European Countries DROP Landmine Ban – Why?

As Russia’s threat looms, European nations are tossing out their landmine bans to prepare for the unthinkable – a direct confrontation with Putin’s forces.

At a Glance

  • Finland has joined Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia in announcing withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention banning anti-personnel landmines
  • The decision is directly motivated by Russia’s aggression and lessons from the Ukraine war, where minefields have proven tactically valuable
  • Major powers including the US, China, and Russia never joined the 1997 treaty, limiting its effectiveness from the start
  • Critics warn the move undermines humanitarian principles, while supporters argue it’s a necessary defensive measure against overwhelming threats

The Collapsing European Consensus on Landmines

Remember when disarmament treaties were the hallmark of European enlightenment? Well, reality has come knocking, and it’s wearing Russian combat boots. Finland has become the latest European nation to announce its withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention – the 1997 treaty banning anti-personnel landmines – joining Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia in a growing exodus. These nations aren’t abandoning humanitarian principles on a whim; they’re responding to the existential threat directly on their doorstep that the comfortable elites in Brussels and Washington can’t seem to comprehend.

The Ottawa Convention was once proudly described as “a driving force in order to ensure peace, security and prosperity of mankind” by President Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique. That lofty rhetoric sounds downright quaint now as Russian forces lay waste to Ukrainian cities and plant millions of mines along a 600-mile front. 

The treaty that was supposed to make the world safer failed to convince the biggest landmine users – Russia, China, and the United States – to join in the first place. Now, the countries most vulnerable to Russian aggression are making the rational calculation that survival trumps symbolic gestures. 

Ukraine’s Bloody Lessons

If you want to understand why these nations are suddenly reevaluating decades of disarmament policy, look no further than the hellscape that is modern Ukraine. The war has demonstrated with brutal clarity what military strategists have known all along – that landmines are devastatingly effective at slowing down enemy advances and protecting defensive positions with minimal manpower. Both Ukrainian and Russian forces have extensively employed minefields to channel enemy movements and compensate for shortages in troops and equipment. For smaller nations like the Baltics, with lengthy borders to defend against a numerically superior adversary, the strategic value is impossible to ignore.

According to the U.S. Department of State: “Landmines enable a commander to shape the battlefield to his advantage.” 

The hard truth is that while the global elite were busy congratulating themselves on their moral enlightenment by banning these weapons, Russia was stockpiling them by the millions. Now countries like Finland, with its 830-mile border with Russia, are facing the consequences of unilateral disarmament. 

The Finnish government didn’t make this decision lightly – it came after thorough assessments by their defense forces and security agencies. Unlike the virtue-signaling from capitals far from the Russian border, the Finns understand that deterrence requires teeth, not treaties. 

The Hypocrisy of Critics

Predictably, the humanitarian industrial complex is in full meltdown mode over these decisions. Norway’s Foreign Minister wrung her hands about how Finland’s withdrawal could “reduce the stigma against landmine use globally.” Funny how that concern never seems to extend to pressuring Russia, which currently maintains the world’s largest stockpile of anti-personnel mines and is actively deploying them in Ukraine. 

The critics conveniently ignore that the countries withdrawing from the treaty aren’t planning indiscriminate use but rather responsible, defensive deployment to protect their sovereignty against an aggressor that never agreed to ban these weapons in the first place.

The uncomfortable reality is that nations facing existential threats don’t have the luxury of unilateral disarmament when their adversaries are actively arming. For countries like Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – with their small populations and militaries – landmines represent a critical force multiplier against a Russian army that outnumbers them many times over. As NATO continues to struggle with member states not meeting their defense spending commitments and with uncertainty around American security guarantees, these vulnerable nations are taking their defense into their own hands. And they should be applauded for it, not condemned.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR