14 June 2024

At the June UN symposium, a new pact was forged, showing global efforts to prevent violence through disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration. 

How do conflicts affect the environment?

Conflicts can have serious repercussions for the environment due to the employment of specific means of warfare which damage the ecosystems and cause negative effects to the civilian population. The impact of conflicts on the environment can be direct, namely linked to the weapons employed, or indirect, therefore, as a consequence of the social, political, and economic instability that they cause. Some weapons, such as nuclear weapons, may leave Toxic Remnants of War (TRW), defined as “toxic or radiological substance[s] resulting from military activities that form a hazard to humans or ecosystems” which are of particular concern to humanitarian disarmament.

How is it affecting civilians?

Some weapons, such as nuclear and incendiary weapons can produce devastating, long-term environmental damage, causing mass migrations and endangering the health and wellbeing of civilians. The use of indiscriminate weapons can cause devastating damage to the environment such as deforestation, groundwater pollution and excessive air emissions, forcing civilians to live in precarious conditions, suffering from lack of food and water and putting their health at risk.

What is the international community doing about it?

Today, a growing number of environmental, human rights, and disarmament organizations are calling onto States and international organizations to adopt stricter laws and monitoring mechanisms to increase environmental protection. The latter falls within the scope of International Humanitarian Law, which includes various provisions limiting the devastating impact of conflict on the environment. Articles 35 and 55 of the Protocol I of 1977 additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 lay down basic rules for the conduct of conflict, prohibiting the employment of means of warfare that are intended or expected to cause widespread, long-term, and severe damage to the environment. A more recent step of the international community towards environmental protection was marked with the adoption, by the United Nations International Law Commission in 2019, of 28 draft legal principles on the Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflict (PERAC) which lay out measures aimed at preventing or remediating to conflict-caused environmental damages.

Fonti:

https://humanitariandisarmament.org/issues/conflict-and-the-environment/

https://reliefweb.int/report/world/witnessing-environmental-impacts-war-environmental-case-studies-conflict-zones-around

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/article/other/57jmau.htm

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/icrc_002_0321.pdf

Author: Carla Leonetti

What are cluster munitions?

Launched from the ground or dropped from the air, cluster munitions are large weapons made up of a hollow shell containing dozens or hundreds of smaller explosive submunitions. They are designed to break open in mid-air, releasing the submunitions and saturating an area that can be as wide as several football fields, posing a humanitarian threat both during and after attacks, since they can explode even after months or years. Cluster munitions are area-effect weapons, which means that their impact is not limited to one precise target, indeed, often a whole area is scattered with explosives, and anybody within the targeted area is very likely to be killed or seriously injured. Furthermore, since the explosive submunitions are not precision-guided, weather and other environmental factors can affect their accuracy.

How are they affecting civilians?  

Because the submunitions cannot distinguish between combatants and civilians, cluster munitions used in populated areas almost inevitably kill or injure civilians.  

Many explosive submunitions, also known as bomblets or “duds”, that fail to detonate as designed when they are dispersed, become de facto landmines, endangering people for months or years after the conflict has ended and creating barriers to socio-economic development. Indeed, unlike the initial blasts, the effects of unexploded submunitions are more discriminate, killing almost exclusively civilians. The research program “Cluster Munition Monitor”, recorded that the total number of cluster munition casualties to date has reached 86,000, as calculated from various country estimates. Since 2008, the countries with the highest recorded numbers of cluster munition casualties are Laos (7,755), Syria (3,580), and Iraq (3,070). 

What is the international community doing about it?

To protect civilians from the effects of cluster munitions, in 2007, the civil society grouped under the Cluster Munition Coalition, together with some United Nations Agencies and other countries led by Norway, initiated the Oslo Process, which resulted in the adoption of the Convention on Cluster Munitions in 2008. The Convention bans the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of these weapons. It also requires state parties to destroy stockpiled cluster munitions, to clear contaminated areas, and to assist victims.

To date, 123 states have committed to the goals of the Convention, and most states that have not joined the convention have never used cluster munitions. However, Israel, Russia, and the United States, which are known to be major users and producers of cluster munitions, are neither states parties nor signatories. 

Nevertheless, the Second Review Conference of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions will be held between the 2nd and 3rd June. Ahead of the first part of the Review Conference, the Lausanne Declaration - which includes the condemnation of the use of cluster munitions by any actor under any circumstances” - has been disseminated. At the conclusion of the Second Review Conference, states should adopt that declaration in order to help each other to fulfill their obligations under the convention. 

Sources:

https://humanitariandisarmament.org/issues/cluster-munitions/

https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Cluster%20Munition%20Monitor%202020.pdf

http://www.the-monitor.org/en-gb/the-issues/cluster-munitions.aspx

https://www.icrc.org/en/document/cluster-munitions-civilians-consequences-are-severe-and-long-lasting

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/en-gb/home.aspx

https://www.clusterconvention.org/

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/04/19/case-condemnation

https://undocs.org/en/ccm/conf/2020/wp.1

Author: Eleonora Gonnelli

What are antipersonnel mines?

Antipersonnel mines are devices containing explosives whose detonation mechanism is activated by proximity or contact with an individual. The explosion caused by an antipersonnel mine has devastating effects on the victims, regardless of whether they are civilians, humanitarian personnel or soldiers.

How is it affecting civilians?

The “Landmine Report 2020” by the Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor, a civil society initiative providing research for the International Campaign to Ban Landmines - Cluster Munition Coalition (ICBL - CMC), recorded some 5,554 landmine casualties in 2019 alone. The devastating effects of landmine use include psychological damage, burns, blindness or other life-long injuries, such as significant physical disabilities. In addition, 66 states are still contaminated with explosive devices, while 12 are landmine-producing States. A further threat to the effective implementation of the Treaty provisions is the use of improvised mines, by non-state armed groups (NSAGs). In 2019, some 156 km2 of land was declared cleared from mines, as a result of UN funding. One of the most unfortunate developments in 2020 was the new policy adopted by the United States (US), which lifted bans on the production and use of antipersonnel mines, moving them off the path to treaty accession.

What’s the international community doing about it?

The international community has taken many steps towards strengthening its response to the landmine issue. In 1997, the “Ottawa Process” led to the creation of the Mine Ban Treaty (MBT), the first success for the “humanitarian disarmament”. Based on the work of the ICBL, the treaty commits States Parties to destroying their stockpiles of mines, clearing contaminated areas and providing support to victims. It also prohibits the production, stockpiling, transfer and use of antipersonnel mines. 

The 24th International Meeting of Mine Action National Directors and United Nations Advisers (NDM-UN) will be held on 25 May 2021, an opportunity to renew and strengthen cooperation among actors involved in the fight against landmines.

https://humanitariandisarmament.org/issues/antipersonnel-landmines/

http://www.icbl.org/en-gb/problem/why-landmines-are-still-a-problem.aspx

http://www.the-monitor.org/media/3168934/LM2020.pdf

https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/04/1089312

https://www.mineaction.org/en/24th-international-meeting-of-mine-action-national-directors-and-united-nations-advisers

Author: Francesca Mencuccini; Editor: Benedetta Spizzichino

What are incendiary weapons? 

Incendiary weapons are among the cruellest weapons used in contemporary armed conflicts. These weapons injure or kill people, together with setting fire to objects through heat or flame produced by a chemical reaction of a flammable substance such as napalm or white phosphorus. 

How are they affecting civilians?

Incendiary weapons cause extremely painful and excruciating burns and destroy homes, civilian objects and other infrastructures. The invasive burns inflicted by these weapons can cause immediate and long-term suffering and, in many cases, a painful death. Particularly, incendiary weapons can cause fourth- and fifth-degree burns that damage skin, muscles, ligaments, tendons, nerves, blood vessels, and even bones, leading to shocks and infections. Another possible consequence is respiratory damage to the lungs and tissues that is caused by carbon monoxide poisoning. 

Survivors often experience lifelong disabilities and psychological trauma because of the severe scarring and disfigurement, which can drive them to withdraw from society. 

Furthermore, since incendiary weapons are used in populated areas, as is happening in Syria, they also cause socioeconomic harm and displacement since they destroy homes, schools, hospitals and other civilian infrastructures.  

What is the international community doing about it?

Protocol III to the 1980 Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) regulates incendiary weapons and currently, more than 110 nations are parties to it. However, the Protocol has loopholes that reduce its legal and normative power, as it excludes multipurpose munitions that have the same incendiary effects and does not contain strong regulations for ground-launched models or air-dropped ones. Human Rights Watch urges states to review the protocol and to close those loopholes. CCW states parties have expressed their commitment to review and strengthen the protection offered by Protocol III and they should address this issue during the 2021 CCW Review Conference which will be held in December. 

Sources:

https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/11/14/myths-and-realities-about-incendiary-weapons

https://www.hrw.org/topic/arms/incendiary-weapons

https://humanitariandisarmament.org/issues/incendiary-weapons/

http://www.weaponslaw.org/glossary/incendiary-weapon-definition#:~:text=Incendiary%20weapons%20kill%20or%20injure,Convention%20on%20Certain%20Conventional%20Weapons.

https://disarmament.ch/events/ccw-sixth-review-conference/

Author: Eleonora Gonnelli

What are killer robots?

Although there's reluctance to pin down a single definition, the most used term for lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWSs) originated in a 2012 US Department of Defense (DOD) directive on autonomous weapon systems. The document defined a weapon as fully autonomous if, when activated, it “can select and engage targets without further intervention by a human operator.”

The majority of NGOs actively participating in the disarmament process, including the International Committee for Robot Arms Control, Article 36, Human Rights Watch, and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), adhere to functionally similar definitions. All organizations listed so far are members of the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots (CSKR), which has been the leading advocate in this space since 2012.

Precursors to these weapons, such as armed drones, are being developed and deployed by nations including China, Israel, South Korea, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

How are they affecting civilians? 

As written in a 2012 report entitled “Losing Humanity-The Case against Killer Robots” , Human Rights Watch and Harvard Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC) believe that such revolutionary weapons would not be consistent with international humanitarian law and would increase the risk of death or injury to civilians during armed conflict, therefore although no accident has been recorded so far, a preemptive prohibition on their development and use is needed. The effects of their precursors are more than evident, with drones capable of bombing entire sites. 

What’s the international community doing about them?

Not many laws exist to constrain the use of killer robots. At international level, no law or policy deals specifically with LAWS or other automated systems. However, since this technology will be used by the military to kill, certain international rules and rights apply that restrict all weapons of war; like any weapon, these technologies are governed by the laws of war and the use of force, which state that no weapon can be used to kill civilians indiscriminately or without a clear military objective behind the strike. However, experts stress that LAWS may lower the threshold to conflict and cannot be guaranteed to accurately discriminate civilians from soldiers, so the laws of war and use of force rules do not adequately address the threat that LAWS pose.

Sources:

https://www.skynettoday.com/overviews/killer-robots 

https://www.hrw.org/report/2012/11/19/losing-humanity/case-against-killer-robots 

https://www.whs.mil/News/News-Display/Article/2210967/so-just-what-is-a-killer-robot-detailing-the-ongoing-debate-around-defining-let/ 

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/08/calling-autonomous-weapons-killer-robots-is-genius/378799/ 

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/10/14/ai-drones-swarms-killer-robots-partial-ban-on-autonomous-weapons-would-make-everyone-safer/ 

Author: Benedetta Spizzichino; Editor: Francesca Mencuccini

What is the arms trade? 

For a variety of reasons, there is no straightforward answer to the definition of arms trade, primarily because there’s no globally agreed definition of the word “weapon”, secondly because there is no common agreement on what types of activities constitute the arms trade, and thirdly because of the lack of openness and transparency by many arms suppliers and recipients regarding the value and volume of their arms exports and imports, which makes it difficult to report accurate data.

However, arms trade can be broadly defined as the either national or international transferring of several kinds of weapons and munitions, generally from a (sponsoring) country to another. 

How is it affecting civilians?

There is always a terrible human cost caused by a poorly regulated global trade in conventional arms and its effects can be noticed in a variety of crimes: in the killing, wounding and rape of civilians – including children – and the perpetration of other serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, in the displacement of people within and across borders and in the endurance of extreme insecurity and economic hardships by those affected by armed violence.

Unregulated arms transfers can destabilize security in a region, enable the violation of the Security Council arms embargoes and contribute to an inconvenient domino effect.

What’s the international community doing about it?

States have primary responsibility for enforcing arms regulation and controlling the activities of arms brokers and dealers operating from their national territory or registered with their national authorities. However, several international organizations contribute to the monitoring of arms trade. In 2003, the Control Arms Coalition was formed to advocate for better regulation of the licit arms trade, an important first step to reducing illicit trade. It helped pressure the UN General Assembly to initiate the negotiations of the Arms Trade Treaty, which was adopted in 2013 by 110 countries, including several legally exporting states. The treaty regulates the transfer of conventional arms ranging from small arms and light weapons to tanks, combat aircraft, and warships. It obliges states parties to assess the risks of proposed arms exports and not to authorize transfers if the risks cannot be mitigated. The treaty expressly prohibits transfers of arms that a state party knows would be used to commit genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and serious human rights violations.

Sources: 

https://humanitariandisarmament.org/issues/arms-trade/ 

https://www.un.org/disarmament/about/ 

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010-07/international-arms-trade-difficult-define-measure-control 

https://www.globalissues.org/issue/73/arms-trade-a-major-cause-of-suffering 

https://www.iapss.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/25_Volume-29.pdf 

Author: Benedetta Spizzichino; Editor: Francesca Mencuccini