A unique opportunity. An international ban on cluster munitions

Translation from the Norwegian

There haven’t been many successes in the disarmament field in recent years, but we may now be close to a breakthrough in one important area. Final negotiations on an international ban on cluster munitions started this week.

We have come a long way since Norway hosted the first meeting in the negotiating process nearly a year and a half ago. More than 100 states, the UN, the Red Cross and other NGOs are now gathered in Dublin for the final lap. The aim is to conclude negotiations on a convention banning cluster munitions that have severe humanitarian consequences within the next two weeks. The negotiations will be demanding.

The Norwegian delegation in Dublin has a clear mandate. It is to advocate a robust and comprehensive agreement that includes certain key elements: The agreement must lead to an unconditional ban on all cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians. It must ensure real assistance to victims and clearance of affected areas, leading to concrete improvements in the lives of those who are suffering from the consequences of these weapons now. And finally, it must prevent the proliferation of cluster munitions by providing for the verified destruction of stockpiles of these weapons within a specified time-frame.

We will also work to ensure that as many states as possible sign the agreement, and to ensure broad international recognition of the fact that cluster munitions constitute a major humanitarian problem. This is really what the debate on cluster munitions is all about, and this is why the Government took the initiative for what is now known as the Oslo Process.

My time in the Red Cross and the World Health Organisation gave me an opportunity to see at close hand the tragic effects of cluster munitions on people living in affected areas. Cluster munitions are basically canisters that contain a number of submunitions. These submunitions are spread over a large area. This type of weapons is therefore often incapable of distinguishing between the intended target and innocent civilians. Another problem associated with many types of cluster munitions is that they leave duds, submunitions that have not exploded.

In many cases, duds keep on causing harm long after a conflict has ended. They hamper daily life and reconstruction long after the war is over. Sitting back passively watching the proliferation of this type of weapon is a violation of the requirement under humanitarian law to distinguish between combatants and civilians.
So far cluster munitions have been used in 26 countries. This number could increase rapidly if we fail to agree on a ban. The enormous stockpiles found in more than 70 countries all over the world pose a great proliferation risk. We are speaking of billions of small warheads.

During the negotiations in Dublin, the focus will be on two issues in particular. The first is which weapons should be covered by the ban. It’s not very realistic to expect agreement on a total ban. We want results. Therefore we have to be realistic. We must focus on the types of weapons that have unacceptable humanitarian consequences.

For Norway it is important to achieve a ban that includes the types of cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians and that leave behind large numbers of duds. Thus, this does not mean a ban on all weapons with more than one submunition. But we are prepared for the fact that it may include cluster munitions that are currently in the stockpiles of the Norwegian defence forces.

The other discussion concerns the consequences a ban would have for military cooperation with states that are not party to the convention, in military jargon called interoperability. The draft convention prohibits the parties from assisting, encouraging or inducing anyone to use cluster munitions, and is considered by some to be an obstacle to joint military operations with states that do not join.
It is important for Norway as a NATO member to contribute to a result that still allows for close, ongoing joint military operations. NATO members have previously resolved similar issues by concluding specific cooperation agreements for the various operations. Norway will actively seek to find solutions in this area. 

There are those who argue that such an agreement is of little use if not all countries join. To this I would respond that an agreement that enjoys broad support set a standard. The Land Mine Convention has been ratified by 155 countries. That is three quarters of all countries in the world. That does have an impact.

If we succeed, we will have managed to add a new, important pillar to the international rules for the protection of civilians in war. And it will be a strong signal that it is possible to mobilise political commitment to disarmament.