From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec

5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM HUMANITARIAN RELIEFHOW CHANGE HAPPENS:LANDMINES, AN ARMS-CONTROL SUCCESS STORYUntil recently, governments and military commanders saw antipersonnelmines as a cheap, low-tech, and reliable weapon. Landmines were killingor injuring 26,000 people every year, and were stockpiled by some 125countries. Now, thanks to an international treaty banning their use, thatnumber has fallen to between 15,000 and 20,000 people a year. In 2005,only three governments – those of Myanmar, Nepal, and Russia –acknowledged using landmines (rebel groups used them in a further tencountries). The number of countries producing landmines had fallenfrom 50 to 13, despite the fact that a quarter of the world’s governmentshad not yet signed or ratified the treaty.The 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, and the ‘Ottawa Process’ that led to it,broke new ground in the annals of diplomacy, riding a wave of post-ColdWar optimism, which allowed governments and NGOs to look at securityissues with fresh eyes. Global civil society, led by NGOs in theInternational Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), put the issue on theinternational agenda and built the extraordinary momentum needed toban weapons that most governments considered to be as common andacceptable as bullets.The ICBL mobilised public opinion and influenced governmentsacross the globe with a clear and concise message: that nothing can justifythe human cost of landmines. Its founding members were NGOs engagedin clearing mines, providing prosthetics for victims, and documentingthe impact of mines on civilians. Governments immediately recognisedtheir unmatched expertise on the issue. The diversity of ICBL’s membershipand its flexible structure (it has never had a secretariat, and it onlybecame a legally registered entity after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in1997) added to the movement’s strength.Perhaps the key factor in the success of the movement was the closeco-operation between the ICBL and a handful of like-minded governments(especially Canada, Norway, Austria, and South Africa), as well aswith UN agencies (especially UNICEF) and the International Committeeof the Red Cross. In the face of opposition from the great powers, this coreCASE STUDY403