At the end of April an exclusive of the Wall Street Journal Through satellite data showed a series of strategic movements of the Russian army on border enclaves. A few days before, The New York Times told how Finland I was preparing For an eventual war. Then it was the Baltic countries that began to surround Russia With 600 bunkers. Now all these countries have taken an unprecedented step. A shadow of the past. For decades, the Antipersone mines They marked the borders of the Soviet block, not as much as a Effective military defensebut as a brutal means of avoiding the flight of its citizens to the West. After the collapse of the USSR, the international community embarked on a complex and laborious demining campaign that culminated with the firm From the Ottawa treaty In 1997, backed by more than 160 countries. It happens that this legacy of humanitarian disarmament, which seemed sealed forever, now It is cracking. Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, five European countries (Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) have decided to initiate the legal process for leave the treatythus reopening the possibility of the systematic use of antipersone mines on European soil. Military pragmatism. The decision does not imply An immediate placement of mines on its borders, but it does mark a change of drastic approach and loaded with implications. For years, modern military doctrines minimized the tactical value of these weapons in conventional conflicts, underlining their indiscriminate character and scarce utility against armored units. However, the war in Ukraine has altered that reasoning: the extensive mines fields placed by Russia They were one of the decisive factors in the containment of the Ukrainian counteroffensive. Although they do not stop an mechanized division alone, they force the adversary to slow down their progress, channel their movements and spend valuable resources in cleaning operations, thus offering an asymmetric defensive advantage that many now see how inalienable. Italian antipersone mine Valmara 69 Legal and moral consequences. The Ottawa treaty was more than a military pact signed by more than 160 countries (important: without Russia, China and the United States): it represented A moral milestone In the history of humanitarian law. Its success allowed to reduce the number of victims by mines of more than 20,000 a year In the nineties about 3,500 today. The output of several countries Europeans not only weakens the treaty in practical terms, but undergoes legal architecture that since the end of the Cold War has sought to humanize conflicts. For many activists, Like Mary Wareham of Human Rights Watch, this withdrawal represents A dangerous crack in a consensus that also protects against chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. In his words, once the idea of abandoning international agreements gains legitimacy, it is difficult to stop The domino effect. What is at stake is not only a weapon, but the very principle that there are limits in war, he clarifies. Blow to the heart of Europe. The pressure on governments has been intense and transverse. In Finland, whose parliament voted for a large majority in favor of leave the treatyEven legislators contrary to the mines recognize that fear of a Russian invasion has altered national security priorities. The 1,300 kilometers terrestrial border with Russia, together with a story marked by wars With Moscow, it has generated a particular sensitivity that has given wings to proposals that just five years ago would have been unthinkable. The political trigger, however, Lithuania winewhere the then Minister of Defense, after visiting Ukraine, said that the prohibition of the mines was hindering the defense in front of Russia. From there, the idea spread among the most exposed allies geographically. Only Norway, among countries with direct border with Russia, has reiterated Your firm commitment With the treaty. The past as a warning. Ukraine, signer of the treaty in 2006I had kept more than three million mines. Frustration after the partial failure of his counteroffensive, together with Mass use of mines On the part of Russia, he led the Zelensky government to reconsider its position. In fact, the president announced this month formally Treaty outputarguing that an existential threat could not be fought with a hand tied by treaties that Moscow never signed or respected. The United States, although it is not part of the treaty, had maintained restrictions on the use of mines, but partially lifted them for supply to Ukraine. This has marked a tacit break with decades of diplomatic efforts and disarmament. For many, like British Paul Heslop (UN expert in demining), what we are witnessing is a betrayal to the memory of those who fought (and died) for eradicating these weapons. Image | Dfid, United NationsPh1 Dewayne Smith In Xataka | Finland is the happiest country in the world. And is also preparing thoroughly for the most unhappy end: war In Xataka | Now we know what the US Army did in Finland. Russia is expanding its troops on its border with Europe
