Statement on Assistance, Mine Ban Treaty intersessional meeting

Geneva, Switzerland  
 
Thank you for allowing me to take the floor again under this agenda item. I will be brief.  
 
For a number of years, States Parties have been discussing the Article 1 prohibition on assistance, especially in the context of joint military operations with an armed force that may use antipersonnel mines. The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) has repeatedly expressed concern about the varying interpretations of what acts are and are not permitted under the treaty's ban on assisting with prohibited acts. While states did not reach a formal understanding on this matter at the First Review Conference as urged by the ICBL, an understanding has nevertheless begun to emerge, as more and more states make their views known. 
 
More than 40 States Parties have declared that they will not participate in planning and implementation of activities related to the use of antipersonnel mines in joint operations with a state not party to the Mine Ban Treaty which may use antipersonnel mines. More specifically, many States Parties have agreed that States Parties should not participate in planning for use of antipersonnel mines, agree to rules of engagement permitting use of antipersonnel mines, derive direct military benefit from others' use of antipersonnel mines, train others to use antipersonnel mines, request others to use antipersonnel mines, or provide security or transportation for antipersonnel mines.  
 
Nearly all States Parties expressing views have also agreed that transit of antipersonnel mines through the national territory (land, air, sea) of States Parties is not permitted, nor is foreign stockpiling of antipersonnel mines on the national territory of States Parties.  
 
All of these acts are prohibited by the Mine Ban Treaty. It would still be useful to reach a formal common understanding on these matters before or at the Second Review Conference in 2009.  
 
Thank you.