Finland Weighs Reintroducing Anti-Personnel Landmines Amid Ukraine War

Finland is reconsidering its stance on anti-personnel landmines, a weapon internationally banned by the Ottawa Treaty, due to the ongoing war in Ukraine. This move has sparked a debate within the country and among European nations, weighing national security against humanitarian concerns.

Finland's Reversal on Landmines

Colonel Rico Mikon of the Finnish military has addressed the press regarding the reintroduction of anti-personnel mines into Finland's defense capabilities. He emphasizes that the war in Ukraine has demonstrated the continued effectiveness and important role of infantry mines on the battlefield. Finland shares a 1,300-kilometer border with Russia, and concerns about its eastern neighbor have led some to view landmines as a necessary protective measure.

Finland officially joined the Ottawa Treaty in 2012, which bans the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of anti-personnel landmines. However, in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Finnish Parliament voted to withdraw from the treaty. This decision was supported by a significant majority, with arguments citing lessons learned from the conflict in Ukraine, the global political situation, and military threats facing Finland.

The Debate: Security vs. Humanitarian Concerns

Arguments for Reintroducing Landmines

Proponents of landmines, including many in the Finnish military and political leadership, argue that they are effective and affordable weapons that strengthen defense and create deterrence. They highlight Finland's unique defense trajectory, which has always maintained a conscription system and prepared for large-scale conventional ground warfare. The reintroduction of landmines is seen as a cost-efficient and beneficial weapon for defending national territory.

Finnish officials assert that they will use landmines responsibly, deploying them only in military areas where civilians are absent and meticulously marking and documenting minefields for future clearance. They believe Finland possesses the capacity to clear these mines after a conflict. Some experts have even referred to this as "Finnish exceptionalism," suggesting Finland can use landmines responsibly unlike other actors.

Arguments Against Reintroducing Landmines

Conversely, many, including former Finnish Parliament member and current European Parliament member Lee Anderson, strongly oppose the reintroduction of landmines. Her party, the Left Alliance, unanimously rejected the idea of leaving the Ottawa Treaty. Anderson argues that while strong defense capabilities are necessary, this does not justify reintroducing weapons that the international community has worked to eliminate. She points to Russia's disregard for rules in Ukraine as a reason to be cautious, emphasizing that if Russians gain ground, it is difficult to reclaim.

Critics also highlight the inherent dangers and long-term consequences of landmines. Zoran Yesich, a landmine survivor from Bosnia, vividly recounts his experience of losing a leg to a mine during the Bosnian War. He stresses that mines are designed to kill, not just injure, and that their impact extends for decades after conflicts end, posing a threat to civilians. Yesich argues that it is impossible to use landmines responsibly, as natural disasters like floods can displace them, making previously cleared areas dangerous again. He expresses deep disappointment that European countries are considering withdrawing from the Ottawa Treaty, fearing that more innocent lives will be lost.

The Human Cost and Long-Term Impact

The experience of Bosnia serves as a stark reminder of the devastating and lasting impact of landmines. Despite the war ending almost 30 years ago, approximately 1,700 additional landmine victims have been recorded, with over 600 fatalities. An estimated 170,000 mines remain buried across nearly 800 kilometers, continuing to pose a threat to the population.

Zoran Yesich, who now runs an organization to help mine survivors, emphasizes that landmines are a "cowardly weapon" designed to inflict suffering. He points out that mines do not differentiate between soldiers, civilians, women, children, or animals.

Mine Clearance and Training Efforts

In Sarajevo, Alma Jukich works at a training center for a Norwegian aid organization, where mine clearance experts and detection dogs are trained. They primarily use Malinois Belgian Shepherds due to their eagerness to learn, hardworking nature, and adaptability to various weather conditions. The training involves extensive socialization and ground searching, utilizing the dogs' natural instincts to locate explosives. These highly trained dogs are crucial for clearing minefields, with some already deployed to Ukraine to assist in demining efforts.

Broader Implications for Europe

Finland's decision to reconsider landmines is not isolated. Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia are also reportedly planning to withdraw from the mine ban convention, indicating a potential shift in Europe's stance on these weapons.

Lee Anderson expresses concern that the current geopolitical climate, particularly Russia's actions, is being used to push decisions that align more with an authoritarian worldview rather than traditional European values. She emphasizes that for small countries like Finland, a rules-based international system is crucial.

The debate also touches upon broader societal priorities, with a general trend towards increased defense investments and less discussion on social spending. Anderson argues that security encompasses more than just military capabilities, including social cohesion and climate adaptation.

While there is hope that the trend of reintroducing landmines might be reversed, many believe it is unlikely as long as Russia continues its aggressive policies. The situation highlights the complex interplay between national security, humanitarian principles, and international cooperation in a rapidly changing global landscape.