DYB2011-Part-II-web

Conventional weapons issues
management. In this context, experts from the Geneva International Centre for
Humanitarian Demining delivered a presentation on the quality management
for priority-setting in ERW clearance programmes, stressing that the
objective was to clear the most important areas first and to use the resources
in the most economic manner. 79 Belarus, Guatemala, Nicaragua, the Russian
Federation, Serbia and Ukraine provided updates on their respective clearance
programmes.
The Coordinator on article 4 presented an assessment of the information
on implementation that the High Contracting Parties submitted in their
annual national reports. Two thirds of the reporting States parties provided
information on steps to implement article 4. Only a few of these States referred
to the Generic Electronic Template. Ireland delivered a presentation on its
recording procedures pursuant to article 4 and illustrated that, as a State with
both small armed forces and inventories of munitions and delivery systems,
it had only limited resources to overcome the challenges of implementing
article 4.
Cooperation and assistance and requests for assistance. The Coordinator
on cooperation and assistance encouraged both donor and recipient countries
to include detailed information on cooperation and assistance in their national
reports. States that submitted requests for assistance were encouraged to
provide regular updates on the status of those requests. Estonia, France, India
and the Philippines delivered their national presentations. The Coordinator
also co-chaired, together with the Coordinator on the subject of clearance, a
session on the needs of ERW-affected States in the area of clearance. 80
Generic preventive measures. The discussions in this session focused on
munitions management, life cycle of weapons and tests carried out throughout
that life cycle. Belgium, France, Germany and the United States, as well as
independent professionals, 81 delivered presentations covering a range of issues
such as the surveillance of munitions still in service and their maintenance
throughout their life cycle, national regulations and practices with regard
79 “Quality management for priority-setting in ERW clearance programmes” by Vera Bohle
and Asa Gilbert (GICHD); “Measures undertaken by Ukraine to remove WWII munitions”
by Tetyana Shalkivska (Ukraine); “Ireland’s implementation of article 4 of Protocol V” by
Jim Burke (Ireland).
80 “International cooperation and assistance: French mine action” by Lionel Pechera (French
Army School of Engineers in Angers, France); “Georgia PfP Trust Fund III” by Kadi Silde
(Ministry of Defense, Estonia); “Philippines international ERW cooperation” by Jesus S.
Domingo (Philippines); “Cooperation and assistance” by Abhay Kumar Singh (India).
81 “Belgian best practices related to generic preventive measures of article 9” by Peter
Constandt (Belgium); “German standards for ammunition storage installations and
handling of ammunition” by Volkmar Posseldt (Germany); “Generic preventive
measures—life cycle” by Franck Decobeq (France); “Generic preventive measures—
follow up to the guide on the implementation of Part 3 of the Technical Annex” by Franck
Decobeq (France); and “Generic preventive measures—detailed visit of munitions” by
Frank Decobeq (France).
95