View previous stories
	Explosive remnants of war have a ongoing negative impact on civilian life by Humanity & Inclusion, agencies   May 2022   Lasting Harm: Cluster Munition Attacks in Ukraine. (Human Rights Watch)   Russian forces have repeatedly used cluster munitions in attacks that killed hundreds of civilians and damaged homes, hospitals and schools since its invasion of Ukraine. Ukrainian forces appear to have used cluster munitions at least once. Both countries should cease their use of this banned weapon and commit to joining the international treaty prohibiting cluster munitions.   The 20-page report, “Intense and Lasting Harm: Cluster Munition Attacks in Ukraine,” details how Russian armed forces have used at least six types of cluster munitions in the international armed conflict in Ukraine.   “Russian forces’ repeated use of cluster munitions in populated neighborhoods in Ukraine causes immediate and long-term civilian harm and suffering and needs to stop,” said Mary Wareham, arms advocacy director at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. “Ukraine should also stop using these brutal weapons before more civilians are harmed.”   Human Rights Watch has documented several cluster munition attacks by Russian forces in populated areas in the cities of Chernihiv, Kharkiv, Mykolaiv, and Vuhledar. The exact number of cluster munition attacks in the 2022 conflict is not known, but hundreds have been documented, reported, or alleged..   Russia and Ukraine have not joined the Convention on Cluster Munitions – the 2008 treaty banning cluster munitions – which requires destruction of stockpiles, clearance of areas contaminated by explosive cluster munitions remnants, and assistance to victims. The convention has 110 states parties.   The convention obligates each state party to make their “best efforts to discourage” the use of cluster munitions. At least 36 countries have condemned the use of cluster munitions in Ukraine, including the United Kingdom as the current president of the Convention on Cluster Munitions.   Human Rights Watch cofounded and chairs the Cluster Munition Coalition, the global coalition of nongovernmental organizations working to ban cluster munitions.   “Most of the world rejected cluster munitions years ago due to their widespread indiscriminate effects and long-lasting dangers,” Wareham said. “Condemning the use of cluster munitions in Ukraine will strengthen the global stigma against these weapons and help ensure that civilians are protected from them in future.”   http://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/29/ukraine-russias-odesa-cluster-munition-attack-harms-civilians http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/en-gb/media/news/2023/campaign-shocked-by-us-decision-to-transfer-banned-cluster-munitions-to-ukraine.aspx http://www.hrw.org/news/2022/05/11/end-cluster-munition-attacks-ukraine http://www.the-monitor.org/en-gb/reports/2022/cluster-munition-monitor-2022.aspx http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/en-gb/media/news/2022/icbl-cmc-calls-on-all-parties-to-end-cluster-munitions-use-in-ukraine-and-respect-global-ban-on-the-weapon.aspx http://www.hi-us.org/news-hi-ukraine-returning-civilians-threatened-explosive-ordnance http://www.dw.com/en/ukrainian-red-cross-warns-of-land-mine-threat-for-decades/a-64504735 http://www.icrc.org/en/document/five-things-to-know-about-deadly-legacy-explosive-remnants-war http://www.icrc.org/en/publication/4694-preventing-and-eradicating-deadly-legacy-explosive-remnants-war http://www.icrc.org/en/document/cluster-munitions-ending-the-scourge-of-these-treacherous-weapons http://www.icbl.org/en-gb/problem.aspx http://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/un-warns-toxic-environmental-legacy-ukraine-region   Apr. 2022   New Report spotlights Dangerous Unexploded Weapons in Syria   After the Mozambique civil war ended in 1992, demining experts needed 23 years to clear the 86,000 unexploded weapons left behind. A just-released Carter Center report suggests that there could be more than three times that amount of unexploded ordnance in Syria, where demining efforts have yet to begin.   The presence of unexploded ordnance is a critical impediment to Syria’s recovery and development, affecting the ability to farm, use roads, repair housing, or access schools, hospitals, and other essential infrastructure. Explosive remnants of war have a resounding impact on civilian life, economic activity, and environmental health.   The need to remove them is one of the few things that Syria’s warring parties and their international backers agree on, and the issue deserves the attention of the larger international community.   The Carter Center’s report is based on painstaking analysis of data collected by the Carter Center and obtained from the Armed Conflict Location Event Data Project. Researchers looked at conflict events across Syria dating back to 2012 and extrapolated the likely amount of unexploded ordnance in different areas based on reports of how many of each of a variety of types of weapons were used during a particular skirmish.   The result is an analysis that can be used to inform recovery efforts and negotiations. It illustrates why the international community should prioritize this issue and how it can address the problem. The study recorded at least 972,051 uses of explosive munitions from 99,194 conflict events between December 2012 and May 2021.   http://www.cartercenter.org/news/features/blogs/2022/new-report-spotlights-need-to-rid-syria-of-dangerous-unexploded-weapons.html   Oct. 2021   Iraq bomb contamination: catastrophic and a serious barrier to recovery, reports Humanity & Inclusion   More than four years after hostilities ended in Iraq, communities are still as fractured as the buildings­, roads, and bridges around them.   “No safe recovery: The impact of Explosive Ordnance contamination on affected populations in Iraq,” paints a harrowing picture of the daily lives of Iraqis, some of whom are too nervous to let their children walk to schools, or so desperate for income that they’ll risk working in places known to be polluted with explosives.   Released by Humanity & Inclusion, the report lends critical evidence to generations of cases proving war cannot end for civilians until the last bomb is cleared.   It underscores the need for States to reach a consensus on a way to safeguard civilians when conflicts strike populated areas.   Researchers focused on Iraq’s heavily populated governorate of Ninewa, home to the cities of Mosul, Sinjar, and Tel Afar.   For explosive ordnance, Iraq is one of the most heavily contaminated countries on our planet. Explosive remnants of war pocket more than 3,200 km2 of land—twice the area of London.   The pollution infuses the population with terror, as mines or explosive remnants claim ongoing victims. A staggering 8.5 million Iraqis live amid these deadly, waste-products of war.   “Gone are the neat rows of minefields,” says Humanity & Inclusion’s Advocacy Protection of Civilians Manager, Alma Al Osta. “We’re often talking about bombs triggered by tripwires in hallways, aerial bombs that never exploded resting meters below ground and surrounded by rubble, and children’s toys packed with explosives.”   Clearing what deminers call “three-dimensional” pollution requires the top-level of explosive ordnance training—a classification that too few deminers hold in Iraq.   Even the classic deminer’s blue protective suit is almost useless amid this contamination. One mine actor interviewed for the report in Mosul noted, “we would find more items as we dug. This makes clearance difficult, as it is not just surface layer, it is deep underneath.”   Demining bombed-out cities costs six times as must as it does to clear a rural setting. The job is often done with a mix of heavy machinery, and the constant risk to deminers and neighbors that controlled explosions will trigger collapse. In cities, this critical work takes eight times longer to complete compared to rural settings.   Funding is a serious barrier. Iraq requires $170-180 million USD per year, including $50 million for Mosul, to remove its explosive ordnance.   Bombing cities: Inhumane, imprecise, expensive   Bombing populated areas was a hallmark of the conflict that Iraqis endured from 2014-2017. This practice not only robbed tens of thousands of Iraqis of their lives, but also left their schools, fields, pathways, homes, water treatment plants, and shops littered with explosive ordnance.   “Bombs and cities should never meet,” says Al Osta. “Not only does the moment of impact cause maximum destruction to the buildings, institutions, and people within the blast radius, the explosive pollution left behind robs a population’s right to any chance at restoring its economic and social heartbeat.”   Indeed, the report is stacked with income-stopping data from the conflict, culled from regional reports:   $7 billion damage to the electricity sector; $2.8 billion damage to roads, airports, bridges, and railways; $2.1 billion worth of damage to agriculture, including an estimated three-quarters of all cattle, sheep, goats, and buffalo lost; $600 million damage to water infrastructure.   In Mosul alone, 9 out of 13 hospitals damaged, along with 169 schools damaged or destroyed.   “Current rules of war fail civilians in populated areas during conflict, and as we see from Iraq, years after the fighting ends, too,” says Al Osta.   “What evidence do States need to back a strong political declaration to avoid the use of explosive weapons with wide-area effect in populated areas?”   After two years of diplomatic discussions, Humanity & Inclusion hopes such a declaration will be signed by States soon. It could mark a historic breakthrough for the protection of civilians in conflict.   Explosive ordnance accidents have also shifted roles within families and communities.   “When we see a head of household injured in an accident, they may feel that they are no longer able to support their family, which has a negative impact on their psychological well-being,” says Humanity & Inclusion’s Country Director of Iraq Marc Van der Mullen. “If a family member experiences disability after an accident, they can be seen as a burden, especially as access to health services remains limited and expensive.”   One in 12 internally displaced persons—and Iraq counted 678,512 internally displaced neighbors in 2020—reports that the presence of explosive ordnance is a barrier to their return, the report notes. Barred from safe return, households continue to be displaced and communities are unable to reconnect and build their resilience collectively.   With schools and playgrounds contaminated, groups that might otherwise mix, cannot. As one woman explained in Sinjar, “In my village, there is no high school. It is difficult for students to travel to other villages, especially when we do not know whether that village is contaminated or not.”   The report concludes, “The scope of this contamination is clearly hampering the efforts of communities and humanitarian and development actors in the region towards recovery, peace and sustainable development.   Women and persons with disabilities are likely to be more vulnerable to these reverberating effects of explosive ordnance contamination. In fact, indirect impacts of contamination on social cohesion, such as limited access to livelihoods and services, can cause tensions within families. “Women are particularly vulnerable in these situations, as tensions may translate into gender-based violence,” the report finds. http://bit.ly/3jk7ddZ   Hidden threats, multiple casualties in North-East Nigeria   The protracted crisis in north-east Nigeria remains one of the world’s largest and most severe humanitarian crises. The offensive between non-State armed groups and Nigerian security forces has now entered its thirteenth year, leaving a trail of unexploded bombs, mortars, projectiles and grenades hidden and unearthed. These are literally hidden threats that cause preventable deaths and injuries, placing an estimated 1.2 million people at risk and in need of protection across all affected communities. The majority of casualties have been reported in the three states most affected by the conflict: Borno, Adamawa and Yobe (BAY).   Each year the conflict continues, children, women and men remain at risk of grave injury or even death. Improvised explosive devices and other explosive ordnance all have a serious humanitarian impact, impeding the safe return of displaced people to their hometowns.   http://unocha.exposure.co/the-scars-and-suffering-from-deadly-landmines   * Yemen is now one of the world’s most mine and explosive ordnance affected countries. HALO is an international NGO whose mission is to protect lives and restore the livelihoods of those affected by conflict. In the service of vulnerable communities, they survey and clear landmines and explosive ordnance (EO), and provide explosive ordnance risk education (EORE) and weapons and ammunition management services. Interview with Matt Smith, Yemen Programme Manager at Halo Trust:   http://starvationaccountability.org/news-and-events/story-in-focus-interview-with-matt-smith-yemen-programme-manager-at-halo-trust   Nov. 2020   Witnessing the environmental impacts of war, a report by the Conflict and Environment Observatory, agencies   The environment remains under-prioritised throughout the cycle of conflicts, and yet environmental quality is critical for sustaining human health and livelihoods, for the security and stability of societies, and in the functioning of the ecosystems upon which we all depend.   Conflicts bring with them new forms of environmental harm, or exacerbate pre-existing problems. Critically, they disrupt systems of environmental governance, ensuring that their impact lasts well beyond the cessation of hostilities.   This much is clear from a new report Witnessing the environmental impacts of war, which has been published to mark 2020’s International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict – #EnvConflictDay. The report is a collaboration between Amnesty International, the Conflict and Environment Observatory, the Environmental Law Institute, Geneva Water Hub, the Global Green Institute, Norwegian People’s Aid, PAX, the Universidad Externado de Colombia and Zoï Environment Network.   Using case studies from Iraq, Syria, Colombia, Yemen, Ukraine, Laos DPR and Senegal, the report documents the often complex ways in which conflicts and insecurity create or compound environmental risks, or drive environmental change.   http://ceobs.org/why-were-calling-for-a-new-agenda-on-the-environment-peace-and-security-this-envconflictday/ Visit the related web page
	Climate change is exacerbating hunger & conflict - it’s time to break the cycle by Farah Hegazi, Caroline Delgado Stockholm International Peace Research Institute   Sep. 2023   In the run-up to COP28, Crisis Group experts contribute their views on how climate change shapes the conflicts and crises they work on.   Two months after meeting at the UN General Assembly, world leaders will reconvene in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, for COP28. The conference will test whether delegates can bring the necessary focus on conflict and climate affected countries and the much-needed support to their adaptation efforts.   Half of the countries most vulnerable to climate change also experience conflict, making climate adaptation in fragile states a critical bulwark to future climate and security risks.   As political differences in the UN Security Council have impeded climate, peace and security conversations in New York, November’s forum in Dubai is an opportunity to build on initiatives that began in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, at COP27. COP 28 will for the first time feature a ‘Relief, Recovery and Peace Day’ - the first explicit discussion of peace and conflict at any COP and a pivotal moment in the global climate discourse.   Despite this growing attention, integrating conflict and the needs of fragile and conflict-affected states into the COP dialogue faces systemic constraints. As we published last year, countries experiencing conflict receive on average only half the financing for adaptation compared to those at peace.   Nevertheless, it is crucial that leaders capitalise on the current momentum of having peace on the agenda for the first time and mainstream the climate-conflict nexus for successive COPs.The costs of inaction are perilous.   As global warming persists unabated, climate change will further stoke food insecurity, displacement and exacerbate conflicts, necessitating humanitarian and security interventions.   http://www.crisisgroup.org/global/cop28-special-series http://www.kofiannanfoundation.org/articles/climate-environment-conflict-interconnected-crises http://www.sipri.org/publications/2024/sipri-policy-papers/promoting-peace-through-climate-resilient-food-security-initiatives http://sipri.org/commentary/essay/2023/beyond-un-security-council-can-un-general-assembly-tackle-climate-security-challenge http://www.sipri.org/research/peace-and-development/sustainable-peace/food-peace-and-security http://theglobalobservatory.org/2023/06/security-council-climate-change-scientific-evidence/ http://www.icrc.org/fr/publication/4742-weathering-storm-reducing-impact-climate-risks-and-environmental-degradation-people   Apr. 2022   Leaders in the fields of climate science, peacebuilding and security, call for acknowledgement of links between climate change and conflict.   IPCC report findings signal need to address compound climate change and conflict risks in policy and programming.   The IPCC Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report published in February 2022 titled Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability contains important findings on the links between climate change and conflict emerging from recent research: climate change does contribute to increased risk of conflict, along indirect pathways and strongly mediated by socio-economic and political factors.   Following the report publication, however, some political actors have over-simplified and downplayed this evidence, implying that peacebuilding policy should not be concerned with climate change. We therefore find it necessary to emphasize the following points.   First, while the IPCC report underlines the prime importance of socio-economic conditions and governance in driving conflict risks, it simultaneously shows that these conditions themselves are subject to climate change.   Fragile contexts in which socio-economic and governance challenges are most pronounced and protracted are often facing disproportionate climate change impacts, which further exacerbate pre-existing vulnerabilities.   Just as climate change adaptation and mitigation measures should not ignore conflict risks, peacebuilding efforts cannot and should not ignore the effects of climate change on key drivers of conflict.   Second, the IPCC report further finds that climate change adaptation and mitigation have great potential to serve as peacebuilding measures, including by facilitating dialogue and cooperation between conflicting parties towards a common goal. Risks of conflict can also be reduced by promoting climate-sensitive economic activities along with women's self-determination, for example.   A contrast between climate adaptation as a means of promoting either peace or sustainable development, as some have made following the publication of the IPCC report, is therefore not only misleading, but often spurious.   The complexity of interactions between climate change and fragility must not be an excuse for inaction. The extent to which there is a general causal relationship between climate change and conflict is not the critical question to which policymakers need an answer before engaging.   Equipped with a context-specific understanding of how climate change and societal factors interact to increase conflict risks, policymakers should neither postpone nor prevent action to support those vulnerable members of our global community that face the compound risks of climate change impacts and governance-related threats to human security.   Prevention is better than cure. A forward-looking climate-and-conflict sensitive approach can help reduce future losses and damages while supporting truly sustainable development and promoting peace and stability. The international community should pursue such an approach across climate change, conflict prevention and peacebuilding policies and programming, specifically by:   Integrating environmental protection and climate-sensitivity into conflict prevention and peacebuilding efforts; ensuring that finance from across the security, sustainable development and climate change remits reaches fragile contexts; building conflict-sensitivity into climate adaptation and mitigation measures, especially in fragile contexts and throughout the project cycle.   Promoting international cooperation to mitigate the risks of instability associated with climate change, mitigation and adaptation; conducting locally informed climate-security risk assessments, particularly in fragile contexts, and integrating the findings of these into early warning systems, development cooperation and peace-building operations.   Listening to local communities, experts and civil society organisations in affected regions, and ensuring that, along with quantitative data, qualitative data on how climate and fragility risks interact informs policymaking.   It is also crucial that commitments to reduce emissions and make climate finance available are fulfilled.   Addressing the climate-security nexus is an essential component of climate justice. The international community should do whatever it takes to protect those who have contributed the least to the climate crisis, and already face the greatest risks to their lives and livelihoods, from the terrible prospect of violent conflict.   http://www.weatheringrisk.org/en/event/IPCC-Climate-Conflict-Joint-Statement http://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/experts2019-statement-calls-to-acknowledge-links-between-climate-change-and-conflict http://www.adelphi.de/en/news/7-questions-g7-superforecasting-climate-fragility-risks-coming-decade   Oct. 2021   Climate change is exacerbating hunger & conflict - it’s time to break the cycle, by Farah Hegazi, Caroline Delgado.   Hunger, violent conflict and the visible impacts of climate change are all on the rise. World Food Day, October 16, is a reminder that we need to talk about the intricate ways that these challenges are connected—and how to tackle them together.   Despite steadily increasing global harvests, more than 150 million people were acutely food-insecure in 2020, and 41 million people were reportedly on the edge of famine this summer. The main drivers of this food insecurity were violent conflict and extreme weather events.   With the number of active armed conflicts at an historic high, the impacts of climate change intensifying rapidly, and the world economy reeling from the COVID-19 pandemic, the need to find sustainable solutions to the dangerous interactions between hunger, conflict and climate change impacts could not be more pressing.   Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Haiti, Nigeria, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Yemen and Zimbabwe together accounted for the 10 worst hunger crises in 2020. In the preceding decade, they accounted for over 72 per cent of all conflict deaths globally. Most of these countries are also highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change.   This is no mere coincidence. Both conflict and climate change impact people’s ability to produce, trade and access food, often through complex interactions.   Attacks on food production are a regular feature of war, whether it is placing landmines in fields, burning crops, looting or killing livestock, or forcing farmers to switch away from food crops to more lucrative illicit crops such as coca leaves.   Disruption of transport routes makes it harder to distribute and store food, especially more perishable types. And when food is short and formal markets fail to deliver, black markets can thrive, with profits often going to one conflict party or another and thus helping to prolong the fighting. Not surprisingly, lasting food insecurity is among the principal legacies of war.   Climate change can also disrupt food production—from the immediate damage from floods and droughts, to slower impacts such changing rainfall patterns and rising temperatures that make it harder to grow current crop varieties.   These impacts can devastate the livelihoods of farmers and herders. The risk of conflict breaking out increases as they compete over viable land and water resources or migrate. They may also be courted by armed groups promising security and brighter prospects.   In Mali, for example, nearly a fifth of the population is food-insecure because of greater variability in rainfall and more frequent and severe droughts linked to climate change. Extremist groups have been quick to use this to their advantage, providing people with food in exchange for support and thereby further fueling conflict.   South Sudan is facing a similar situation. In flood-affected pastoral regions such as Jonglei, cattle raiding has become more frequent and more violent.   On the positive side, these links between hunger, climate and conflict provide entry points for action that addresses all three—and does so more effectively than programmes trying to tackle them separately.   As an example, in a region of East Africa known as the Greater Karamoja Cluster—spanning parts of Ethiopia, Kenya, South Sudan and Uganda—there have been violent clashes between groups of migratory herders during protracted drought.   The Intergovernmental Authority on Development and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization have managed to reduce these conflicts, and boost the herders’ livelihoods and food security, by helping them negotiate deals on the use of pasture and water resources.   Even small-scale, highly localized programmes can catalyse wider change. In Colombia, a country highly vulnerable to climate change and scarred by the legacy of a long-running armed conflict, the revival of traditional indigenous knowledge is gaining momentum.   This includes using natural early warning signs like the appearance of certain migratory birds, which can help locals to prepare themselves for climate impacts, as well as reviving sustainable farming, fishing and hunting practices. In the process, it brings together communities fragmented by the fighting.   The rise of hunger and conflict—reversing decades of progress—along with intensifying impacts of climate change all call for urgent action, from the United Nations down. But they are connected issues, compounding each other at dire cost to people and nature.   Although it recognized that conflict and climate are linked to food insecurity, the recent UN Food Systems Summit missed the chance to discuss in depth how these connections work or how to address them.   Another chance for real progress is coming with the imminent UN climate summit in Glasgow, COP26. It is to be hoped that the discussions on climate change adaptation and loss and damage will explicitly look at how to decouple hunger, conflict and climate change.   * Dr Farah Hegazi is a Researcher on the Climate Change and Risk programme at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). She is part of the research team for the SIPRI initiative Environment of Peace. Dr Caroline Delgado is a Senior Researcher and Director of the Food, Peace and Security Programme at SIPRI.   http://www.sipri.org/research/peace-and-development/environment-peace http://www.sipri.org/commentary/essay/2022/time-competing-crises-environmental-action-matters-more-ever http://www.environmentofpeace.org/ http://www.globalhungerindex.org/issues-in-focus/2021.html http://www.crisisgroup.org/global/climate-security-special-series Visit the related web page
	View more stories