Britain has been urged to withdraw from the key landmine and cluster bomb treaties to counter the deteriorating global security situation, former defence secretary Ben Wallace has said.
With Russia’s military might growing and the US disengaging from Nato, Mr Wallace said that unless the treaties were updated, “we must leave them”.
A key driver argued in a paper published by the Policy Exchange think tank was the growing threat of Russia invading Eastern Europe after its aggression against Ukraine. Cluster bombs and landmines are estimated to have caused more than 300,000 Russian casualties, preventing them from taking more territory.
Now with several Eastern European countries indicating that they will withdraw from the treaties, this could create a “domino effect” across the continent, the paper said.
But global de-mining charities warned that more people would die as a result of any treaty withdrawal and that the tactical use of anti-personnel mines was outweighed by the civilian harm they caused.
With Africa, Afghanistan and South-East Asia particularly affected by decades of landmines being sown during the Cold War, their legacy has caused countless civilian deaths and traumatic injuries. As a result, in 1997 the Ottawa Treaty was agreed by 133 states, banning the use of anti-personnel mines.
Cluster bombs, which are made up of a single device spreading about 100 bomblets over an area of several football pitches, were also banned in 2008 in the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
Treaty outdated
But “a lot has changed” since then, said Mr Wallace, who was defence secretary during Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. He had first-hand experience of how the Ottawa Treaty prevented Britain and other allies supplying Ukraine with important munitions.
“I was beset by lawyers applying old and out-of-date treaties to new capabilities which are vital to saving life and countering Russian lethality,” he said in a foreword to the paper. The bans had become “tools for our adversaries to use to their advantage” and unless the treaties were “updated to reflect modern security imperatives, we must leave them”.
Domino effect
That intent has already been indicated by Poland, Finland and the Baltic States stating their desire to withdraw.
“Are we now going to see a domino effect over the next few months against the backdrop of a deteriorating security situation on Europe’s eastern flank?” the Policy Exchange paper asked.
But given the global insecurity, the British government should urgently consider joining them to lead a more co-ordinated change that would act as a significant deterrent to Russia, it said.
More pressingly, with America now disengaging with Europe and Russia’s military power base expanding, “decisive action” was needed to increase stockpiles of the “critical weapons”.
Cluster bombs and landmines, which can remain in place for years after the fighting has finished, are highly effective defensive weapons to deter invasion and wear down an invading force, as demonstrated by Ukraine.
Cost to attackers
With divergence in the Nato alliance coming to a head under US President Donald Trump and the security of American military might no longer guaranteed, Europe could be fatally undermined in its ability to defend itself.
Modern warfare had also demonstrated the ease with which mines could be planted, with drones or missiles able to bury them behind enemy formations to hamper a retreat.
This had allowed Ukraine “to cede ground slowly while exacting a disproportionate cost to the attacker”.
Therefore, in any future war with Russia the arms would be “crucial weapons”, especially with cluster munitions able to the job of several artillery shells or rockets, the paper said.
Cluster bombs could halt a fast-moving Russian offensive with their ability to “saturate and destroy” concentrated armoured forces.
The current agreements restricted Europe’s defences therefore the British government should “urgently lay the legal framework to withdraw from both treaties” that will help them “actually fight and win a war with Russia", the paper concluded.
Withdrawal condemned
The Mines Advisory Group, a de-mining organisation, told The National that experience showed the “tactical utility of anti-personnel mines is outweighed by the civilian harm they cause”, something it witnesses daily.
“We recognise that there are no easy choices for states that feel under threat of armed aggression, but international humanitarian law is designed precisely for times like these, when people are in the gravest danger and the risk of conflict is at its highest,” a spokesman said.
The Halo Trust, which has removed millions of mines around the world, said it understood “the deadly nature of landmines better than most” and the treaty had been “instrumental in saving millions of people’s lives”.
But it also recognised that the invasion of Ukraine “has created a new reality for the defence of Eastern Europe”.
