Conflicts around the world have left abandoned minefields that have killed or maimed thousands of people, sometimes over half a century or later after the mines were laid. A panoply of humanitarian demining charities has sprung up and there is an entire small industry devoted to demining operations and technology. Demining operations are slow and tedious, often taking years. If one were to believe mainstream commentary and social media, the world has banned landmines and there is a treaty against them.

Prompted by an international campaign by NGOs and much international diplomacy, an arms control treaty was painstakingly negotiated to conclude the Ottawa Treaty, otherwise known as Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention. The main NGO at the heart of it, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, won the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize. The treaty was finalised in late 1997 and went into effect upon ratification by 40 states in March 1999.

The full text of the Ottawa Convention only bans anti-personnel landmines and gives us this legal definition:

“‘Anti-personnel mine’ means a mine designed to be exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of a person and that will incapacitate, injure or kill one or more persons. Mines designed to be detonated by the presence, proximity or contact of a vehicle as opposed to a person, that are equipped with anti-handling devices, are not considered anti-personnel mines as a result of being so equipped.”

Anti-tank mines are thus not covered by the Convention, nor are command-detonated mines, like the directly fired M18 Claymore in use by the US military for decades. Scatterable anti-personnel landmines are definitely covered. Although anti-tank mines might be lethal for farmers on tractors or other large equipment, the vast majority of the post-conflict injuries have been caused by anti-personnel mines. Rather a lot of commentary in the mainstream press overlooks the fact that anti-tank mines are not banned. It should be noted that in many countries it was commonplace doctrine to use anti-personnel mines to supplement and protect belts of anti-tank mines. Scatterable mines delivered by air or other munition systems are similar in many ways to cluster munitions, which is an adjacent topic that will be addressed in a future article on this site.

One way to look at the Ottawa Convention is that it was an act of optimism. Some people genuinely believed that anti-personnel mines had been rendered largely obsolete because the sorts of large wars that had driven the initial use cases for landmines were no longer likely. On a more pragmatic note, if the majority of the world’s countries banned their production, use and stockpiling, the industrial base for making and selling them would evaporate.

The serious problem with implementation is that, while the majority of the world’s countries have ratified the ban, a number of major countries with large militaries have not ratified the Ottawa Treaty. The holdouts are crippling. Russia, China, North and South Korea, and the United States have not signed or ratified the treaty. The United States has signalled its willingness to observe the treaty except in Korea and has adopted self-destruction mechanisms for its scatterable mines. Both the United States and South Korea feel that landmines are essential to defend against any invasion from the north.

Egypt, Israel and Iran have also not signed the treaty. One merely needs to observe where today’s wars are, or are likely to be, to realise that arms control in this sector still has a way to go.

Because of the lack of Russian participation in the treaty, there is a serious argument to be made that the Russian invasion of Ukraine and forcible annexation of parts of Ukrainian territory have meant the death of, at least serious damage to, the Ottawa Treaty. The current war in Ukraine has seen use of landmines of every type. Anti-tank mines are not even covered by the treaty, but well before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine widespread allegations and evidence of landmine use were made against both the Russian military and various Russian proxy forces in the disputed regions under Russian control. Initial claims of landmine use by Russian and proxy forces started in 2014.  In 2015, Human Rights Watch issued a detailed briefing on Russian mines in use. There have been some isolated claims of Ukrainian use of prohibited landmines, but the vast majority of claims have involved Russian forces. Accounts vary significantly on the scope of the mining of Ukrainian terrain, but casualties, both military and civilian, have been reported and even the most modest estimates are high. Russian withdrawals and retreats seem to incur mining as a withdrawal tactic. Mines have been reported as a menace to Ukrainian agriculture.

As a direct result of this war, several countries that face potential Russian aggression have exited the treaty. In March 2025 Poland and the Baltic states jointly announced their intent to depart from the treaty and by early 2026 all four had withdrawn. Finland voted in June 2025 to do so and exited in January 2026. All cited the need for landmines to be able to defend their territory in the event of a war with Russia. Ukraine, in the awkward position of being a signatory while fighting an enemy that has mined significant swathes of Ukrainian territory, has signalled its intention to depart from the treaty. There clearly is no sign of Russia adopting the Ottawa provisions. Is the treaty dead? No, but it is clearly on life support and there will be decades of demining work in Ukraine once hostilities there are finally concluded.