• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

International Poland and Baltic nations plan to withdraw from landmine convention

LeonardoBjj

Professional Wrestler
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
8,893
Reaction score
11,220
By Andrius Sytas and Barbara Erling

  • Poland, Baltics say they need to protect their borders
  • Finland may follow their lead
  • Comes as Ukraine and Russia may agree ceasefire
  • 1997 landmine ban was global disarmament landmark
  • Red Cross 'gravely concerned' by the move
VILNIUS/WARSAW, March 18 (Reuters) - NATO members Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia plan to withdraw from the Ottawa convention banning anti-personnel landmines due to the military threat from their neighbour Russia, the four countries said on Tuesday.

Quitting the 1997 treaty, which has been ratified or acceded to by more than 160 nations, will allow Poland and the three Baltic countries to start stockpiling and using landmines again.

"Military threats to NATO member states bordering Russia and Belarus have significantly increased," the countries' defence ministers said in a joint statement.

"With this decision we are sending a clear message: our countries are prepared and can use every necessary measure to defend our security needs."

All four countries share borders with Russia. Poland, Lithuania and Latvia also share borders with Moscow's ally Belarus.
The announcement comes as Ukraine and Russia may be on the brink of agreeing a 30-day ceasefire and may move towards a more permanent end to the three-year-old conflict sparked by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

22780927816_dedbf8b163_z.jpg

Poland and the Baltics are concerned that an end to the war in Ukraine could lead Russia to re-arm and target them instead. All four were under Moscow's dominion during the Cold War.

"Poland's hands cannot be tied," Polish Deputy Prime Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz told a press conference.

GLOBAL DISARMAMENT

The 1997 Ottawa convention was one of a series of international agreements concluded after the end of the Cold War to encourage global disarmament. Anti-landmine campaigners won the Nobel Peace Prize that same year. Mines have killed or maimed tens of thousands of civilians across the globe, many of them long after conflicts have ended.

The International Committee of the Red Cross said it was "gravely concerned" by the move.

"Reintroducing these appalling weapons would be a deeply troubling step backward," Cordula Droege, ICRC's Chief Legal Officer, told Reuters. "Anti-personnel mines have limited military utility but devastating humanitarian consequences."

26235946420_60c9d8202c_c.jpg

Russia, the United States, China, India and Israel are among the countries who have not signed or ratified the treaty.

In 2008, the Convention on Cluster Munitions - explosive weapons that release smaller submunitions over a vast area - was adopted. Like landmines, they do not discriminate between combatants and civilians.

The United States, which did not sign that convention, in 2023 transferred cluster munitions to Ukraine to help it defend itself against Russia.

FINLAND COULD FOLLOW

Other countries could follow the lead of Poland and the Baltics. Finland, the last EU state to sign the Ottawa convention, in 2012, has said it was mulling withdrawal, citing Russia's use of such weapons in Ukraine as the reason. Finland shares a 1,340 km (833 mile) border with Russia.

"We have examined very closely through intelligence how Russia operates in Ukraine, specifically their mass use of infantry and also their mass use of mines," Finnish Defence Minister Antti Hakkanen told Reuters in December.

"This infantry issue is one thing that argued for the fact that it's worth examining the use of anti-personnel mines," he said.
The Finnish parliament's defence committee chair Jukka Kopra said on Tuesday the decision by Poland and the Baltics was "good and wise".

Poland said it could withdraw from the convention by passing legislation in parliament and securing the president's approval, followed by formal notification to the U.N. The withdrawal would take effect six months later.

In Estonia, the government needs to propose the law and parliament needs to vote on it, its foreign ministry said.
In Lithuania, the president will need to propose to parliament to denounce the convention, its foreign ministry said, and three-fifths of lawmakers need to support the move.

Reporting by Andrius Sytas in Vilnius, Barbara Erling, Alan Charlish, Karol Badohal and Anna Wlodarczak-Semczuk in Warsaw, Anne Kauranen and Essi Lehto in Helsinki, Emma Farge and Olivia Le Poidevin in Geneva, writing by Gwladys Fouche, editing by Terje Solsvik, Alexandra Hudson and Ros Russell

images

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/poland-baltic-nations-pull-out-landmines-convention-2025-03-18/
 
I wonder if the Soviet Era Russian immigrants get a lot of hate in the Baltics due to these political tensions.
 
I wonder if the Soviet Era Russian immigrants get a lot of hate in the Baltics due to these political tensions.

On average not really, people are "used" to each other on nation level

There are some tensions like you might end up in a fight at bar due to some drunk but nothing too serious at moment to my knowledge

What are potentially problematic are regions that are pro russian like narva in estonia or cultural events where pro political stuff might happen
 
Last edited:
The withdrawal of America's security umbrella naturally leads to a return to barbarism. Of course land mines are effective on the battlefield as shown in Ukraine, the issue is they're effective long after the battle has ended against civilians too. One of the many prices we will pay for "America First"
 
The withdrawal of America's security umbrella naturally leads to a return to barbarism. Of course land mines are effective on the battlefield as shown in Ukraine, the issue is they're effective long after the battle has ended against civilians too. One of the many prices we will pay for "America First"
This goes back to the question, why does America have the responsibility to protect the entire world?
 
This goes back to the question, why does America have the responsibility to protect the entire world?
Because they systhematically had oppressed countries to prevent them develop decent deterrent, always had sold them expensive weapons and instructed how to breath and how to think.

For example, U.S methodically had oppressed South Korea in order to prevent them develop long range missiles despite Kim and North Korea never had cared and developed a lot of stuff and now thanks to U.S and their friends in China and Russia...they now does have nice neighbor in North Korea with nukes and long range missiles & Kim telling that U.S are enemies and should STFU and sit in corner....

A lot of examples and exactly U.S directly are responsible for idiotic idea MTCR on paper voluntary noise but in reality for direct oppression of other countries.

Therefore for example Gulf countries does have nice instructions from U.S and ....Iran, nice neighbor with fanatics and long range missiles etc beauties...

A lot of reasons. Also ofc they wants to instruct others how to think....
 
Because they systhematically had oppressed countries to prevent them develop decent deterrent, always had sold them expensive weapons and instructed how to breath and how to think.

For example, U.S methodically had oppressed South Korea in order to prevent them develop long range missiles despite Kim and North Korea never had cared and developed a lot of stuff and now thanks to U.S and their friends in China and Russia...they now does have nice neighbor in North Korea with nukes and long range missiles & Kim telling that U.S are enemies and should STFU and sit in corner....

A lot of examples and exactly U.S directly are responsible for idiotic idea MTCR on paper voluntary noise but in reality for direct oppression of other countries.

Therefore for example Gulf countries does have nice instructions from U.S and ....Iran, nice neighbor with fanatics and long range missiles etc beauties...

A lot of reasons. Also ofc they wants to instruct others how to think....
So now they are no longer suppressing them. Isn’t that a good thing?
 
So now they are no longer suppressing them. Isn’t that a good thing?
They are oppressing even today.

They had failed to oppress North Korea and prevent them to develop nukes and long range missiles.
While with South Korea?
They still are using MTCR and also NPT on South Korea. Supervising that they will not develop nukes.
Doesn't sell them long range missiles etc.

Therefore are responsible.

They even were responsible for situation in Gulf area because failed to supervise Iraq and Iran 1980 - till 1992 th...
These gave f*** about U.S instructions how to think.
 
This goes back to the question, why does America have the responsibility to protect the entire world?
Because its mutually beneficial for all involved but those with a zero-sum mindset can't comprehend that. Just look at this one case. The reason nations joined the landmine convention is because landmines, despite being very effective, exert an enormous cost on civilians after the war. Extending the security umbrella so that nations don't feel they need to risk blowing up children in the long term for their short to medium term security is good actually.
 
Last edited:
This goes back to the question, why does America have the responsibility to protect the entire world?

The only country to ever invoke article 5 is US.
Europe (NATO) showed up...
When was the last time US soldiers died for other NATO countries in modern times?
I know the last time none US NATO soldiers died for US, it was Afghanistan.
 
History will make a short paragraph about this in the books. Just another indicator, in retrospect, of what was about to come. If only we had opened our eyes.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,260,943
Messages
57,061,994
Members
175,524
Latest member
bartu
Back
Top