WHAT IS CANADA’S POSITION?

Background

  • The Canadian Forces have possessed small stocks of two kinds of cluster bombs, both of which are considered to be among the most inaccurate and unreliable models that they have never used.
  • In August 2005, Canada announced that it retired and will destroy its inventory of Rockeye cluster bombs.
  • At the Oslo Conference (February 2007), Canada announced that it will destroy the remainder of its existing stockpile of cluster munitions (155mm artillery projectiles). A date for completion has not been confirmed.
  • Canada has never produced cluster munitions.
  • Canada is a member of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), which is the body that has tried, and failed repeatedly to effectively address the issue of cluster bombs.
  • Canada has not ratified CCW’s Protocol V on Explosive Remnants of War (ERW), which entered into force on November 12th, 2006. Protocol V is the first multilateral agreement that addresses post-conflict responsibility of cleaning up ERW, which would include clearance of cluster munitions. MAC considers Protocol V a good first step but not a fully adequate response as its obligations are largely voluntary; the standards are vague; it has no provisions for current contamination; and it does not address humanitarian concerns about clusters at the time of use.
  • Atthe CCW Review Conference (November 2006), the Canadian government stated that the CCW is a viable forum for addressing the issue of cluster munitions, in part because the major users and stockpilers of the weapon – like the US, Russia and China– are a part of the CCW. At the Oslo Conference (February 2007), Canada said that the CCW and process started in Oslo could be complementary. This is somewhat ironic as the Ottawa Process on landmines began from the failure of CCW to deal adequately with antipersonnel mines.
  • Canada did attend the Oslo Conference on Cluster Munitions in February 2007 and signed the Oslo Declaration committing to create a new treaty by the end of 2008.

5-Point Call to Action

Following the failure of the CCW Review Conference, MAC launched a public campaign to stop cluster munitions including a 5-point call to action for Canada:

  • Join with the other countries leading efforts in developing a new international treaty on cluster bombs;
  • Declare a moratorium on the use, production, trade, transfer, or procurement of cluster munitions until humanitarian concerns about them are addressed;
  • Complete the destruction of the cluster munitions in Canada’s military arsenal which are known to be inaccurate, unreliable, and inhumane;
  • Ensure policy coherence by supporting effective efforts to prevent the predictable humanitarian harm caused by the use of cluster munitions, in addition to funding post-conflict clearance, risk education and victim assistance; and
  • Ratify the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons Protocol V, of 1980, on the clean-up of explosive remnants of war and be the first country to announce new and additional funding to implement our obligations under this Protocol.

Underlined items in the above call are items where actions from Canada are still needed.

MAC’s priority for action from Canada is the declaration of a moratorium on the use, production and transfer of cluster munitions until a new treaty has been negotiated.

The Government has indicated that a moratorium is not possible at this time. Canada has never used clusters; it does not produce them; and it has announced its intention to destroy all of its stockpiles. Given that the Oslo Declaration’s goal is to negotiate a new treaty by the end of 2008, it would be very imprudent of Canada to potentially invest in new cluster munitions that may end up being declared illegal in 2008.

One of the arguments put forward by some countries, including Canada, for not declaring an official “no-use” policy or moratorium on cluster bombs is that it could cause problems in joint operations, such as within NATO, if some member forces could not use a specific weapon. This was a similar argument put forward during the days when the Ottawa Treaty banning landmines was being discussed and has, 10 years later, proven not to be an issue. Firstly, landmines were not often used in coalition operations because of their limited strategic value. Also, because of treaty obligations from multiple coalition members, landmines were simply not considered as part of the battle plan and other weapons were used instead.

A similar argument could be made for cluster bombs now.

General Kohn, head of operational planning for NATO’s International Security Assistance Force for Afghanistan, said that it is not using cluster bombs because of their impact on civilians. He stated:

“If we apply blind force, we would defeat them very quickly. It is only because we are restraining ourselves, with the aim of sparing civilians, it will take time. That is why, for example, we do not use cluster bombs or other weapons that would allow us to clear an area.”

Additionally, five members of NATO already have a national ban or “no-use” policy on the use of cluster bombs, which means that the issue of not using them in joint operations is already being accommodated on the ground.