The Mine Ban Convention: A Justified Success or Just Another Naked Emperor?
Faculty Sponsor(s)
Nick Buccola
Location
Jereld R. Nicholson Library
Subject Area
Political Science
Description
The Mine Ban Convention (MBC) has been heralded as one of the most effective treaties in the post-Cold War era due to an unprecedented rate of compliance: 162 out of 190 states have ratified the treaty and 84% of members have destroyed 90% of stockpiled Anti-personnel (AP) landmines worldwide. However, a case study of the treaty to ban AP landmines demonstrates that measuring effectiveness through compliance may have dangerously distorted our perceptions of treaty success. In the case of the MBC, equating compliance with effectiveness has caused scholars to overlook unintended consequences of the treaty, including environmental damage and the economic burden of landmine removal. Furthermore, this approach turns the treaty into a government initiative that places more emphasis on state participation than realistic humanitarian outreach. This study proposes that achieving humanitarian goals in the MBC and similar treaties ultimately depends on emphasizing the resolution of problems shared by the entire global community over threats to individual states, which can be accomplished by re-examining problems through the lens of common security.
Recommended Citation
Brittingham, Whitney Z., "The Mine Ban Convention: A Justified Success or Just Another Naked Emperor?" (2015). Linfield University Student Symposium: A Celebration of Scholarship and Creative Achievement. Event. Submission 70.
https://digitalcommons.linfield.edu/symposium/2015/all/70
The Mine Ban Convention: A Justified Success or Just Another Naked Emperor?
Jereld R. Nicholson Library
The Mine Ban Convention (MBC) has been heralded as one of the most effective treaties in the post-Cold War era due to an unprecedented rate of compliance: 162 out of 190 states have ratified the treaty and 84% of members have destroyed 90% of stockpiled Anti-personnel (AP) landmines worldwide. However, a case study of the treaty to ban AP landmines demonstrates that measuring effectiveness through compliance may have dangerously distorted our perceptions of treaty success. In the case of the MBC, equating compliance with effectiveness has caused scholars to overlook unintended consequences of the treaty, including environmental damage and the economic burden of landmine removal. Furthermore, this approach turns the treaty into a government initiative that places more emphasis on state participation than realistic humanitarian outreach. This study proposes that achieving humanitarian goals in the MBC and similar treaties ultimately depends on emphasizing the resolution of problems shared by the entire global community over threats to individual states, which can be accomplished by re-examining problems through the lens of common security.
