Canada & the landmines ban March 11, 2014

Overview The Ottawa Process: context and process Ten years later Establishing a legacy

Why the landmines case? Example of key role non-state actors can play in developing and driving foreign policy Demonstrates the role soft power can play in international diplomacy Middle powers push it first before major powers come on-board Model for other efforts since

The Ottawa Process: context In the 1990s, NGOs generated public awareness of the problem of landmines. Various initiatives at state-level to limit or ban the use and production of landmines Clinton’s speech to the UN General Assembly calls for action with “view to eventual elimination of antipersonnel landmines” Challenge of UN system of disarmament negotiations

Formed in 1992 by collection humanitarian groups: the International Red Cross, various NGOs, many victims of landmine explosions. Enlist support of key public figures: Princess Diana, the Pope Red Cross key in documenting cases Key success in reframing issue: From military arms control to humanitarian issue International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL)

‘Landmines Kill Kids’

The Ottawa Process launched, 1996 Not in Geneva or NY Canadian foreign minister, Axworthy, announces, “The challenge is to see a treaty signed no later than the end of 1997.” Not following traditional diplomatic process, creating separate track from conventional process

The Ottawa Process Gaining domestic support Canada has to lead by example Partnering with non-governmental organisations unique level of influence given to NGOs Diplomatic soft power US and lead up to Oslo Meeting in Oslo

Halo Trust mine clearance in Angola

The elements defining the uniqueness of the Ottawa Process:  Certain states and NGOs used human relationships and strong negotiating skills to form a coalition of common interest.  Coalition was based on the principles of human security, transforming the accepted norms of warfare.

NGOs / coalition shifted away from thinking about national security to the one of human security. It set the stage for Canada, along with other middle powers and in partnership with civil society groups, to inject more soft power diplomacy into foreign relations.

Ten years later In 2005/2006 over 470,000 landmines destroyed, clearing more than 740 km 2 of landmines Casualty rates in Cambodia dropped by one third. More than 60 km 2 of landmine-infested terrain cleared in Cambodia In Bosnia, landmine victims declined: from 625 in 1996 to 19 in 2005/2006.

Establishing a legacy Direct result of saving lives around the world Alternative foreign policy paradigm: protection of individuals at the center of foreign policy and thus challenge to the precepts of state sovereignty (e.g. intervention in Libya 2011) New precedent in foreign policy by demonstrating alternative foreign policy force (middle powers as a new collectivity, coupled with non-state actors like NGOs)

Conclusion NGOs can have an important role in getting issues on the FP agenda and driving them How an issue is framed can have significant impact on its success Major FP issues can be addressed without direct major power support