Interior Minister Rihards Kozlovskis (JV), replacing the Foreign Minister at a government meeting, said he had asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to determine the urgency of this issue and to include it at the first issue at the Saeima sitting on 27 March.
The Saeima will make the decision from the end of the Convention.
The State Chancellery will prepare bills in parliament.
Latvia is expected to leave the Synchron with Estonia, Lithuania and Poland from the Convention, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA).
The MFA explains that this Convention was adopted on September 18, 1997, but came into force in 1999. It has been joined by more than 160 countries around the world, including most Western countries. China, Russia, USA, India and Pakistan have not joined the Convention.
Member States of the Convention shall never use or under any circumstances, not to develop, not to produce, not to produce, or to receive a different way, to store, to preserve, or not to give anyone directly or indirectly.
Similarly, members of the Convention shall undertake not to assist in any way, not support or encourage anyone on actions that any Member State has been prohibited in accordance with the Convention. Each Member State also undertakes to destroy all infantry mines or to ensure their destruction in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.
The moment Latvia’s accession to the Ottawa Convention was decided, there were no military, strategic or security reasons why Latvia is not accompanied by it, while the security situation in the Baltic region has changed at the moment, the MFA points out.
The ministry notes that, through full -scale aggression against Ukraine, Russia has shown that it does not comply with the territorial boundaries and international law of sovereign states. Therefore, it is important for Latvia to maintain freedom of choice and flexibility to apply various weapon systems and solutions to strengthen discouraging and national protection, emphasizes the MFA.
Referring to the war in Ukraine, the ministry points out that non -conductor mine in combination with other mines and arms systems increases the lethality of the Defense Forces by delaying or stopping Russia’s mass movement. The MFA also concludes that in the context of the current regional security situation, the Ottawa Convention restricts the possibilities of Latvia’s defense, completely excluding the use of an effective military protection product – infantry mine.
The MFA adds that the issue of withdrawal from the Convention has also been raised in other countries of the region, ensuring the possibility of solidarity and united to decide on withdrawal. In view of the security situation changes in the region, Latvia’s defense needs, consultations with the Allies, and to confirm solidarity and unity with other countries in the region, Minister of Defense Andris Sprūds (P) has called for Latvia’s withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention in a joint statement with Estonian, Lithuanian and Polish defense ministers.
The Convention also stipulates that each Member State is entitled to withdraw from it in implementing its national sovereignty. The Member State shall notify the withdrawal of all other Member States, the UN Secretary -General and the UN Security Council. The withdrawal shall enter into force six months after the withdrawal document has received the depositary. Accordingly, Latvia will have the right and the ability to use, purchase or produce infantry mines.
The MFA emphasizes that Latvia will continue to comply with international obligations, including humanitarian rights, while ensuring its security needs.
The ministry also notes that any possible purchase, placement and use of non -conductor mines will depend on military logic and need, as well as the priorities of the defense capacity and the available funding.
LETA has already written that Latvia, Estonia, Lithuanian and Polish defense ministers have reached a regional agreement to strengthen their borders to the withdrawal of countries from the Ottawa Convention prohibiting the use of infantry mine.
On March 18, the Latvian government decided to launch the process so Latvia would leave the Convention.
What are the potential benefits of Latvia withdrawing from the Ottawa Treaty, according to dr.Elina Veckalne?
Table of Contents
- 1. What are the potential benefits of Latvia withdrawing from the Ottawa Treaty, according to dr.Elina Veckalne?
- 2. Latvia’s Potential Withdrawal from the Ottawa Treaty: An Interview with Security analyst Dr.Elina Veckalne
- 3. The Shifting Security Landscape
- 4. Strategic Implications and Regional solidarity.
- 5. A Look Ahead
Latvia’s Potential Withdrawal from the Ottawa Treaty: An Interview with Security analyst Dr.Elina Veckalne
Archyde News Editor: Welcome, Dr.veckalne. Thank you for joining us today to discuss Latvia’s potential withdrawal from the Ottawa Treaty, a topic of significant importance given the current geopolitical climate. Could you give us some background on the treaty itself?
Dr. Elina Veckalne: Thank you for having me. The Ottawa Treaty, officially the “Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction,” was adopted in 1997 and came into force in 1999. It prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of anti-personnel landmines. Over 160 countries have joined, but notably, Russia, the United States, and China have not.
The Shifting Security Landscape
Archyde News Editor: the news indicates Latvia,along with Estonia,Lithuania,and Poland,is considering withdrawing due to the evolving security situation.What specific factors are driving this re-evaluation?
Dr. Elina Veckalne: The primary driver is the perceived increased threat from Russia, especially in light of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Russia’s actions have demonstrated a disregard for international law and territorial boundaries. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs emphasizes that the Ottawa Convention now restricts Latvia’s defense capabilities, excluding the use of a potentially effective military protection product – infantry mines. The possibility of using such measures is viewed as critical for discouraging Russian aggression.
Strategic Implications and Regional solidarity.
Archyde News Editor: How does Latvia’s withdrawal fit into the broader regional strategy, and what are the strategic implications of such a move?
Dr. Elina Veckalne: There’s a clear effort towards regional solidarity.The defense ministers of Latvia,Estonia,Lithuania,and Poland have already reached an agreement for a coordinated withdrawal. This unified approach sends a strong message of deterrence, showing a united front against potential threats. Strategically, withdrawing allows Latvia to have the flexibility to employ various weapon systems, which could be perceived as an important advancement for national defense.
Archyde News Editor: If Latvia withdraws, what practical steps will follow, and what impact could this have on international relations?
Dr. Elina Veckalne: The Saeima (Latvian Parliament) will make the decision to withdraw.The state chancellery is preparing the necessary bills.The withdrawal process itself involves notifying all othre member states, as well as the UN Secretary-General and the UN Security Council. the withdrawal would come into affect six months after the notification.This would allow Latvia to use, purchase, or produce infantry mines. It’s critically important to note that while prioritizing security needs, Latvia has also emphasized a commitment to continue upholding international obligations, including humanitarian rights.
A Look Ahead
archyde News Editor: Dr. Veckalne, considering the international condemnation of Russia’s actions in Ukraine,do you believe that this re-evaluation of the Ottawa Treaty represents a necessary step toward national security,or a potentially dangerous precedent for other nations? What are your thoughts?
Dr. Elina Veckalne: This is a complex issue with no easy answers. While the treaty has humanitarian goals, the evolving security situation demands a re-evaluation of defense capabilities. A withdrawal could be seen as a necessary response to a changing geopolitical landscape. The key will be balancing national security needs with a continued commitment to international law. Readers should consider if the potential benefits of enhanced defense outweigh the potential diplomatic ramifications of this decision. I welcome thoughts and comments on the matter.
Archyde News Editor: Dr. Elina Veckalne,thank you for your insights.
