Sida's Contributions to Humanitarian Mine Action

ecently developed. The approaches to impact assessment developed by NPA include consultationswith community and other non-HMA implementers. The government is seen as a further key to theprocess. NPA Angola has tried to relate constructively with local government, INAROEE and theMinistry of Social Affairs and Reintegration (MINARS), both in information exchange and in providingthe government with seconded personnel. Despite this, the Angolan government has pressuredNPA to undertake tasks for political reasons. In the past, NPA believed that if it wanted to continueworking in Angola, it had to respond to requests from regional politicians irrespective of the predictedimpact of the task, whenever such requests were presented. Currently, this is changing with the developmentof the impact-assessment methodology. The establishment of a standard approach is fundamentalin preventing this from occurring in the future, because impact assessments can be used toestablish a common language between NPA and government officials. The government will have torealize that NPA is restricted, both by impact-assessment prerequisites and on the types of tasks theycan undertake.The government channelIn general, there have been few studies on the use of the government and the military as implementersof mine action, and very little, if anything, is known about their efficacy. In Nicaragua, the governmenthas assumed responsibility for virtually all aspects of mine action in the country. This includes thesetting of priorities, the general coordination of HMA and HMA implementation. In the followingsections, we assess the Nicaraguan military as implementers of mine action in Nicaragua.Sida’s roleBeginning in 1996, Sida has provided support for demining in Nicaragua through the OAS. Aside fromsupporting mine clearance, Sida has also channelled funds through the OAS for limited work on victimassistance. In terms of mine clearance, Sida has not been directly involved in demining efforts. However,Sida has requested that specific areas be demined in order to facilitate other Sida-funded developmentprojects. Sida has thus far refrained from monitoring the work conducted by either the armedforces or the government. One reason for this has been that Sida is understaffed at the field level.A second reason is that Sida staff do not have the expertise required to monitor and assess. From theperspective of the OAS, this is advantageous in that it places fewer restrictions on implementingorganizations. Sida did propose that Honduran and Nicaraguan demining efforts be more closelycoordinated, but this was rejected by the OAS owing to the complexity and difficulty of such an arrangement,along with the different priorities inherent in each country. 19Assessment of the Government programme in NicaraguaRelevanceThe mine problem in Nicaragua – as well as the rest of Latin America – has never reached the proportionsof other countries examined in this report. Damage to infrastructure in Nicaragua has beenconsiderably less than in other cases, and the overall level of post-conflict infrastructure reconstructionin the form of roads and bridges is not as immediate. Furthermore, the number of victims from landminesis relatively low, and the issue of refugee return has not been linked to the mine problem. 2019Perina, Dr Ruben M. (OAS) & Mr William McDonough (OAS), 1997. Correspondence to Ms Elisabeth Lewin, LatinAmerica Department, Sida, 22 July20Landmines in Nicaragua claim upwards of 80 victims per year, and to date a total of 553 persons have been reportedvictims of landmine accidents. Centro de Estudios Internacionales CEI [International Studies Centre], 1999. MinasAntipersonales y Desminado en Nicaragua: Avances y Limitaciones [Anti-personnel Mines and Demining in Nicaragua: Advances andLimitations]. Nicaragua: CEI, p.15.34 Sida’s CONTRIBUTION TO HUMANITARIAN MINE ACTION – Sida EVALUATION 01/06