European Nations Rethinking Land Mine Treaties In Light Of Ukraine Crisis

Map highlighting Ukraine and surrounding countries

Eastern European nations are abandoning a global landmine ban treaty as Russia’s aggression in Ukraine forces them to reconsider defense priorities, igniting debate between military necessity and humanitarian concerns.

Key Insights

Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia are withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention banning anti-personnel landmines due to growing Russian threats.
The Ukraine conflict has demonstrated landmines’ effectiveness in territorial defense, influencing these nations’ strategic recalculations.
Major powers including Russia, China, and the United States never joined the 1997 treaty, limiting its effectiveness in eliminating landmines globally.
Military analysts argue landmines offer smaller nations cost-effective defensive advantages against larger invading forces.
Humanitarian organizations warn the withdrawals could normalize landmine use and increase civilian casualties worldwide.

Defense Reality Trumps Post-Cold War Idealism

The Ottawa Convention, established in 1999 with the ambitious goal of eliminating anti-personnel landmines worldwide, is experiencing a significant exodus of European nations along Russia’s borders. Finland recently announced its withdrawal, following similar moves by Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia – all countries with substantial reason to fear Russian military aggression. The convention, which currently has 164 state parties, never succeeded in bringing major military powers like Russia, China, and the United States into the fold, creating an unbalanced security environment for smaller nations facing threats from these powers.

When Central and Eastern European nations initially joined the treaty, they did so partly to demonstrate their alignment with Western values following the Cold War. However, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has forced a harsh reassessment of defense priorities. The conflict has starkly demonstrated landmines’ effectiveness in territorial defense, with both Russia and Ukraine deploying them extensively to control movement and protect forces. This practical battlefield utility has overwhelmed humanitarian concerns for nations that feel existentially threatened.

Finland to Withdraw From Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Treaty | The Defense Post

Finland’s prime minister said Tuesday the country plans to withdraw from the international treaty banning anti-personnel mines, the latest signatory moving to ditch the ban over threats from Russia.… pic.twitter.com/dycnjpQghA

— Owen Gregorian (@OwenGregorian) April 2, 2025

Military Necessity Versus Humanitarian Concerns

The decision to withdraw from the Ottawa Convention reflects a fundamental tension between military necessity and humanitarian principles. Landmines offer smaller nations with limited resources a cost-effective way to delay or deter larger invading forces. As Finland’s President Alexander Stubb explained, their decision was “based on assessments by relevant ministries and defense forces,” while maintaining a commitment to responsible mine use. For countries with long borders with Russia and limited military personnel, landmines represent a force multiplier that could prove crucial in the early stages of an invasion.

Critics, however, argue that abandoning the treaty undermines international humanitarian law and could lead to increased civilian casualties worldwide. Norway’s foreign minister Espen Barth Eide sharply criticized Finland’s decision, warning it could reduce the global stigma against landmine use. Ukraine now stands as the world’s most heavily mined country, with clearance efforts expected to take decades and cost billions. The human toll in post-conflict regions remains a powerful argument for maintaining the ban, regardless of military utility.

Changing Security Landscape Drives Policy Shift

The European security landscape has undergone a dramatic transformation since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Nations bordering Russia have significantly increased defense spending, with Finland and the Baltic states now well above NATO’s 2% GDP target. Their withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention represents one element of a broader strategy to strengthen deterrence against Russian aggression. The landmine ban initially represented an optimistic post-Cold War vision, described by Mozambique’s President Joaquim Chissano as “a driving force … in order to ensure peace, security and prosperity of mankind.”

That vision has collided with today’s resurgent great power competition. These withdrawal decisions reflect a pragmatic recognition that universal disarmament remains unlikely in the current geopolitical environment. While the treaty prohibits the manufacture of anti-personnel landmines, experts suggest countries like Finland could rapidly restore production capabilities. The growing threat from Russia, combined with uncertainty about American security commitments, may lead additional European nations to reevaluate their stance on landmines as they seek to maximize their defensive capabilities with limited resources.