Sweden Urged Not to Reintroduce Banned Landmines

The decision by five of Sweden's neighbors, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, to withdraw from the convention banning anti-personnel mines is a grave concern, according to the authors. They argue that reviving this weapon is a significant mistake, especially given the current geopolitical climate and Russia's attempts to undermine European security norms.

The debate in Sweden has largely focused on interoperability, questioning whether Sweden can effectively cooperate with allies if it maintains its ban on anti-personnel mines. However, the authors contend this narrow focus overlooks the severe and lasting humanitarian and environmental consequences of these weapons. They assert that the military value of anti-personnel mines has long been debated, even among military experts.

These concerns were central to the Ottawa Convention in the 1990s, and little has changed since then. The authors criticize the reduction of the Swedish debate to a question of cooperation with Finnish forces, ignoring the broader political, legal, and strategic implications of withdrawing from the convention. They warn that Sweden should avoid contributing to the erosion of norms and institutions that underpin peace and security in Europe.

The reasons Sweden signed the Ottawa Convention in 1997 remain valid today. Anti-personnel mines pose a serious and persistent threat to human security, with approximately 90% of registered victims being civilians. These mines cannot distinguish between combatants and civilians, and their effects continue long after hostilities cease, violating international humanitarian law. In Ukraine, mines continue to kill and injure soldiers and civilians for decades, hindering reconstruction and restricting access to land.