TASK FORCE STATUS: From 2000 to 2004 - closed

Anti-personnel landmines continue to threaten individuals, communities and livelihoods around the world. Mines, and the fear of mines, prevent the safe and productive use of land, road and other infrastructure, posing a serious obstacle to the delivery of humanitarian aid, safe return of refugees, post-conflict reconstruction and sustainable development. The injuries they cause place a strain on families, communities and health facilities and seriously hinder economic progress.

The Reay Group on Mine Action

May 28, 2002 Reay Group meeting (full)
Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) - Geneva

Recognizing the impact that landmines have on the region of South Eastern Europe, the Stability Pact created the Reay Group (previously the Forum for Cooperation on Mine Action in South East Europe). The Reay Group promotes a coordinated approach to mine action through the provision of a strong regional framework for funding mine action projects. This initiative has been built on existing structures in an effort to avoid duplication, and to assist coordination efforts by identifying and filling gaps in activities taking place at a regional level. In addition, the Reay Group brings higher visibility and further donor/beneficiary coordination to mine action activities.

Over the past year, the core members of the Reay Group have worked to identify gaps in programming and develop possible projects in three priority areas where it was felt the Stability Pact framework could provide the most added value:

As a range of organisations are already well established in operational mine clearance in the South Eastern European region, the Stability Pact initiative does not focus on de-mining but rather on other equally important aspects of mine action which can effectively promote regional peace and security.
All of the countries in the region are party to the Ottawa Convention, with the exception of Serbia and Montenegro, which has recently announced their intention to accede. Consequently, the Reay Group works within a regional context of legal and political commitment to humanitarian mine action.

Regional Mine Action Support Group
Objectives and Structure

General

The formation of a Regional Mine Action Support Group (RMASG) was decided during a Stability Pact brainstorming meeting in Sarajevo on 10-11 May 2000. The participants at the meeting, drawn from recipient and donor nations, international and non-governmental organizations, discussed at length a discussion paper outlining the possible role and objectives of this Group, a recommended flexible structure, the relationship of the Group to the Pact as a whole and how it might function. There was general consensus that a Group of this type could be a useful addition to the work of the Stability Pact. Lieutenant General (ret’d) Gordon Reay of Canada was confirmed as the Chair for this Group and was instructed to redraft the Discussion Paper into one detailing the Group’s objectives and structure in accordance with the thrust of the discussions in Sarajevo.

The RMASG will act as a catalyst to encourage and promote a regional focus for mine action, to facilitate more synergy within the region and to highlight where additional value could be attained. In doing so, the RMASG is to take care not to duplicate the structures and programs already in place. Moreover, the Group should take advantage of existing programs and projects, building its regional focus from the bottom up. This regional focus must reflect positions, priorities and funding requirements for the entire region, not for individual countries or small groups of countries.

The RMASG will act as a forum or focal point for the exchange of information, for the development of collaborative programs and for effective liaison between all the interested parties. In this respect, the roles of the Group are to facilitate, support, co-ordinate and encourage. Conversely, the Group does not have the mandate to evaluate, audit, supervise, manage or direct existing programs or the organisations implementing them.

The RMASG will act as an instrument for the promotion of additional humanitarian mine action funding for the countries in the region. Many Pact partners had been disappointed with the results of the last Regional Funding Conference and offered the opinion that a more focussed, regional approach to this issue could only improve the chances of securing more and longer term financial support. Equally, there was a recognition that the countries of the region needed to demonstrate their commitment to humanitarian de-mining by making reasonable investments of their own.

In conducting its work, the RMASG will remain conscious of the broader objectives of the Stability Pact to strengthen regional co-operation, to encourage reform, to facilitate regional integration and to contribute to a safe and secure environment.

Objectives

The following objectives have been determined to be those that will give the most practical and concrete effect to the overall thrust of the RMASG:

• Assemble and maintain a list of current and proposed humanitarian de-mining projects within the South East Europe Region;

• Develop an assessment criterion that will permit the prioritisation of projects from the perspectives of maximum value, regional synergy and transparency;

• Develop a positive regional strategy to convey the results of these assessments, with appropriate recommendations, to the donor community;

• Maintain effective liaison with the affected countries, international organisations and NGO’s in order to remain current with developments within the region and to prevent duplication of effort. Where the RMASG detects both opportunities and problems, the Group will take a proactive stance in raising these issues with the concerned parties;

• Promote innovation, the dissemination of best practices and lessons learned. In this regard the Group should act as a focal point for any interested party either to convey its successes or to seek information that will allow them to be more efficient and responsive;

• Provide a focus for the development of funding options for the region as a whole and to convey those options to the Pact partners; and

• Develop and maintain an electronic network to facilitate the timely exchange of information and to encourage open liaison.

Structure

The RMASG will function in an open and transparent manner. The Group will not have an overly rigid structure, with a permanent secretariat and a large bureaucracy. Rather, it will operate informally with a small core of interested parties maintaining communication with each other.

Additionally, the core will be expanded on a case by case basis to examine specific issues. Moreover, any Stability Pact member is invited to contribute actively to the work of the RMASG at any time, using the electronic network as the main, but not the only means of providing input.

It is hoped that this informal approach will promote candour, a regional focus and an agreed program that will satisfy the requirements of the affected countries of the region as well as those Pact members wishing to contribute to the development of regional security and economic development. Records of discussion, minutes and/or briefings as required will be provided to all Pact partners.

The Group should meet, on average, every three to four months. More meetings may be required at the outset to finalise objectives, establish a work plan and set the course of future action. Conversely, once concrete plans have been established and agreed, the requirement to meet on a regularly scheduled basis may likely diminish, particularly if maximum advantage can be taken of electronic correspondence. Meetings will be held within the region on a rotating basis, although advantage will be taken of other meetings where a significant number of the core group might be present.

Some organizations have already offered to assist the Group in its work. While these have to be examined in more detail, the Group will, in principle, wish to take advantage of those offers where they make sense. The organisations actively involved in humanitarian de-mining have also agreed to co-operate and assist in the work of the RMASG. All such offers are worthy of examination within the context of advancing mine action within the region as a whole.

Another dimension the RMASG may wish to examine would centre on the possible selection of a Goodwill Ambassador for mine action within South East Europe, and the modalities under which such an ambassador might function.

The RMASG will function under Working Table III of the Stability Pact; a relationship that will provide the RMASG with the necessary linkage to the Pact and its partners.

Conclusion

Participants at the Sarajevo meeting saw a genuine opportunity with this RMASG to advance the cause of mine action generally, to re-engage the interested parties in the continuing landmine problem in South East Europe, to define the major impediments to progress and to work co-operatively to find the best possible solutions. The Group will bring its best efforts to bear to meet the challenging objectives set for it and to assist the Stability Pact in achieving its broader goals.

Background

 

Earlier this year, informal discussion within the Stability Pact identified the possible utility of creating a forum for cooperation on mine action within South East Europe. One of the greatest impediments to economic and social reconstruction remains the presence of large amounts of landmines in the region. Not only do these mines deter economic activity from resuming but they also deter the return of displaced persons to their homes, while leaving a residue of mistrust that the ground actually can be cleared and brought back to economic use. Mine action must remain a high priority within the region. For this priority to be maintained, mine action programmes must continue to be planned and funded and all possible options for promoting rapid and safe demining programmes, victim assistance and the destruction of stockpiles must be explored.

 

It is important to recognize the excellent work already well in progress within the region. Competent demining commissions and mine action centres, supported by governments and non-governmental organizations are coping well with a vexing and dangerous problem. Good communication exists, allowing these entities to share experiences, maximize effort and seek the best value for the funds and equipment available. Any new initiative must dovetail with these programmes in such a way as to complement them, not compete with them.

 

General Orientation of the Forum for Cooperation on Mine Action in South East Europe (FCMASE)

 

Informal discussions and two informal meetings in Sarajevo and Geneva brought to light both the concerns with a new Stability Pact forum and the possible utility of such a group. It would be useful to review these issues, draw deductions from them and determine a possible road ahead.

 

The majority of concerns revolved around the perceived duplication of effort of such a forum with the many other activities already in train. Such an overlap was seen to be detrimental, indeed potentially in competition with these other programmes. Clearly, for such a forum to succeed and be accepted within the mine action community, these duplications must be avoided. This new entity should be regarded as an additional and useful conduit to obtain information, to secure stable funding and to find solutions to emerging problems.

 

A second set of concerns focussed on the creation of a new and unnecessary bureaucracy and the resultant impression that this new forum would take the emphasis on mine action away from the region, residing it in some amorphous committee distant from the real problems on the ground. This was not the intention and must be avoided in formulating a role for the forum. The broad concepts of assisting in the growth of regional capacities and promoting regional ownership and accountability must be stressed. Bureaucracy must be minimized and certainly not be seen to be siphoning off resources desperately needed for mine action. Whatever structure is adopted for this Forum must recognize the prime place of the affected nations in that structure.

 

 

Conversely, those who see potential for this forum do so in the context of encouraging regional synergies, facilitating progress and generally acting as a catalyst for the furtherance of mine action programmes in the region. These attributes should be encouraged and developed. The forum envisioned should therefore act in such a manner as to demonstrate these attributes. It must be clearly stated that the forum does not exist to manage or direct individual programmes or projects, nor should it act in any audit or evaluation capacity. Perhaps the best way to regard this Forum is that it is simply one more toll in the mine action tool box.

 

Possible Objectives for the Forum on Cooperation on Mine Action within South East Europe

 

There appear to be two dimensions of possible work for the FCMASE. One dimension is policy-oriented while the other would bring a more narrow technical focus. Both dimensions would foresee the forum acting as a kind of clearing house for the mine action community to exploit where appropriate. If any entity, be it a national organization, a donor state, an NGO or even a private company sees merit in using this forum, it must be encouraged to do so. If any see a gap in programmes, see a solution or proven practice elsewhere they wish to test in their own circumstance or see merit in a Pact-sponsored activity, they must see the forum as a useful vehicle for achieving these ends.

 

Policy Objectives

 

At the policy level, the best role appears to be one of facilitation. Three areas may lend themselves to consideration: funding, data management and the sharing of experiences or solving of problems.

 

Funding

 

The recipient states continue to have difficulty securing sufficient funding over predictable periods that will permit long range planning. A number of mechanisms exist already to obtain funds, with the work of the International Trust Fund being perhaps the best example. On the other hand, only eight of the Stability Pact countries have actually committed funds for mine action. Can this Forum play a role in encouraging more nations to contribute and to promote allocations of funds for longer periods of time to permit planning? The Forum would not supplant or compete with these other mechanisms but would complement them.

 

Data Management

 

The Forum would require the data needed to make its own assessments. However, one presumes that if a Forum of the Stability Pact itself recommended projects and programmes, such recommendations would receive a favourable hearing. The challenge for the Forum is to assemble the correct data in such a manner that credible recommendations could be made. This process depends upon the nations and organizations within the region providing that information, indicating where priorities might lie and why, and defining the gaps in programmes and the alternatives for filling them. To provide information on a fully regional basis, is there a need for a regional information centre of some kind? Where might it best be located and what would its principal objectives be? Does this information already reside in one location, such as UNMAS or the Geneva Centre, and, with repackaging, could it serve this purpose?

 

Promoting Regional Synergies

 

A third element at the policy level might be one of promoting synergies across the region as a whole. One possibility might be the sponsoring of seminars and workshops on a regional basis. There are mechanisms already in place. The Mine Action Centres within the region already cooperate on a number of issues. Information is shared and lessons learned are promulgated within the regional community to some extent. However, there appear to be few opportunities for the mine action community within the entire region to meet and discuss common issues. This is partly due to financing, or the sense that funds spent for these types of activities are funds taken away from actual mine action. In part, the many agendas within the region occasionally cause difficulty for one group to accept the leadership role of another or the nature of the workshops are such that they are of interest to some but not all the nations of the region. This may be an opportunity lost. The mine action community, including the donors, could be consulted about the merits of region-wide seminars and workshops. Such conferences must have a well-defined purpose and must seek to achieve concrete objectives. If consultation with the key players within the mine action community revealed a common concern or a perceived gap in achieving success, such a seminar or workshop could have considerable value. The sponsorship of the Pact itself would lend credibility and would help in assembling the right people to examine corrective action. These could be scheduled on an ad hoc basis, as the need arises, or could be regular events with an agreed themes.

 

Promoting Technical Objectives

 

Moving to the technical level, there again appears to be a needed niche for a Forum such as this one. As stressed earlier in this paper, the role of the Forum is to facilitate, encourage and cooperate. For the Forum to achieve meaningful results, the issues must emanate from the bottom. The Forum could then tie the strings together and undertake analysis or even solve specific issues that more traditional methods have failed to address in a satisfactory manner.

 

Attached to this paper is a template of mine action issues which could merit consideration. It’s aim is to list the kinds of technical issues where the Forum may be able to assist. Where problems, difficulties or gaps are peculiar to one nation or organization, potential solutions could be left or them to resolve with their normal interlocuters. However, where issues seem to transcend individual nations, the Forum may be able to help. To illustrate, let us examine the issue of maps. Are the mine action staffs missing certain types of maps, be they normal topographical maps, imaging maps, maps of a particular scale or type, photographic maps or other types of maps and charts that would render their work easier and more productive? If so, can the Forum assist in obtaining these assets? Given its mandate under the Stability Pact, the Forum may be able to approach the owners of such material – be it NATO, the WEU, the OSCE, the EC or even private companies – and seek solutions on a regional basis. This Forum, using the auspices and collective pressure of the Stability Pact, may have more success than individual nations in obtaining the needed material.

 

This type of template could be developed and updated on an agreed scheduled basis. Pact partners, especially those in the region, would be invited to identify issues suitable for inclusion. It could be an all-inclusive list of possibilities without being constrained by time, requiring the Forum to assign priorities, or it could be confined to those issues deemed to be the most urgent and worthy of consideration in the short term. Again, it is best constructed from the bottom, with the Forum looking for regional synergies in assessing the merits of each item. Such a template, in whatever form it takes, seems to be a concrete means by which the Forum can truly act as a facilitator and catalyst. This template is a model and should not be taken as a definitive list of objectives or potential solutions

 

Management and Structure of the Forum

 

This forum exists solely to facilitate mine action programmes within South East Europe. The makeup of the Forum should reflect this priority, with its participants ready to roll up their sleeves and focus on practical and meaningful means of achieving the objectives assigned to it. By the same token, every member of the Stability Pact has an interest in the Forum and in promoting its worth. Thus every member of the Pact must feel free to contribute to the Forum, to offer assistance and to further its objectives.

 

The organizational challenge is how to promote a policy of inclusion, while ensuring that practical work is accomplished by those closest to the problem. Employing a smaller committee of mine action experts, with scheduled reports to the Pact partnership, may be the best means of managing regional mine action within the context of this Forum. An informal Working Group already exists and perhaps that Working Group should act as the day to day Forum. With a Chair, three representatives from the victim states and three from the active donor community, a suitable cross-section of the most concerned parties seems to exist. Of course, the results of any work of this Forum would be conveyed to the Pact partners as a whole. Equally, mechanisms would be found to ensure that Pact partners could express their views on the work of the Forum, possible agendas, assignment of work responsibilities, and so on. The aim is to be inclusive but also to ensure that the Forum is manageable and productive. Membership need not be fixed. Indeed, a rotation cycle should be established that permits the seven member organizations to change on a predictable basis, thus ensuring that every interested party can plan on entering the Forum on some agreed time. Conversely, the idea of a permanent or large supporting bureaucracy must be discouraged.

 

Conclusion

 

This paper is very much a draft and is designed to stimulate discussion. It postulates some proposals that seem to give the most effect to the idea of this Forum acting as a facilitator for regional mine action, to complement the excellent work already in place and to maintain the mine action momentum. It does not purport to represent all the possibilities that might exist but hopefully will stimulate discussion, identify other areas that may be suitable and chart the road ahead. If these types of issues are deemed suitable, then the actual mode of operation of the Forum will also require agreement. Put succinctly, this Forum simply provides one more tool in the mine action tool box. It will build its objectives from the bottom up. It has no bureaucracy, no large secretariat, no executive committee and no board of governors. It simply provides the mine action community with an additional resource. There are gaps in mine action, many of which have been defined in papers and seminars over the past 12 to 18 months. If this entity can help to close those gaps, it will perform a valuable service. It is certainly not a threat to existing structures or programmes, but rather will complement them.

 

The past six months have seen considerable debate about the possible roles and functions of this type of Forum. This paper has attempted to capture the wishes of the Pact partners and translate those wishes into a concrete proposal with specific objectives. It is time to decide whether this Forum should proceed and, if so, in what form.

THE STABILITY PACT

FORUM ON COOPERATION FOR MINE ACTION IN SOUTH EAST EUROPE

TEMPLATE OF POSSIBLE TECHNICAL ISSUES

For further information,

please Contact:

Regional Cooperation Council