Frequently asked questions on the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention or ‘Ottawa Treaty’

Officially known as the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction, the APMBC is an international agreement that bans the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of anti-personnel landmines. It was adopted in 1997 and entered into force in 1999. It also commonly referred to as the Ottawa Treaty.

Anti-personnel mines cause long-term human suffering, killing and maiming civilians—often children—long after conflicts end. These weapons overwhelmingly harm those they were never intended to target. The treaty was created to eliminate them and reduce their devastating impact on civilians.

As of today, 165 countries have joined the treaty, representing most of the world’s nations. The Convention is one of the most widely supported treaties addressing a specific weapon on humanitarian grounds. However, some states, including the United States, Russia, and China, have not signed it.

• Never use, develop, produce, acquire, stockpile, retain, or transfer anti-personnel mines.
• Destroy all stockpiled mines within four years.
• Clear all mined areas within ten years.
• Assist victims of landmine explosions, including medical care, rehabilitation, and reintegration into society.

Anti-personnel mines (APM) are designed to kill or seriously injure when triggered by a person, making them inherently “victim-activated”. They are difficult to see, as they are typically buried or camouflaged on the ground. Some, like blast mines, detonate directly underfoot, causing severe lower-limb injuries, while others, such as fragmentation mines, project metal fragments over a wider area, injuring multiple people. As a result, they are easily triggered and cannot distinguish between combatants or civilians – such as farmers tending their land or children walking to school. APM also pose a hazard to one’s own and allied forces, particularly during fluid combat operations. 

Survivors often suffer life-altering injuries, leading to permanent physical disabilities due to the loss of limbs. They face significant obstacles in achieving full, equal, and effective participation in society. 

APM, including so-called “non-persistent” or “self-deactivating” landmines, have devastating and long-lasting humanitarian consequences. Until they are safely cleared, they continue to endanger communities for years, even decades, after hostilities have ended. Their presence, or suspected presence, hinders recovery and reconstruction, delays the return of displaced people, restricts access to essential infrastructure and services like education and healthcare, and prevents the safe, productive uses of contaminated lands. This has far-reaching consequences for human and socio-economic development.

Anti-personnel mines (APM) are distinct from anti-vehicle mines, which are designed to target vehicles and require greater pressure to detonate. The Ottawa Treaty specifically bans APM but does not prohibit anti-vehicle mines. 

The Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC) also does not prohibit command-detonated devices, which are fired by remote-control and are mostly of a directional fragmentation type. However, when such a munition is victim-activated – for example, triggered by the pressure of a person stepping on it or coming into contact with a tripwire – it is considered an APM and is therefore prohibited under the APMBC.

Misconception 1: The APMBC weakens national security and military effectiveness.

Reality: The Anti-personnel Mine Ban Convention (AMPBC) does not prevent countries from using other defensive measures, including modern alternatives such as surveillance technologies combined with precision weapons – like First Person View drones – which can better target military personnel and systems and have a lower residual risk. Many military forces worldwide have successfully adapted their strategies without relying on anti-personnel mines.

Misconception 2: Anti-personnel mines are necessary for border defense.

Reality: Border defense can be effectively maintained using a combination of surveillance systems, patrols, and other military defenses that do not indiscriminately harm civilians. Landmines often end up harming local populations rather than deterring aggression.

Misconception 3: The treaty fails because some major powers have not signed it.

Reality: The treaty has built a strong international stigma against anti-personnel mines, significantly reducing their global production, trade, and use. Even some non-signatories have adopted policies restricting the use. It has also driven widespread mine clearance efforts, saving countless lives. 

Misconception 4: Non-state armed groups do not respect the treaty, making it ineffective.

Reality: While some non-state armed groups (NSAGs) still use anti-personnel mines (APM), the stigma against them has grown significantly.  The prohibitions of the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC) indirectly apply to NSAGs and individuals under the jurisdiction of a State Party (e.g., those on its territory or its citizens). Additionally, through Geneva Call’s Deed of Commitment, over 50 non-state armed groups have formally committed to a total ban on APM and to cooperation in mine action efforts.

Misconception 5: Anti-personnel mines are a low-cost weapon.

Reality: While this may have been true in the past, when states and other actors had access to Cold War-era military stores, today’s military procurement and ammunition storage regulations impose higher requirements for transport, storage safety, and delayed arming procedures. Additionally, deploying anti-personnel mines is costly and requires protective measures and maintenance.

Misconception 6: Anti-personnel mines are effective in blocking access.

Reality: Little, if any, development of anti-personnel mines (APM) has occurred since the APMBC came into force in the 1990s. In contrast, military countermeasures, such as mechanical and remote explosive mine breaching systems, have seen significant improvements in their deployability and speed, rendering APM obsolete as military means of blocking access.

The Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC) has fostered a global community of practice that includes states, international organisations, NGOs, and survivors. It has strengthened the norm of transparency through regular reporting and has established international standards and methodologies for landmine clearance, risk education, and victim assistance. The treaty has also paved the way for other disarmament treaties, such as the Convention on Cluster Munitions, demonstrating that humanitarian disarmament treaties can succeed even without universal participation.

• Over 55 million stockpiled landmines have been destroyed.
• The number of countries producing landmines has dropped from over 50 to fewer than 10. 
• Global use of anti-personnel mines has drastically declined.
• Large-scale clearance operations are making former war zones safe for civilians.
• The Convention has provided a platform for survivors, ensuring their voices are heard and their participation is prioritized at both national and international levels.
• Thousands of landmine victims have received assistance for medical care and rehabilitation.

• Significant delays in the clearance of contaminated areas, with 35 States parties still having clearance obligations. This has led to a growing number of States parties seeking extensions of their clearance deadlines. 
• Slow rate of universalization.
• Non-compliance with the obligation to destroy stockpiles and the obligation to adopt national implementation measures. 46 States parties have yet to report having sufficient legislation in place.
• Excessive numbers of APM retained for permitted purposes, with 61 States parties retaining APM. 
• Insufficient assistance to mine victims 
• Increasing challenges due to the growing use of improvised APM, primarily by non-state armed groups. 

Additionally, resurgent claims about the military utility of APM have sparked debate in some states about whether to withdraw from the Convention.

• Advocate for universal ratification of the treaty.
• Support demining and victim assistance organizations.
• Raise awareness about the humanitarian impact of landmines.
• Pressure non-signatory states to adhere to the treaty’s principles.

The Ottawa Treaty remains a landmark achievement in humanitarian disarmament, proving that international cooperation can reduce the devastating effects of war on civilians.