****

Number 143, August 1998

Global Mine Clearance

An Achievable Goal?

by Carl T. Sahlin, Jr.

Conclusions - Approximately 60 people are killed or seriously injured    daily by anti-personnel land mines (APLs).
- The number of victims may seem insignificant given the    world population, but each person killed or maimed presents a real physical and    psychological barrier to the economic and social development of more than 60 affected    countries.
- Although 122 nations recently signed a treaty in Ottawa,    Canada, banning APL use, the logical next step is to clear existing mines.
- The policy goal established by the Clinton administration    to clear anti-personnel land mines from the world by 2010 may be achieveable but it    requires a change in U.S. strategy.
**Banning Anti-Personnel Land Mines**
The anti-personnel land mine (APL) banmovement, which led to the Ottawa Treaty, enjoys popular support in many Westerndemocracies as well as in mine-afflicted nations. The ban requires an immediate andunconditional commitment to prohibit the use and destroy stockpiles of APLs within aspecified time. It makes no differentiation between nations with global securityresponsibilities and those with none. The ban movement did not recognize previous andongoing voluntary efforts by the United States and other nations to limit and control APLuse. The debate portrayed countries as being either for of against the indiscriminatekilling of innocent children. In the United States the issue was emotionally charged andhotly debated, although largely "inside the beltway." Certainly, U.S. commitmentto such a treaty is decided in Washington, but also, and just as important, the issue hadneither the attention nor interest of Middle America. 

Underscoring America's commitment to theprinciple of an APL free world, but also recognizing the current military need for APL incertain defense scenarios, President Clinton charged the administration with two majornear-term efforts. First the Department of Defense (DOD) must deploy a replacement forAPLs in the Korean DMZ by 2006. Second, he directed a significant increase in the U.S.mine clearance program, setting a goal for ending the APL threat by 2010. Secretary ofState Madeleine Albright established an office to achieve this goal. 
****
**U.S. Policy**

U.S. efforts focus on alleviating thepersonal and economic burdens caused by APLs by helping afflicted states address medicaland financial problems while also training local citizens to neutralize APLs.
***Mine Clearance Policy Goals
- to promote human welfare through mine awareness and    training, and 
- to promote U.S. foreign policy, security, and economic    interests. 
***Mine Clearance Policy Objectives
- reduction of civilian casualties, 
- development of medical infrastructure,
- enhancement of host country stability, 
- establishment of sustainable indigenous demining programs.

These goals and objectives recognize theconnection between APL victims, their local economy, and the logical need for afflictednations to work the hardest to provide their own solutions. When a medical infrastructureis developed that is sustainable and can meet all the requirements for rehabilitation,victims can retake their place in productive society. As economies develop, with thereturn of arable land and capable people, regions and countries become more stable. Stableeconomies promote political stability. U.S. national interests of peace and stability arecomplemented.
**Philosophical Approach**
As long as the United States is thepre-eminent world power, it will be looked to for leadership in mine clearance. About 10years ago the United States joined the fledgling humanitarian mine clearance effort aroundthe world. Since that time we have generally expanded our effort by simply doing more ofwhat was done before. While that approach got mines out of the ground, it will not sufficeto meet President Clinton's goal and the world's expectation of us. 

The May 1998 Washington Conferenceacknowledged that 110 million mines may be a counterproductive overestimation. Theconference attendees agreed to revise and lower the estimate. This decision acknowledgesthat the number of mines is not as central to the issue as the number of victims. 

The "one at a time" clearancemethod of the past requires technological augmentation to reach the President's goal. Theproblem is further complicated by the profusion of areas that are declared minefields butare in fact only "suspected" or may consist of only one mine, the one thatexploded.

A two-part enhanced technology effort isemerging as a cornerstone of the U.S. approach to mine clearance. First, use technology tocut the problem down to size; and second, use technology to find and clear the mines.Highly accurate surveys are needed to separate suspected from confirmed areas and,further, to limit the actual mined areas to their real boundaries. Some currentlyavailable satellite and global positioning satellite (GPS) technology may, with furtherdevelopment, be useful. Using this technology to reliably rule out suspected areas, muchland can be returned to use without the expense of painstakingly clearing each squarefoot. With suspected areas ruled out, further development of fast, cheap clearance shouldbe the remaining priority. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) isdeveloping, among other projects; computer-assisted technology to mimic the processing adog's nose and brain do to differentiate smells. This research is promising and may resultin very low risk mine clearance. Further research in this area coupled with highlyaccurate surveys could make the concept of land mines in war obsolete. 

While this research is carried out,casualties are still occurring at an alarming rate. The United States is actively tryingto alleviate APL dangers until the new technology is available. DOD sends uniformedservice members to *teach*indigenous troops or citizens mine clearance and relatedsubjects. An unwritten policy from Capitol Hill requires that U.S. instructors *not*accompany indigenous personnel in minefields during actual mine removal. The impact ofthis is obvious. U.S. instructors are teaching mine clearing from a theoretical pointonly, since they have never cleared actual mines under peacetime conditions. Wartimemine-breaching operations are different from peacetime clearance because in war there isno concern for preserving the agricultural quality of the soil. Mine-afflicted countriesknow that U.S. instruction is not as credible as that from Non-Governmental Organizations(NGOs). These NGOs have hands-on experience and are willing to go into the field withtheir trainees. However, U.S. administrative and logistical support is still highlyregarded. The United States has the reputation in many mine-afflicted countries ofproviding reliable equipment, adequate training for that equipment, and adequateavailability of spare parts�all serviced by honest and friendly personnel. Further, mostrecipients of U.S. military aid in general know that the United States lives up to itswritten agreements.

Other U.S. government agencies alsocontribute. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has a seat on theInter-Agency Work Group for Humanitarian Demining, but has a small budget for deminingproject support and does not routinely consult on each demining mission. The link betweenmine clearance and economic development could be maximized by closer cooperation amongU.S. government agencies throughout the process, to include evaluative follow-up, oncemine clearance has been completed.

This success in monitoring and executingsmall-scale operations may be adequate for small, slow clearance; but it is insufficientto clear enough land to end the threat by 2010.
**External Factors**
Achievement of this goal is furtherclouded by local and international situations, which are unique to the APL issue. Amongthese are:
- UN observers have noted local farmers installing and    removing their own private minefields, using them to protect crops.
- There is no definition of a "cleared" minefield.    The United Nations, individual nations, and mine clearance companies all differ, with    commercial insurance coverage determining meaning.
- Many mine-afflicted areas are also infested with metal    fragments from other ordnance, increasing clearance time greatly as every metal object    must be treated as a mine until proven otherwise. 

Some issues can be resolved throughdiplomacy; some are better resolved applying research and technology. Through its combinedState/Defense approach, the United States has spent $153 million over the past five yearsto help demine 17 countries. It makes sense to continue the State/Defense division ofresponsibilities. 
**Internal Factors**
The suitability of Humanitarian MineClearing in an era of constrained resources is debated in DOD, even as Capitol Hillreflects a reluctance to risk U.S. soldier's lives unnecessarily. Advocates of mineclearing point out that such a new role for the U.S. military ensures relevance, andpromotes stability and peace through economic development. In the final analysis, however,DOD is judged on its ability to win war, not by how many hectares of foreign soil havebeen cleared. Private contractors or NGOs could be used to provide mine clearinginstruction, support, and services. Conduct of actual mine clearance could be furtheroutsourced in this manner. DOD could continue its support, with U.S. defense attaches,augmented by Army engineer experts, providing quality control through spot checks ofcleared areas. This would provide certain Army elements, notably special operationsforces, with exposure to foreign languages and culture. This arrangement providesdiplomacy, leadership, technical expertise and safety.
**Funding**
In the short term, funding appears to beadequate. Up to $80 million has been allocated by the Clinton administration this year.However, this figure needs to be greatly augmented by as many other countries as possible.A more precise figure of how much more money must be raised depends on the methodology ofclearance. The method used in any given country is dependent on four interrelated factors:culture, climate, terrain and technology. Locating, plotting and clearing mines using hightechnology may speed up the process, thereby saving lives. However, no body of knowledgeexists to explain the wide variance in clearance costs between mined areas. 

A goal of the emerging strategy is todemonstrate how partnerships between government, industry and the population at large canraise funds, foster commitment and raise consciousness on this issue. Public donationscoupled with private and corporate financing are desirable and provide an example forother countries that want mine-clearing assistance. Tremendous research and developmentpotential exists in our national defense laboratories, such as the Lincoln or LawrenceLivermore Laboratories. This combination could match appropriate new technology withcultural, climate and terrain considerations to increase effectiveness. American collegesand universities are also involved in research that complements detection and clearanceefforts. Further partnering their efforts with those of the national laboratories couldhasten breakthroughs in mine clearance. 

Other partnerships could also beencouraged. A farm community could sponsor a mine-afflicted farm community in Bosnia orCambodia, for example. Local and national merchants could donate supplies and equipment tothe sponsored community that could be shipped free via military transportation under theprovisions of10 U.S.C.A. 2608. Other nations would beencouraged to adopt this sort of sponsorship.
**Public Awareness and Support**
As previously mentioned, publicconsciousness about this issue is lacking. Despite efforts such as the support of latePrincess Diana for the APL Ban Campaign, it does not seem to be a priority issue to theAmerican people. No Americans are at risk from APL within the borders of the UnitedStates. 

To put this subject on the national agendawould require a significant public relations effort and expense. Obtaining a nationalcommitment requires national awareness and consensus. This can only be built whenAmerica's leaders take up the issue in earnest. Currently the sensitivity brought to thelarger issue of land mines by the APL Ban Campaign has made the topic noxious to nationalleadership. Activists accuse President Clinton of diverting attention from the issuethrough his announcement of the 2010 goal and then throwing money at it and hoping it willgo away. 

It is logical for Americans to ask whythey should be concerned and whether the mines are made in the United States. InAfghanistan, Cambodia, Angola and El Salvador, there are mines made in the United States,as well as those of other countries. The death and destruction that mines still causeestablishes a moral reason for American concern and involvement. Americans have beenhistorically supportive of well-grounded, well-publicized humanitarian causes and donateregularly and reliably to the Red Cross and other relief agencies. 
**Summary**
While global APL casualty reduction by theyear 2010 is a worthwhile goal, its achievement under U.S. leadership requires a change incurrent philosophy and an intensively managed follow-through. A good start has been madewhich, with public and private support, can broaden into a program encouraging economicdevelopment while promoting stability and peace. The United States should concentrate onrapidly achieving breakthroughs in research and development, applying these technologicaladvances to surveying to quickly confirm or deny suspected minefields, and limiting theproblem to its true size. Efforts should be redoubled to develop medical andrehabilitative infrastructure because the United States is one of the few countries whichcan do so.
**Recommendations**
The Departments of State and Defenseshould collaborate in order to change U.S. strategy to achieve the President's goal by theyear 2010. That strategy should promote America's ability to do that which it does best.The United States can research and develop faster and better than any other nation in theclearance effort. It is important to continue removing mines by every means possiblebecause each mine removed is potentially a life saved. While other countries continuetheir efforts, the United States should concentrate its greater technological capabilityon high speed, increased reliability surveys. This would allow more land to be declaredmine-free and returned to use. We should stop funding limited benefit "train thetrainer" type missions while increasing contracts with the most reliable private mineclearance companies for operations. Our superior medical technology can be applied tovictim assistance. New partnerships between public and private sectors should beencouraged. Finally, a public information campaign is needed to increase support for thishumanitarian cause in the United States.
**The United States has also led the worldin the effort to remove existing land mines, again not with talk, but with action that hassaved lives. Our experts have helped to remove mines from the ground in 15 nations. Theyhave trained and equipped roughly one-quarter of all the people who work at this effortaround the world. These efforts are paying off.**
President William J. ClintonSeptember 17, 1997

Colonel Carl T. Sahlin, Jr., USA, is aSenior Military Fellow at INSS. He can be contacted at (202) 685-3839 or via e-mail at[email protected]. 

The Strategic Forum provides summaries of work by membersand guests of the Institute for National Strategic Studies and the National DefenseUniversity faculty. These include reports of original research, synopses of seminars andconferences,the results of unclassified war games, and digests of remarks by distinguishedspeakers.

Editor in Chief - Hans Binnendijk

Editor - Jonathan W. PierceNOTE

**| Return   to Top | Return to Strategic Forum Index |  Return to Publications |
*Return to NDU Homepage**INSS Homepage*********