Model UN Background Guide

Committee: SPECPOL (GA4)

Topic: Mine Action and Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) Clearance

Conference Year: 2026

Topic Background

Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) continue to pose severe humanitarian, socio-economic, and security challenges decades after conflicts end. Landmines are explosive devices designed to incapacitate or kill personnel or vehicles, often remaining active long after hostilities cease. ERW refers to unexploded ordnance (UXO) such as artillery shells, bombs, grenades, and cluster munitions that did not detonate when deployed. Both cause civilian casualties, hinder post-conflict reconstruction, obstruct agricultural development, and impede the safe return of displaced populations.

The issue of mine action and ERW clearance has been on the international agenda since the late 20th century, gaining prominence with the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty (Ottawa Treaty) and the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions. Despite progress, new conflicts and the legacy of old wars mean that millions of square kilometers remain contaminated globally, especially in regions like Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe. The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, for example, has brought renewed global attention to the dangers posed by mines and ERW, as contaminated areas threaten civilian safety and complicate humanitarian access.

In 2026, SPECPOL addresses mine action and ERW clearance as part of a broader commitment to peacebuilding, sustainable development, and the protection of civilians. The topic intersects with humanitarian aid, disarmament, international law, and development goals. The challenge is not only technical—clearing contaminated land—but also political, requiring cooperation among affected states, donor countries, and international organizations. This agenda item remains critical for advancing the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those related to health, poverty eradication, and safe infrastructure.

Key Actors

States

• Afghanistan, Cambodia, Colombia, Laos, and Ukraine: These states are among the most heavily affected by landmines and ERW contamination. They have extensive mine action programs and often advocate for increased international assistance and stronger enforcement of disarmament treaties.
• Egypt and Lebanon: Countries with significant ERW contamination from past conflicts, particularly cluster munitions and unexploded bombs.
• Canada and Norway: Leading proponents of the Mine Ban Treaty and active donors to mine clearance and victim assistance programs.
• Russia and the United States: Both are major military powers that have not joined the Mine Ban Treaty but participate in mine action through bilateral and multilateral initiatives. Their policies influence global norms and funding.

International Organizations

• United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS): The UN’s primary coordinating body for mine clearance, risk education, and victim assistance worldwide. UNMAS works closely with affected states and donors to implement mine action programs.
• International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL): A coalition of NGOs that played a pivotal role in the Mine Ban Treaty’s adoption and continues to monitor compliance and advocate for victim support.
• Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD): Provides expertise, training, and research to improve mine action practices globally.
• International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): Engages in advocacy, victim assistance, and promoting compliance with international humanitarian law regarding mines and ERW.

Bloc Positions

1. Affected States Bloc

Comprising countries heavily impacted by mines and ERW (e.g., Afghanistan, Cambodia, Colombia, Laos, Ukraine). This bloc prioritizes increased funding for clearance, victim assistance, and risk education. They emphasize the need for international cooperation, technology transfer, and adherence to disarmament treaties. They often call for stronger accountability mechanisms for non-signatory states.

2. Donor and Treaty Advocate Bloc

Including Canada, Norway, Switzerland, and EU member states. This bloc champions universalization and implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty and the Convention on Cluster Munitions. They support robust international funding mechanisms and advocate for comprehensive victim assistance programs. They may push for stronger international legal frameworks and monitoring.

3. Non-signatory and Military Powers Bloc

Led by the United States, Russia, China, and others that have not ratified the Mine Ban Treaty or the Convention on Cluster Munitions. This bloc stresses the military utility of certain mines and ERW, often advocating for responsible use and clearance rather than outright bans. They may emphasize national sovereignty and the need for flexible approaches to mine action.

4. Regional and Developing States Bloc

Countries with limited resources and capacity for mine action, often in Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia. They seek technical and financial assistance, capacity-building, and integration of mine action into broader development and peacebuilding efforts. They may also highlight the link between mine action and sustainable development.

Past UN Action

• GA Resolution 60/97 (2005): Focused on strengthening mine action and victim assistance globally, emphasizing cooperation and resource mobilization.
• GA Resolution 70/41 (2015): Called for renewed efforts to universalize the Mine Ban Treaty and enhance clearance activities.
• Security Council Resolution 2220 (2015): Highlighted the role of mine action in peacekeeping operations and post-conflict stabilization.
• GA Resolution 76/43 (2021): Addressed the clearance of ERW and the importance of victim assistance, urging member states to increase funding and technical support.
• UNMAS Annual Reports: Provide updates on global mine action efforts, challenges, and achievements, informing the General Assembly and Security Council.

Questions a Resolution Should Answer

1. How can the international community enhance coordination and funding mechanisms to support mine action and ERW clearance in the most affected countries?
2. What measures can be taken to improve victim assistance, including physical rehabilitation, psychological support, and socio-economic reintegration?
3. How can technological innovation and capacity-building be better integrated into mine clearance operations?
4. What strategies can promote the universalization of the Mine Ban Treaty and the Convention on Cluster Munitions, especially among major military powers?
5. How should mine action be incorporated into broader peacebuilding, development, and humanitarian frameworks at the national and UN levels?
6. What role should regional organizations and affected states play in sustaining mine action efforts post-clearance?
7. How can the international community address the challenges posed by new conflicts and evolving types of ERW, such as improvised explosive devices (IEDs)?

Further Reading

• UN Documents: Official General Assembly and Security Council resolutions on mine action, UNMAS annual reports, and Secretary-General’s reports on explosive remnants of war provide authoritative insights into UN policy, mandates, and operational updates. These documents outline the legal frameworks, funding trends, and programmatic priorities.

• Think-Tank Reports: Research and analysis from institutions such as the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD), the International Crisis Group, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) offer detailed assessments of mine action challenges, technological advancements, and geopolitical considerations. These reports often include case studies and policy recommendations.

• News Outlets: Coverage from reputable international news agencies (e.g., Reuters, Al Jazeera, BBC) and specialized humanitarian news platforms (e.g., IRIN News, ReliefWeb) provide up-to-date information on ongoing conflicts, mine clearance operations, and humanitarian impacts. They reflect real-time developments and public awareness trends.

This background guide aims to provide delegates with a comprehensive understanding of the complexities surrounding mine action and ERW clearance, enabling informed debate and effective resolution drafting in SPECPOL 2026.