Editor's Choice | This Week in BMJ | Press releases

BMJ No 7120 Volume 315 Letters Saturday 29 November 1997 Total ban on landmines is unnecessary See Editorial by Nathanson, p 1389 Editor The announcement of a unilateral ban on the use and stockpiling of antipersonnel landmines by the government of the United Kingdom is the culmination of a vigorous media campaign by a coalition of agencies led by the Red Cross. Some media reports, however, have seriously distorted the facts about landmines. The debate on the international regulation of landmines has been emotional and conducted by people with little firsthand experience. Much of the commentary is ill informed, and wider issues of landmine control have not been adequately discussed. A complete ban on antipersonnel landmines is impossible to enforce and not necessarily desirable. The number of mines said to be still active in various countries is in the tens of millions, but there is little evidence to support these estimates. Some have claimed that landmines made in Britain injure civilians in many countries. This is in contradiction to our experience: over the past five years we have worked with landmine clearance teams in many heavily mined countries and neither of us has ever seen a mine retrieved that was made in Britain. On 12 May 1995 the United Kingdom adopted the joint action of the council of the European Union on antipersonnel mines. This action bans the export of all types of undetectable and non-self destructing landmines and restricts the export of self destructing weapons to countries that have signed the United Nations Weapons Convention.(1) It has been extended to ban the export of `all types of antipersonnel mines to all destinations.'(2) Previously, official policy had been to work for an immediate international ban on the use of mines that are not fitted with self destructing or self neutralising mechanisms and to work towards a total ban on the use of antipersonnel mines. A better option would be to enact a treaty which permits the use of self destructing or self neutralising weapons but completely bans the use of non-detectable mines. The explosive charge could be limited to a maximum of 30 g; this would reduce the number of patients requiring amputations above the knee and thus lessen the problems of rehabilitation. This type of approach rather than an outright ban would increase the chance of the United Nations enacting a treaty or tightening protocol II of its weapons convention. The medical profession has been in the forefront of the campaign for stricter regulation of landmines. As scientists we know that complicated situations cannot be reduced to black and white issues. Writing emotional sketches and exaggerating the known facts may sell newspapers, but it is not going to solve the problem. Eddie Chaloner General surgical registrar Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB Steve Mannion Registrar in orthopaedic surgery Lewisham Hospital, London SE13 6LH References 1 Council decision 12 May 1995. Official Journal of the European Communities. No L115. 1995 May 22;38:1-3. 2 House of Commons official report (Hansard). 1996 April 22;276:cols 28-9. Home | Current issue | Past issues | Classified ads | Career Focus | Feedback Collections | About this site | About the BMJ | BMA | Medline