My delegation believes that because land-mines always exacerbate the already adverse humanitarian situation in any conflict, demining should always be given top priority in every peace-keeping operation. It is important that the demobilization of the combatants and the promotion of national reconciliation should go hand in hand with demining in order to facilitate the early return of civilians to their homes and to productive lives.

Military rules and procedures dictate that belligerents should mark and map their minefields. Experience has, however, shown that this never happens, and where some limited effort has been made to this end, the maps have not proved accurate enough to be of any meaningful use or assistance in the demining exercise.

While it may seem an exercise in futility to expect the warring parties to remember their obligations to faithfully mark and map their minefields, there is at present no alternative but to insist that they should do so without fail so that the process of demining can be performed with ease during a peace-keeping mission. The international community should not abandon the search for the most practical ways of dealing with land-mines, including considering instituting appropriate measures under international humanitarian law to ensure such compliance. Such measures could also act as a deterrent against the laying of mines if there were clear penalties for non-adherence to the applicable rules. This would indeed facilitate the speed with which demining could be carried out in any United Nations peace-keeping operation and thus afford the peace-keeping mission an opportunity to carry out its mandate more effectively.

All this presupposes the existence of a standardized mine-clearance technology. My delegation deeply appreciates the contributions of those countries that have always been ready to provide assistance in the field of demining technology. It is clear, however, that the demining exercise is not often carried out with the anticipated speed or the desired result, due to the lack of adequate capacity and the diversity of mine-clearance technologies. It goes without saying, therefore, that there is a need to develop an advanced mine-clearance capability and technology, and the United Nations system has an important coordinating role to play in this area, for the good of all humanity.

It is a firmly held view of my delegation that the scourge of land-mines will always be with us even if we develop the best mine-clearance technology. The ultimate solution to the menace presented by land-mines lies in the complete prohibition of the production and use of these horrendous devices of war. Mine-producing countries should be urged not only to halt the production of existing models, but also to halt the development of so-called alternatives, such as remotely delivered and self-destructive mines.

There is no doubt that war has always been a living reality in the history of human civilization and existence. It is a fact that there have always been rules and regulations governing the conduct of those who made war an industry, even in medieval times. It is therefore even more compelling for us, in the last few years of the twentieth century, to curb, prohibit and ultimately rid the world of these tools of war which inflict permanent pain on the human conscience.

Mr. Ladsous (France)

May I at the outset welcome the initiative that you, Mr. President, have taken in organizing this debate.

At the end of a year which will have seen the adoption of General Assembly resolution 50/70 -- which sets the goal of the final elimination of anti-personnel mines -- and the conclusion of work of the first Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons, it was indeed particularly timely for the Council to take up the question of demining in the context of United Nations peace-keeping operations.

With strict respect for the competences of the Security Council, the General Assembly, the specialized agencies and the programmes of our Organization, as well as of the disarmament forums, the international community must deal with this question in all of its aspects: disarmament, development and, of course, humanitarian aspects.

Security Council action in this area must be seen against the background of the efforts of the international community to eliminate land-mines and humanitarian interventions to restrict the effects of this scourge.

For France, the objectives are to outlaw and totally eliminate anti-personnel mines, and my country's commitment to these objectives is of long standing.

On 9 February 1993, France requested the Secretary-General to convene the Review Conference for the 1980 Convention in the very firm hope that this would lead to a substantive review of the provisions of Protocol II of the Convention.

The first Review Conference ended last May. The results achieved, even if they did not fully meet France's expectations, nevertheless represent significant progress. Substantial gains have been made, despite certain shortcomings, but this is but one stage, and the machinery adopted for annual consultations and the commitment to convene another review conference in five years both attest to the fact that States Parties to the Convention wish to continue to work together.

France considers that the efforts to put an end to the scourge of anti-personnel mines will take on full significance only through the adoption of a verifiable international agreement on the total elimination of these mines.

France's commitment to this objective is tangible and, as proof, I cite the restrictions my country has imposed on itself regarding, first of all, the export of anti-personnel mines. In 1993 France became one of the first countries to proclaim a complete moratorium. This unilateral decision covers all types of anti-personnel mines and all destinations.

In addition, France decided last September to adopt a moratorium on the production of all categories of anti-personnel mines. At the same time, it committed itself to the destruction of its stockpiles. It goes without saying that my country urges all States to join it in that decision.

We are aware of the unfortunate figures on the numbers of land-mines laid throughout the world and the number of victims killed or maimed each year by these devices. This shows a very urgent humanitarian need.

France therefore provides considerable assistance to demining activities. In our national capacity or within the framework of United Nations peace-keeping operations, we have sent demining teams and demining training teams to Lebanon, Pakistan -- operation Salam in 1989 -- Somalia, Cambodia, Mozambique and the former Yugoslavia. My country is now participating in operations in Angola where, since its establishment, 12 instructors have been working at the demining school of the United Nations Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM III).

I should like to take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to all the specialized personnel who, with great courage, have taken on a dangerous, thankless but very necessary task. I should like to mention here the efforts made by the European Union in demining and the contributions of States to the United Nations Voluntary Trust Fund. The Permanent Representative of Ireland will, in the name of the European Union, take up these points in a statement with which the French delegation fully associates itself.

Given that the negotiation of universal and binding disarmament instruments and humanitarian intervention are two indispensable areas of action for the eradication of anti-personnel mines, the Council is, in the conduct of peace-keeping operations, confronted every day with the problems posed by mines. Recent debates during the renewal of the mandates of UNAVEM III or of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) have shown that the existence of mined areas and the laying of new mines directly affect the implementation of the mandates of the United Nations forces.

It is therefore important to better integrate questions linked to mines with all stages of the definition and implementation of the mandates of United Nations forces, and I shall offer here only the following few guidelines. First, we should make the contingents of United Nations forces and, obviously, populations more aware of the mine problem. Secondly, we should set priorities for carrying out demining activities and make them consistent with the other objectives of the mandates given to United Nations personnel. Thirdly, we should combine programmes for mine elimination and the establishment of national capacity for demining in countries where peace-keeping operations are being carried out. Finally, we should obviously ensure the security of personnel through the provision of protective vehicles and appropriate means of transportation.

The French delegation, in any case, is very receptive to all suggestions put forward during this debate, in its desire to have a better grasp of the problem of mines in defining the mandates that we give to the Blue Helmets.

Let us not forget that mines are a major obstacle to development. The French delegation would like to reaffirm its determination to act to outlaw anti-personnel mines, and it urges the greatest possible number of countries to join it in achieving this great objective.

Mr. Matuszewski (Poland)

Allow me to begin by thanking you, Mr. President, for the timely introduction of the issue of demining in the context of peace-keeping operations into the agenda of the Security Council.

The problem of mines continues to worry all of us. The efforts to resolve it have not yet produced satisfactory results. I refer in particular to the negotiations on a multilateral agreement concerning the ban on the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel land-mines. Poland is in favour of a resumption of those negotiations. Poland is on the record as supporting an early entry into force of Geneva Protocol II to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons. In accordance with the provisions of the resolutions of the General Assembly calling for a moratorium on the export of anti-personnel land-mines, the Government of my country decided to introduce such a measure. The production of mines has been discontinued since the mid-eighties.

In approaching the problem of mines, we are greatly encouraged to find ourselves among many other like-minded countries. We favour an integrated approach to this issue. We are pleased to observe that this is the line followed by the United Nations. In the same context, my delegation welcomes the seven-point action programme on anti-personnel mines presented recently by Mr. Klaus Kinkel, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany.

We have devoted much attention to the problem of mines in its global dimension because of its obvious importance to the issue we are considering today: the peace-keeping context of demining.

Mines are indiscriminate by nature. They are designed to make people -- military personnel and civilians alike -- suffer. The United Nations experience indicates that when it comes to civil wars, to conflicts within States -- the environment that prevails in contemporary peace-keeping operations -- mines cease to be mere combat tools. They are targeted against civilian populations and are meant to spread terror and hopelessness. Their effects go far beyond the battlefield itself. They not only bring unspeakable suffering to people and adversely affect the humanitarian efforts of the international community, they are also directed against post-conflict peace-building and the prospects for rehabilitation of various segments of life in war-stricken countries.

Mines could seriously limit the operational potential of United Nations peace-keeping forces leading, at times, to the complete cessation of one or another of their mandated activities.

Allow me to address briefly the possible ways of dealing with the problem of mines in the context of peace-keeping operations.

First, the Polish delegation believes that while discussing the establishment of new peace-keeping operations or reviewing the mandates of existing ones, we have to take the issue of mines into consideration. In several ongoing peace-keeping operations demining is already a matter of routine. Polish contingents, among others, are known for having gained considerable expertise in this respect. We are therefore in a position to assess how demining influences the operations' activities. When appropriate and necessary, we should staff peace-keeping operations properly and equip them with technical and financial resources for demining. This in no way releases the parties to the conflict from their responsibility for mine clearance. On the contrary, one might think about making it even clearer by, for instance, including demining clauses in the agreements between the parties to conflict.

We are in favour of intensifying the educational efforts of the United Nations and the further development of training and mine-awareness programmes. We also share the opinion of those who point out the necessity of making the parties to conflicts follow to the letter the provisions of international law. I refer in particular to the documentation of minefields and the protection of the civilian population.

We are discussing a problem which is extremely complex. There is no part of United Nations work that is not affected in one way or another by the mine-infested environment in different regions of the world which urgently need the assistance of the international community.

We hope that today's debate will give new momentum to the international efforts aimed at resolving the growing problem of mines, and in particular to its peace-keeping dimension.

Those are the Polish delegation's comments, made in addition to the statement to be delivered on behalf of the European Union, with which Poland associates itself.

Mr. Elaraby (Egypt)

Germany's proposal for a public debate on land-mines is, in Egypt's view, a very important initiative that deserves our full support. In this regard I would like to commend the action programme presented by Mr. Klaus Kinkel, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany.

Mines are an international problem, afflicting approximately 65 countries, on whose territories are found 85 million to 100 million mines from wars and conflicts that in some cases have ended. This burdensome legacy not only brings suffering to people but also poses a real obstacle to economic development in a number of countries.

We welcome the fact that United Nations peace-keeping operations now have a mine-clearance unit in the field, where Department of Humanitarian Affairs personnel assist the Governments of concerned States to clear the mines obstructing the work of administrative and economic institutions to enable them to run more smoothly and to facilitate the return of refugees and displaced persons.

We view the problem from a comprehensive perspective because the phenomenon of mines preceded by several decades the concept of peace-keeping as it is currently understood. The problem began during the First World War and was aggravated during the Second World War, as well as during other regional wars in various countries throughout the world. These mines are present in countries which face widespread economic problems, which are compounded by the presence of mines and the high cost of clearance, in addition to the drain on technical and financial resources.

In our view there are two approaches to the problem of mines. The first is remedial, and includes the need to intensify international efforts to clear the huge numbers of mines planted during earlier conflicts. The second is preventive, and includes the measures called for by some countries: restrictions on the circulation and use of mines to curb their proliferation, the rate of which far exceeds that of mine clearance.

I take this opportunity to illustrate the first approach to the problem with a real model -- the difficult experience which Egypt is going through. Egypt is one of those countries with a great many mines on its territory, especially in the Western Desert, in the area of El Alamein, west of Alexandria, which was a theatre for widespread military operations in one of the great battles of the Second World War. In addition, there are the mines remaining from four Arab-Israeli wars, particularly in the Sinai peninsula.

I am not exaggerating the proportions of this problem in saying that there are about 22 million mines on Egyptian territory: approximately one mine for every three citizens. These mines represent a real and great threat to the security, health and lives of innocent civilians and obstruct the efforts for economic and human development in these regions, which we are trying to exploit for tourism and other economic ends. They also represent a major obstacle to Egypt's efforts in creating an environment conducive to the absorption of population growth in the long and medium term.

From 1981 to 1991 the Egyptian Government made a great effort, which cost tens of millions of dollars. This led to the clearance of about 924 square kilometres, where 11 million mines were cleared. However, it is difficult, unacceptable and unreasonable that Egypt alone should bear the effort and great cost of clearing all the mines, which were not planted by Egyptians and were not used for any Egyptian interests.

I take this opportunity to remind the countries responsible for the proliferation of these mines of their legal, historic, moral and material responsibility, and I call upon the international community, particularly the countries that laid these mines, to provide the technical and financial assistance necessary for mine clearance.

Egypt has raised this subject before in a number of forums. In this connection, I would like to refer to the Final Declaration of the Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, held in Geneva last May. In this Declaration, there is a paragraph on the role of the countries that lay mines:

(spoke in English):

"Recognizing the important role that the international community, particularly States involved in the deployment of mines, can play in assisting in mine-clearance in affected countries..." (CCW/CONF.I/16/(Part I), annex C, eighth para.)

(spoke in Arabic):

This paragraph should be interpreted as an affirmation of the responsibility of countries that lay mines to clear them. Despite the fact that United Nations documents acknowledge that these mines are present in great numbers on Egyptian territory, Egypt, is not one of the countries benefiting from the United Nations mine action programme, which is coordinated by the Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA) in the United Nations. We consider that the absence of the United Nations mine action programme from the Egyptian territories is an unwarranted exception and does not comply with the major objectives of DHA efforts in the field of mine clearance.

I move now to the second aspect of the problem, the preventive aspect, which has to do with the constant manufacture of mines and their absorption by new markets. It is estimated that the number of new mines laid annually is 20 times as great as the number of mines cleared. The United Nations Convention on Conventional Weapons has dealt with mines to reach a final solution: the destruction of all mines. Egypt agrees with that ultimate and humanitarian objective of the Convention. However, there are certain considerations, particularly security considerations, for a number of countries, as well as the fact that all weapons, from light weapons to nuclear weapons, are considered inhumane. There are about 40 countries that agree on the necessity of prohibiting and outlawing mines. However, there are a number of other countries, particularly developing countries, that consider the responsible and legitimate use of mines an inexpensive way to protect their borders, their regional security and their strategic interests. Those countries do not own any other more advanced, less costly technological alternatives to take the place of mines.

In this context, there are several proposals. The developed countries with modern technology could provide the necessary assistance in technology transfer to developing countries so that they could develop mine production, limited to self-destructive land-mines, or land-mines rendered ineffective following a certain period of time -- the so-called smart mines, which the developed countries excluded from the Convention on the prohibition of mine production. Certainly, in our modern world there should be no discrimination in favour of developed countries that own this kind of technology and manufacture mines at a time when the ban is applied only to developing countries that do not have appropriate alternatives to protect their security interests.

Before concluding, I would like to express our appreciation for the activities of DHA and peace-keeping operations in general in the field of mine-clearance. I would like to call for international support for United Nations efforts in this field through the provision of financial resources, technical expertise, modern technology and through considering the issue of mine-clearance in a comprehensive framework that includes social, economic and humanitarian dimensions, as well as all other dimensions necessary for the protection of the security of all countries.

Mr. Somavía (Chile)

One of the greatest tragedies of our time is the fact that in most of the conflicts that appear on the Security Council agenda the victims are civilians -- innocent, defenceless civilians. Very often military troops of the factions or groups in conflict kill civilians of the opposing side and define their success in terms of civilian deaths. Frankly, it would be better for the purposes of world peace for those who give orders -- the armed sectors of these factions -- to have the courage to confront each other. But no, they are considered heroes because they kill civilians.

Why am I beginning my statement with this comment? It is precisely because anti-personnel land-mines are among the deadliest instruments, and experience demonstrates that they particularly affect civilian populations. A land-mine is an anonymous weapon, secretly placed in the hope that someone will inadvertently step on it. As stated by the Secretary-General in his statement before the International Meeting on Mine Clearance, held in Geneva in July 1995, of concern here are real weapons of mass destruction and of perverse and insidious method, ravaging civilian populations indiscriminately, frequently long after the conflicts have concluded, as we have heard in many statements this morning. The conflict ends; the mines remain.

We are discussing this issue on the understanding that, generally, it is a part of the disarmament agenda and that promotion of and agreement on necessary measures at the international level fall within the purview of the General Assembly. We are discussing today the implications for the Security Council.

We are pleased that for some time the international community has increasingly been showing its concern over anti-personnel land-mines. The figures that we have heard this morning are truly astounding: almost 70 countries throughout the world are afflicted by this scourge; 110 million mines lie planted in various parts of the world; available stocks number 100 million; 2 million to 5 million mines are laid annually, and only 100,000 are removed. There are 360 different types of anti-personnel mines in use, and 100 companies in the world produce these weapons in 55 countries. It is truly a massive, global phenomenon that falls within the purview of collective responsibility. No one country in particular can be singled out, as this is occurring in all parts of the world in many companies in a large number of countries. That is why it is important that the United Nations, and in this case the Security Council, deal with these issues.

The international community's concern and its wish to address this problem are reflected in many proposals inspired by the Secretary-General's "An Agenda for Peace" and in the important initiatives of a number of countries as noted earlier by the representative of the United States.

The first proposal is a moratorium on the export of these weapons; many countries have unilaterally declared such moratoriums. In this connection, I recall that Chile has maintained a unilateral moratorium on the manufacture and export of anti-personnel mines for more than a decade, long predating the moratorium endorsed by the General Assembly.

The second was the convening of the Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects. Failing the complete and permanent elimination of anti-personnel mines, the Conference sought at least to restrict and monitor the use of such weapons with a view to reducing their indiscriminate effects. My country generally supports instruments of humanitarian law, and, as we know, the Conference, the first of its kind, was intended to bolster the humanitarian aims of Protocol II on the use of anti-personnel mines. That intention, unfortunately, was not fully realized owing to deep-seated differences on the scope, application and other aspects of the Convention.

Chile has participated in the ongoing consideration of this subject in the United Nations, and has supported relevant proposals in the General Assembly. We have participated in demining operations in Nicaragua and El Salvador and have been invited to participate in similar operations in other Central American countries. We broadly support demining programmes adopted in the regional framework of the Organization of American States (OAS), most recently the OAS resolution on support for demining in Central America, adopted at the recent OAS General Assembly session in Panama. We have also been invited to participate in demining activities in Angola.

The third proposal by which the international community has expressed its growing concern at the scourge of land-mines was the International Meeting on Mine Clearance convened by the Secretary-General in compliance with General Assembly resolution 49/215 of 23 December 1994. It was aimed at bringing together experts and possible donors with a view to promoting United Nations endeavours and international cooperation in this area. Chile participated in that important international meeting and is pleased that it achieved success and constituted a historic landmark in the international community's activities to address the land-mine crisis.

I mentioned these three elements, which were discussed outside the Security Council, because they have a direct impact on the Council's work. I do not want to repeat the other practical proposals made in the course of our debate this morning by other representatives, relating to such areas as the return of refugees, the restoration of agriculture, the rebuilding of roads, the sharing of demining technology and the development of national capabilities. I would suggest that following this debate, which has attracted broad participation and during which we shall hear many non-members of the Security Council, the President could summarize the proposals; this would enable the Council to improve its consideration of the item, which is the point of this meeting.

I wish in conclusion to thank you, Mr. President, and the German delegation for having convened a formal meeting to consider this item; this enables us to give great political impetus to the process of demining, particularly in the context of peace-keeping operations, which fall within the mandate of the Security Council.

The elements requiring further effort, study, coordination and political will are many. With this meeting the Council sends a clear signal about the relevance of the item, an item to which my country attaches the greatest importance, both within the Security Council and in the General Assembly.

The President

I thank the representative of Chile for the kind words he addressed to me.

Sir John Weston (United Kingdom)

The United Kingdom welcomes this open debate because this is an important subject which needs to be discussed. However, we strongly believe that today's debate should focus on demining in the context of United Nations peace-keeping operations, as the President himself emphasized at the outset. The Security Council is not the forum for the discussion of general land-mine issues. There will be a number of opportunities for that in the coming months, such as the meetings of the First Committee during the fifty-first session of the General Assembly and the Ottawa Conference in October.

But just to be quite clear on this, let me state that the United Kingdom supports a total ban on anti-personnel land-mines. We have announced that we shall destroy almost half our stocks as soon as possible, without replacement, and we have recommitted ourselves publicly to a complete ban on exports of anti-personnel land-mines.

The United Kingdom is committed to reducing the danger that anti-personnel land-mines pose for civilians and those who serve in peace-keeping operations throughout the world. It is clear that substantial support for humanitarian demining efforts continues to be essential. The United Kingdom is one of the largest contributors to these efforts. Since 1993 we have donated, bilaterally and through the European Union, a total of £17.5 million to humanitarian mine clearance and mine awareness programmes.

We fully support the United Nations mine clearance policy, which is based on the fundamental principle that the primary responsibility for taking action must lie with the host country and not, therefore, with an individual peace-keeping operation. We also support the role of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs in providing assistance and training to build up the host country's capabilities and to take on demining operations. But we believe that the United Nations must draw a clear distinction between mine clearance for the operational needs of peace-keeping operations, which is the responsibility of the Department of Peace-keeping Operations, and other humanitarian demining requirements, which fall under the responsibility of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs. It is also important to distinguish between mine clearance and activities such as training and mine awareness. The difficulties encountered in establishing viable national solutions to mine pollution in countries such as Angola and Cambodia resulted, in part, from the ambiguities in mandates between peace-keepers and humanitarian agencies.

We question therefore whether the Department of Peace-keeping Operations should be the focus for humanitarian mine clearance and mine awareness, given the coordinating role now undertaken by the Mine Clearance and Policy Unit of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs. It is clear that there should be close coordination between the two organizations, but their tasks are not the same.

The United Kingdom armed forces have undertaken mine clearance training for the United Nations in countries such as Pakistan and Cambodia. But, in common with the forces of a number of other European nations, they undertake mine clearance work only where it is necessary for the success of the military operation in hand: their aim is to clear sufficient mines to allow them to complete their mission. Humanitarian demining, on the other hand, requires the methodical removal of all mines in a given area. It seeks to reduce risks to civilians, enables local populations to become more self-sufficient, helps the displaced to resettle, and promotes the resumption of normal development. Responsibility for establishing such humanitarian clearance programmes must, in our view, remain with the humanitarian and development agencies, under the overall guidance of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs.

The military undoubtedly has a valuable contribution to make to mine clearance, but the precise nature of this contribution needs to be defined at the outset of a particular peace-keeping operation. Demining as undertaken by the military may not be the most cost-effective means of humanitarian land-mine clearance, and military clearance standards and techniques may not be compatible with the humanitarian standards recommended by the Department of Humanitarian Affairs. Humanitarian mine clearance is a slow, painstaking and methodical process. There are many non-governmental organizations and private companies which, under the coordination of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs, are better suited to the task of humanitarian demining.

Wherever there is a serious mine threat to United Nations peace-keepers, adequate detection, clearance and protection capabilities must be urgently provided to enable them to fulfil their mandate. But not all United Nations peace-keeping operations face similar mine threats. Demining might not always be necessary, and in some circumstances the premature removal of long-established minefields might even add to instability. But in all cases it is essential that the parties to a conflict should guarantee that they will desist from further mine-laying once a peace-keeping operation is established.

We understand that some speakers today will suggest that there is a case for the establishment of a demining stand-by force. For our part, we rather question this. The international community is normally aware in advance of the need for mine-clearance operations, which are usually undertaken only when a conflict is over. Donor countries are unlikely, in our view, to be willing to designate equipment or facilities which, if they are to be available at short notice, would sit idle in the meantime. The United Kingdom would not be able to put mine-clearance trainers on permanent stand-by, but we do remain ready to consider each request on its merits.

During his statement, my colleague the Ambassador of Egypt referred to the problem of Second World War minefields in the Western Desert. The United Kingdom has handed over to the Egyptian Government all maps and other information in our possession about Second World War minefields in Egypt. When he visited Egypt in November 1995, Mr. Rifkind, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, offered our assistance in clearing Second World War land-mines. As a result of subsequent discussions, we have provided a substantial package of assistance which includes mine detectors.

Finally let me thank you, Mr. President, for giving us the opportunity to discuss this important issue. We hope that what we and others have to say today will provide food for thought for the Department of Humanitarian Affairs and the Department of Peace-Keeping Operations. The humanitarian disasters caused by the indiscriminate and irresponsible use of land-mines are, of course, of concern to us all. This problem fully deserves the increased attention of the international community, and the United Kingdom is committed to ensuring that we address these issues urgently and effectively.

Mr. Lopes Cabral (Guinea-Bissau)

Allow me first of all to thank you, Mr. President, for the words of welcome which you kindly addressed to me and to my delegation.

The consolidation of peace as envisaged and conceptualized by the Secretary-General in his Agenda for Peace requires national reconciliation, among other things, for the socio-economic reconstruction of a country within the framework of peace-keeping operations. However, an indisputable prerequisite for any national reconciliation that is to be genuine and lasting, is the freedom of movement for individuals. The existence of anti-personnel mines in a country forms an obstacle to such movement of populations.

The problem of land-mines throughout the world has been further exacerbated during the past year. Continuing disturbances throughout the world and the outbreak of new conflicts have contributed to the proliferation of mines, with all the attendant long-term socio-economic consequences for civilian populations.

At this very moment, as I am speaking to the Council, a mine has perhaps just exploded in one of the more than 60 countries afflicted by this thing man has invented to achieve power and supremacy. It is a bitter heritage and painful memory of the recent past whose consequences continue to haunt the daily lives of millions of human beings.

Yes, somewhere in Afghanistan, in Angola, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, or in Cambodia, Croatia, El Salvador, Mozambique and Yemen -- the list is unfortunately too long to mention all the countries -- a child on the way to school has just, unfortunately, placed his small foot on a mine which, upon exploding, has transformed him into a human wreck. Another explosion has brutally taken the life of a mother seeking water or wood at a nearby river. Mines are exploding every day in many countries of the world, causing irreparable damage to the flesh of their hapless victims and stirring in our hearts a sadness, indeed, a boundless remorse.

In view of the seriousness of this scourge, the Security Council -- thanks, Mr. President, to your initiative -- is today focusing, as it should, on a serious problem, a genuine threat, by debating urgent and effective measures to take against a formidable enemy: the 118 million active mines scattered throughout more than 60 countries. What a tragedy!

The role of the United Nations, whose mission of peace today requires its full meaning through consensus on this priority issue, can only be effective and bear fruit if it is accompanied by the commitment to actively participate in the effort of national reconstruction. Peace, to blossom and become firmly rooted, must emerge from an improvement in the living conditions of the populations concerned.

This, fortunately, is something we have understood, as Members of the United Nations. And this concept, backed by our unanimous adherence, is taking the most diverse forms, manifesting itself everywhere in concrete and admirable ways, even in the most remote corners of the globe.

Demining operations today represent a formidable challenge for the United Nations soldiers of peace, true heroes deserving of the solemn tribute we pay them here for their courage and their spirit of sacrifice and selflessness.

Yes, alas, there are also victims among the Blue Helmets: more than 200 wounded and 60 dead -- too many victims, in truth, for mines are everywhere along roads, in villages, on bridges, on riverbanks, even in schools and hospitals.

What a tragedy, what a mad will of man to wish to destroy everything to ensure his supremacy. Mines remain active for decades and pose a lasting danger to the populations of the regions where they have been laid. There can be no more normal life for villagers once a mine has exploded nearby. Fear takes root in the cornfields and rice paddies. Parents are reluctant to send their children to school. The future is thus taken hostage.

The Republic of Guinea-Bissau considers that the use of all types of mines should be prohibited, banned. Their production and export should be forbidden. In addition, existing stocks should be destroyed. Moreover, even military experts consider the strategic military usefulness of mines to be more dubious than ever. We are dealing with a weapon that kills or leaves its victims mutilated for life, with no possibility of continuing to live normally. The innocent victims are innumerable and, unfortunately, include many children: there are too many amputated, blinded children, pointlessly martyred, nameless and unsung victims of futile and unending wars.

This shows how useful, important and timely our debate today is. The international community must be able to provide the legal instruments for a total ban on mines and the destruction of mines. Important steps have already been taken in this direction, and negotiation to this end must be pursued.

The success of the peace mission of the United Nations is at stake. Success will be incomplete if the effort for national reconstruction in the countries concerned does not enjoy the continued support of the international community, which must endow the United Nations, and in particular the soldiers of peace who are acting on behalf of all of us, with the essential tools to carry out their noble mission.

We must do everything in our power to put an end to this tragedy, for it constitutes a permanent threat to the lives and physical integrity of individuals. Objectives such as a total ban on anti-personnel mines, a complete ban on exports of these wretched devices and effective demining must be essential elements of the new joint action of the United Nations. Furthermore, we encourage the international community to undertake immediately to seek solutions to problems caused by anti-personnel land-mines, with a view to eliminating them for ever and putting an end to this global calamity that kills or permanently mutilates hundreds of victims each week in many countries of the world.

We hope that the International Meeting on Mine Clearance, convened by the General Assembly -- and held in Geneva from 5-7 July last year -- will stir a greater awareness of the various aspects of this problem and will move the international community to greater cooperation and stronger political and financial support for United Nations activities in this area.

The President

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Germany.

Statistics, as the popular saying goes, can be deceiving, but some, unfortunately, are full of sad truths. The casualty report of the United Nations Land-Mine Database is a 30-page-long document with an endless list made up mostly of United Nations peace-keepers and military or civilian personnel killed or wounded by land-mines. There have been 19 incidents in Cambodia since March 1996, 30 incidents in Angola since April 1995 and 97 in Bosnia and Herzegovina since April 1992, to name just three cases. Every figure represents an individual human being. Let me just recall the most recent deaths, those of two Zimbabwean peace-keepers, and the severe injuries suffered by two supervisors and a student in Angola. Even more sadly, conflicts in which mines are being used indiscriminately appear, despite all international efforts, to be on the increase. Has this everyday suffering by people who were sent out to maintain peace been given the attention it deserves? The answer, clearly, is no.

Moreover, land-mines, from a German perspective, are not far away. Let me remind you that 1.3 million mines were laid along the almost 1,400 kilometres of the former inner German Iron Curtain. The threat and the effect of those mines are still vivid in our memories.

That is why we are grateful that the German initiative to hold an open debate on the topic of demining in the context of United Nations peace-keeping met with the consent of Council Members. Previous statements have made it quite clear that this exchange of views is considered to be timely and necessary, and I am looking forward to the statements to follow. Let me seize this opportunity to fully align myself with the statement to be made by Ireland later today on behalf of the European Union.

It is generally agreed that mine clearance is necessary in order to provide security to United Nations missions and their personnel; and, in fact, mine clearance is already part of numerous United Nations peace-keeping operations. But more could and should be done to enhance United Nations capabilities in this area. Recent casualties among Blue Helmets and mission personnel in Angola and Bosnia -- which I mentioned earlier -- have again, in a tragic way, underlined the importance of this task. The United Nations Secretariat, in particular the demining unit of the Department of Peace-keeping Operations (DPKO), deserves to be commended for its achievements in this field, but it needs to be given even more support. In this respect, I would like to point to three areas.

First, as in peace-keeping in general, rapid deployment of demining personnel and equipment is of fundamental importance. Obviously, roads and crucial transport links should be cleared of mines before the main contingents of peace-keepers arrive, and not while they are already operating. Unfortunately, to date, a far too long deployment period of three to six months is the rule rather than the exception. Here, the creation of rapid reaction capabilities, possibly including a range of easily deployable demining stand-by facilities, could be a step forward. Such arrangements may benefit from the growing impact of mechanical mine-clearance systems, which have proven to be effective and efficient and will allow reductions in the number of personnel involved. But, first and foremost, Member States have to be willing to facilitate this task.

This brings me to my second point. Lessons learned from past peace-keeping operations, especially from the failures, have often highlighted the particular importance of clear and practical mandates. This also applies to the element of demining. Provisions for mine clearance have often been implicit -- contained, for example, in a request for freedom of movement. This makes the task of the Secretariat and other agencies rather more difficult. Such provisions deserve a mention of their own. They should be made an explicit element of mandates, wherever necessary, in order to give clear guidance to those who are meant to implement them.

A third area of possible improvement is the organization of work within the United Nations system, the rational delineation of responsibilities and clear hierarchies in decision-making. This should apply to responsibilities both within the United Nations Secretariat and with regard to other United Nations agencies involved in mine clearance. It is true that the operational task of the demining unit of DPKO is distinct from the humanitarian approach towards demining in the Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA); and yet one may be allowed to wonder whether some greater integration of demining activities aimed at United Nations personnel, on the one hand, and at local populations, on the other, combining the shorter- or longer-term perspectives, might not be a more efficient way of handling these issues.

Please allow me a little excursion in order to make my point even clearer: Can one really draw a clear fault-line between the one and the other? Does not operational demining, at least indirectly, also benefit the population of the area concerned? I do not intend to challenge the somewhat different natures of peace-keeping and so- called humanitarian demining; and, of course, compliance with the mandates remains the first priority. But it is my feeling that demining in peace-keeping should not dogmatically have to limit itself to the concerns of mission personnel. The welfare of the local people and their protection from the danger of land-mines should also be seen as a possible element of conflict resolution and, thus, a task of peace-keeping in a wider sense.

I am aware that here I have touched on the borderline between peace-keeping and what we are used to calling peace-building. We all agree, I trust, that successful peace-building and the restoration of conflict-ridden areas and war-torn societies often depend on effective mine clearance and mine-awareness programmes. The Secretary-General has, again and again, emphasized this context. As early as 1992, in his Agenda for Peace, he stated:

"De-mining should be emphasized in the terms of reference of peace-keeping operations and is crucially important in the restoration ... when peace-building is under way: agriculture cannot be revived without de-mining and the restoration of transport may require the laying of hard surface roads to prevent re-mining." (S/24111, para. 58)

I underline this with a telling example of our very recent Council discussions, this very morning: in Eastern Slavonia, the success of the United Nations Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES) and the recovery of the area are seriously hampered, a major reason being that the oil fields, a primary source of income for the region, are for the time being still infested with mines and cannot produce. The ensuing lack of local revenues means that there is no money available to pay the employees of the local administration -- a serious problem with which UNTAES has been struggling now for quite some time.

Moreover, lessons drawn from typical cases of peace-building, be they in Mozambique, Angola, Cambodia or Rwanda, show that peace-building activities usually cannot wait for the end of a conflict. In order to guarantee a smooth transition from peace-keeping to peace-building, but also in order to enhance the success of ongoing peace-keeping operations, elements of peace-building, or the lack thereof, have proven to be of crucial importance to the outcome of the operation. As a consequence, planning, possibly even implementation, of such elements should be taken into account from the very outset of a peace-keeping operation. For reasons mentioned earlier, this particularly applies to demining efforts. The international community must feel the obligation to start humanitarian mine clearance wherever and as early as possible. Any other approach would be cynical towards the victims.

This being said, we cannot but also focus on the other side of the equation. Thus far, I have talked about demining, the elimination of existing mines or minefields, within a peace-keeping context. The picture would be incomplete, however, without an attempt to also address the root causes of the problem -- the laying of mines and the re-mining, as stated by the Secretary-General.

We all know the terrifying statistics about the frequency and costs of eliminating mines compared to the frequency and costs of laying them. While striving for improved demining, we therefore have to increase our efforts to prevent the laying of new mines. While the international community should be ready to step up its assistance in mine-clearance and related programmes, the major responsibility lies with the parties that lay the mines. We cannot allow this simple fact to be forgotten.

This has a macro- and a micro-dimension. At the macro-level, efforts to reach an international ban on anti-personnel mines have to continue in other forums. The recent Review Conference for the United Nations Convention on Conventional Weapons fell short of this broader target. Germany, for one, relinquished totally and unconditionally the use of anti-personnel mines, as underlined again in the recent seven-point action programme on anti-personnel mines presented by our Foreign Minister, Mr. Kinkel.

But the issue also has a micro-dimension, more directly linked to concrete peace-keeping operations. It must be our interest, and in particular the interest of the Security Council, while a peace-keeping operation, including demining activities, is ongoing, that the parties to the conflict abstain from laying new mines. Mandates should attach additional importance to this element and contain provisions, wherever necessary, to prevent irresponsible behaviour on the part of the parties to the conflict. Affected countries must be ready to play a larger role in tackling the problem. Peace agreements should therefore contain provisions for the former warring parties to actively contribute to mine-clearance efforts. In order to facilitate this task, the international community should be ready to provide training personnel in order to turn former combatants into active deminers. As one step in this direction, Germany, on a bilateral basis, is going to offer mine-clearance training in Bosnia. Mine-clearance and assistance programmes in Afghanistan, Mozambique, Angola, Cambodia, Nicaragua and Laos, as well as assistance to the Department of Humanitarian Affairs (DHA) in establishing a mine-documentation database, have been the other major areas of German activity in this field to date.

Let me summarize and conclude. It was in January 1992, at the end of the meeting of 31 January at the level of Heads of State and Government, that the Security Council, for the last time, commented, in a broader approach, on the impact of particular weapons and armaments on United Nations peace-keeping and the maintenance of international peace and security. One issue, however, did not at that time get the attention it undoubtedly would have deserved from our perspective today: the issue of anti-personnel mines and their devastating effect on innocent people within and beyond the peace-keeping context.

Today's debate is one step towards closing this gap. Let me simply express my hope that, on the basis of all the constructive ideas which we have heard and are going to hear, we will be able to come up with some concrete proposals for practical improvements of demining efforts in a peace-keeping context.

I now resume my functions as President of the Council.

The next speaker is the representative of Canada. I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. Fowler (Canada)

The United Nations estimates that some 2 million to 5 million anti-personnel land-mines are deployed each year, added to the 100 million already laid in the ground. We are becoming more aware of the devastating consequences of these devices in terms of death and injury, and this awareness, to a large extent, results from the leadership of the United Nations in raising public awareness.

The economic and social impact of land-mines is also becoming better known: land-mines destroy infrastructure, contaminate agricultural land, make it impossible for refugees and displaced persons to return home and place an unsustainable burden on social assistance services in States emerging from the upheavals of war.

Less well known to the public is the pernicious impact that land-mines can have on peace-keeping operations. We are grateful to you, Mr. President, for drawing attention to this aspect, among others, of the land-mine crisis by taking the initiative to hold this open meeting of the Security Council.

Canada has adopted a two-track approach to putting an end to the tragedy of land-mines. The first track addresses the immediate problem of land-mines already in the ground, causing injury and death each day, as we have just heard. We have set up an active programme of demining assistance and victim rehabilitation in a number of countries. We are also looking for ways to enhance our efforts through fostering the development of Canadian capabilities in this field in order to deal with the many challenges facing mine-affected countries in, for example, Central America. The second track of our approach relates to the longer term, but ultimately more important, need to halt the deployment of new mines. That is why we, along with many other countries, are promoting an agreement to ban anti-personnel mines worldwide.

Canada has a deep and long-standing commitment to the international-security vocation of the United Nations and has participated in all major United Nations peace-keeping operations to date. It is always risky to send young soldiers abroad to secure and maintain peace. However, those soldiers ought not be exposed to the additional risk of encountering the random horrors of land-mines in such circumstances. In recent years Canadian Blue Helmets, along with those of other countries, have risked their lives in the always dangerous task of mine-clearance - in Kuwait, Cambodia, Croatia, Bosnia, Somalia, Rwanda and elsewhere. In the last five years, two Canadian peace-keepers have been killed and 22 seriously injured by mines.

Moved by its deep concern over the economic and social repercussions of land-mines and by the belief that mine-clearance is an essential component of humanitarian reconstruction, Canada has taken steps. Expert personnel from the Canadian Armed Forces have been instrumental in developing independent mine-clearance capabilities in Afghanistan, Angola and Cambodia. Indeed, the Mine Action Centres in Angola and Cambodia, which owe their existence to Canadian and other advisers, provide a model for the development of indigenous mine-clearance capability in other parts of the world.

Mr. Fowler (Canada)

Since 1993 Canada has provided more than $6 million for United Nations-sponsored mine-clearance activities in Afghanistan, Angola and Cambodia, through the Canadian International Development Agency. Canada announced in June that it would also provide financial assistance to the mine-clearance programme of the Organization of American States (OAS).

In addition to providing financial assistance for country-specific or region-specific mine-clearance programmes, Canada has also provided an initial contribution of $200,000 to the United Nations Voluntary Trust Fund for Assistance in Mine Clearance and funding to the In