Estonia joined the Ottawa Convention banning anti-personnel landmines in 2004. Referring to ongoing discussions in Finland about a possible withdrawal from the treaty, the Riigikogu National Defense Committee suggested that the topic should also be addressed in Estonia. On Monday, Defense Forces Commander Maj. Gen. Andrus Merilo met with members of the committee to provide his military assessment on the matter.

"This assessment was compiled by the EDF Headquarters in collaboration with experts," said Merilo. "And today, we concluded that in order to achieve our military objectives and successfully defend the country, there is currently no need for us to withdraw from the Ottawa Convention."

Merilo added that the option should remain open. "Perhaps in the future, we can revisit the matter to assess whether circumstances have changed in a way that would make withdrawing from the convention beneficial for us," he said.

Kalev Stoicescu, chair of the National Defense Committee, also noted during the committee meeting that the issue could be revisited at the appropriate time.

"I asked what the right time might be. The response was that it could be, for instance, after the conclusion of the war in Ukraine, whether temporarily or otherwise," Stoicescu said.

Defense minister: Both drones and cluster munitions among alternatives

According to Andrus Merilo, several alternatives have emerged to replace the passive anti-personnel mines covered under the convention.

"During this analysis, we actually identified a number of technical solutions that we hadn't initially considered," said Merilo. "With modern solutions, we can achieve the same or even greater effectiveness compared to these old-school passive anti-personnel mines."

Globally, anti-personnel mines have been used to hinder enemy movement in areas where friendly forces are not present. Merilo emphasized that obstacles must always be monitored, so to speak, to ensure the ability to engage opposing forces encountering the barrier.

Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur (Reform) noted that potential alternatives are not limited to ground-deployed measures.

"There are certainly aerial countermeasures as well," said Pevkur. "For example, drones, various types of cluster munitions or other means. The main question is whether the charges used against infantry are controllable or, for instance, self-destruct after a certain period of time."

Kalev Stoicescu emphasized that future discussions must prioritize Estonia's ability to defend itself by any means necessary. "Is a machine gun humane?" Stoicescu asked. "No, it's not very humane. If the enemy comes at us in hordes and must be killed, the question is, on one hand, how effective it is at killing and destroying the enemy, and on the other hand, how much it costs."

Stoicescu also stressed the need to consider cost-effectiveness. "These smart mines might end up being much more expensive," he added.

Merilo countered the notion that passive anti-personnel mines are a cheap solution. "After they are deployed, they must eventually be cleared, and this significantly raises the final cost," he said.

Hanno Pevkur noted that withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention would require Estonia to take both military and diplomatic risks into account.

"In Latvia, the framework nation for NATO's presence is Canada, where Ottawa is, of course, located. This is a symbolic issue," said Pevkur. "In Estonia, the framework nation is the United Kingdom, which has long championed the ban on so-called dumb anti-personnel mines, even at the royal level."

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!