‘It Is An Elephant': Ukraine's Unexploded Mine Problem
5 June 2025
These are the results of the ammunition from last nights' attacks, or at least from the munitions which exploded.
At a briefing in New York, Paul Heslop, the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) advisor in Ukraine, described the impact of the unexploded ordnances which have contaminated large swaths of land in the country.
'Contaminated land is not just dangerous. It is lost hope, recovery and livelihood,' he said.
Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, this contamination has spread throughout the territory, making it impossible for residents to return home and farmers to cultivate crops. Children are often among the most vulnerable to unexploded ordinances.
UNMAS and its partners on the ground are working diligently to comb over this land and declare it safe for returning residents and agricultural cultivation.
Massive contamination, 'real and perceived'
Millions of mines and unexploded ordinances are currently scattered throughout Ukraine. This makes it the most heavily contaminated country since the end of the Second World War, said Mr. Heslop.
UNMAS estimates that over 20 per cent of land — or 139,000 square kilometres — in Ukraine is contaminated by mines or unexploded ordnances.
Over six million people live in or around contaminated areas and over 800 casualties due to unexploded ordinances have been documented. This is the real contamination.
But Mr. Heslop noted that for every one square kilometre which is actually contaminated, there are 100 which are not. However, that does not mean that residents feel they can safely return to the land. This is the 'perceived contamination' of unexploded ordinances.
UNMAS is working to identify which of the 139,000 square kilometres of potentially contaminated land is safe.
35,000 square kilometres declared safe
Two years ago, UNMAS estimated that 174,000 square kilometres in Ukraine were contaminated. Since then, 35,000 square kilometres have been declared safe, enabling residents to go back to their communities.
The process of demining contaminated land — either by removing unexploded ordnances or by scanning an area to declare it safe — is especially important for families reliant upon agriculture.
Since the start of the war, Ukraine's agricultural sector has suffered $83.9 billion in losses, due in part to large swaths of agricultural land being contaminated with unexploded ordnances.
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has supported over 250,000 families through various programmes, including vouchers and seed distribution. They have also worked closely with UNMAS to clear agricultural land and return it to use.
'Real progress'
UNMAS and its partners also have worked, over the last few years, to develop a system for demining which maximizes efficiency.
'Demining is an inherently inefficient process,' Mr. Helsop said.
After all, the most thorough option for demining is also the most time-consuming and expensive — having a person walk the land with a detector.
UNMAS alongside two dozen Ukrainian Government entities, have been working to implement satellite and artificial intelligence technology to make demining more time and cost effective.
'What we need to do is make sure the investment that is being made today …continues to deliver results and [is] enhanced moving forward,' he said.
The problem as an 'elephant'
Mr. Helsop compared demining in Ukraine to an elephant, calling upon humanitarian agencies and donors to think about this large problem comprehensively.
He said that demining efforts are still being hampered by a lack of cohesion among groups on the ground, and by funding and personnel shortages. Donors have already committed $1 billion to fund demining efforts in Ukraine, but he said that the entire project would cost many billions.
He also reiterated the necessity of doing it, not only for the people in Ukraine whose livelihoods have been disrupted by contaminated land, but also for the world which has witnessed increased food and energy costs as a result of decreased agricultural production in the country.
'We know how to do it… but we need the resources to do it and it's going to be a slow and potentially dangerous process,' he said. 'But if we get it right, we will bring down global food and energy prices.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
‘It Is An Elephant': Ukraine's Unexploded Mine Problem
5 June 2025 These are the results of the ammunition from last nights' attacks, or at least from the munitions which exploded. At a briefing in New York, Paul Heslop, the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) advisor in Ukraine, described the impact of the unexploded ordnances which have contaminated large swaths of land in the country. 'Contaminated land is not just dangerous. It is lost hope, recovery and livelihood,' he said. Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, this contamination has spread throughout the territory, making it impossible for residents to return home and farmers to cultivate crops. Children are often among the most vulnerable to unexploded ordinances. UNMAS and its partners on the ground are working diligently to comb over this land and declare it safe for returning residents and agricultural cultivation. Massive contamination, 'real and perceived' Millions of mines and unexploded ordinances are currently scattered throughout Ukraine. This makes it the most heavily contaminated country since the end of the Second World War, said Mr. Heslop. UNMAS estimates that over 20 per cent of land — or 139,000 square kilometres — in Ukraine is contaminated by mines or unexploded ordnances. Over six million people live in or around contaminated areas and over 800 casualties due to unexploded ordinances have been documented. This is the real contamination. But Mr. Heslop noted that for every one square kilometre which is actually contaminated, there are 100 which are not. However, that does not mean that residents feel they can safely return to the land. This is the 'perceived contamination' of unexploded ordinances. UNMAS is working to identify which of the 139,000 square kilometres of potentially contaminated land is safe. 35,000 square kilometres declared safe Two years ago, UNMAS estimated that 174,000 square kilometres in Ukraine were contaminated. Since then, 35,000 square kilometres have been declared safe, enabling residents to go back to their communities. The process of demining contaminated land — either by removing unexploded ordnances or by scanning an area to declare it safe — is especially important for families reliant upon agriculture. Since the start of the war, Ukraine's agricultural sector has suffered $83.9 billion in losses, due in part to large swaths of agricultural land being contaminated with unexploded ordnances. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has supported over 250,000 families through various programmes, including vouchers and seed distribution. They have also worked closely with UNMAS to clear agricultural land and return it to use. 'Real progress' UNMAS and its partners also have worked, over the last few years, to develop a system for demining which maximizes efficiency. 'Demining is an inherently inefficient process,' Mr. Helsop said. After all, the most thorough option for demining is also the most time-consuming and expensive — having a person walk the land with a detector. UNMAS alongside two dozen Ukrainian Government entities, have been working to implement satellite and artificial intelligence technology to make demining more time and cost effective. 'What we need to do is make sure the investment that is being made today …continues to deliver results and [is] enhanced moving forward,' he said. The problem as an 'elephant' Mr. Helsop compared demining in Ukraine to an elephant, calling upon humanitarian agencies and donors to think about this large problem comprehensively. He said that demining efforts are still being hampered by a lack of cohesion among groups on the ground, and by funding and personnel shortages. Donors have already committed $1 billion to fund demining efforts in Ukraine, but he said that the entire project would cost many billions. He also reiterated the necessity of doing it, not only for the people in Ukraine whose livelihoods have been disrupted by contaminated land, but also for the world which has witnessed increased food and energy costs as a result of decreased agricultural production in the country. 'We know how to do it… but we need the resources to do it and it's going to be a slow and potentially dangerous process,' he said. 'But if we get it right, we will bring down global food and energy prices.'
1News
29-05-2025
- 1News
King Charles reaffirms Canada's sovereignty amid Trump annexation threats
King Charles III said Canada is facing unprecedented challenges in a world that's never been more dangerous as he opened the Canadian Parliament on Wednesday with a speech widely viewed as a show of support in the face of annexation threats by US President Donald Trump. Trump's repeated suggestion that the US annex Canada prompted Prime Minister Mark Carney to invite Charles to give the speech from the throne outlining his government's priorities for the new session of Parliament. The King is the head of state in Canada, which is a member of the Commonwealth of former colonies. 'We must face reality: since the Second World War, our world has never been more dangerous and unstable. Canada is facing challenges that, in our lifetimes, are unprecedented," Charles said in French. He added that 'many Canadians are feeling anxious and worried about the drastically changing world around them". The King said the 'True North is indeed strong and free' and reaffirmed Canada's sovereignty. ADVERTISEMENT A rare moment King Charles delivers the speech from the throne in the Senate in Ottawa, Canada (Source: Associated Press) It's rare for the monarch to deliver what's called the speech from the throne in Canada. Charles' mother, Queen Elizabeth II, did it twice before The King noted that it had been nearly 70 years since his mother first opened Parliament. And said he's visited 20 times. 'Canada has dramatically changed: repatriating its constitution, achieving full independence, and witnessing immense growth. Canada has embraced its British, French, and Indigenous roots, and become a bold, ambitious, innovative country that is bilingual, truly multicultural,' the monarch said. He said when his late mother opened a new session of Canadian Parliament in 1957, World War II remained a fresh, painful memory and said the Cold War was intensifying. "Freedom and democracy were under threat," he said. 'Today, Canada faces another critical moment." ADVERTISEMENT The King's speech King Charles delivers the speech from the throne in the Senate in Ottawa, Canada (Source: Associated Press) The speech isn't written by the King or his UK advisers, as Charles serves as a nonpartisan head of state. He read what was put before him by Canada's government, but made some remarks of his own. Canadians are largely indifferent to the monarchy, but Carney has been eager to show the differences between Canada and the United States. After the United States gained independence from Britain, Canada remained a colony until 1867 and afterwards, continued as a constitutional monarchy with a British-style parliamentary system. The King's visit clearly underscores Canada's sovereignty, Carney said. 'I have always had the greatest admiration for Canada's unique identity, which is recognised across the world for bravery and sacrifice in defence of national values, and for the diversity and kindness of Canadians,' the King said. ADVERTISEMENT Carney won the job of prime minister by promising to confront the increased aggression shown by Trump and made his first trip to London and Paris, the capital cities of Canada's two founding nations. Carney is eager to diversify trade, and the King said that Canada can build new alliances. More than 75% of Canada's exports go to the US. Tense relationship with the US King Charles inspects an honor guard as he arrives in front of the Senate building in Ottawa, Canada. (Source: Associated Press) The new US ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, said that sending messages to the US isn't necessary and Canadians should move on from the 51st state talk, telling the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. that if there's a message to be sent, there are easier ways to do that, such as calling him or calling the president. The King said that among the priorities for the government is the protection of the French language and Quebec culture, which are at the heart of Canadian identity. He also said the Canada must protect Quebec's dairy supply management industry. Trump attacked the industry in trade talks. And he said that the Canadian government will protect Canada's sovereignty by reinvesting in the Canadian Armed Forces. Trump has complained that Canada doesn't spend enough on its military. ADVERTISEMENT The King said that Canada would look to the European Union to purchase military equipment by joining the "REARM Europe' plan — a major defence procurement project to ramp up arms production in Europe. The speech made no mention of buying from the US. Pomp and ceremony King Charles and Queen Camilla arrive by horse-drawn landau at the Senate of Canada building in Ottawa, Canada, during a royal visit (Source: Associated Press) A horse-drawn carriage took Charles and Queen Camilla to the Senate of Canada Building for the speech. It was accompanied by 28 horses, 14 before and 14 after. After inspecting a 100-person honour guard and receiving a 21-gun salute, King Charles entered the Senate building as the crowd cheered. Former Canadian Prime Ministers Justin Trudeau and Stephen Harper were among those in attendance. The King returned to the UK after the speech and a visit to Canada's National War Memorial. 'Thank you for coming,' one voice called out from the crowd as the royal couple moved toward their motorcade. Justin Vovk, a Canadian royal historian, said the King's visit reminds him of when Queen Elizabeth II opened the Parliament in Grenada, a member of the Commonwealth, in 1985. A US-led force invaded the islands in October 1983 without consulting the British government following the killing of Grenada's Marxist prime minister, Maurice Bishop.
Scoop
29-05-2025
- Scoop
Roads To War: The EU's Security Action For Europe Fund
As the world was readying for the Second World War, the insightful humane Austrian author Stefan Zweig made the following glum observation: 'Openly and flagrantly, certain countries express their will to expand and make preparations for war. The politics of rearmament is pursued in broad daylight and at breakneck speed; every day you read in the papers arguments in favour of armaments expansion, the idea that it reduces unemployment and provides a boost to the stock exchange.' This is not so different from the approval by European Union countries on May 27 of a €150 billion loan program known as the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) borrowing scheme. A press release from the European Council stated that the scheme 'will finance urgent and large-scale investments in the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB)' with the intention of boosting 'production capacity, making sure defence equipment is available when needed, and to address existing capability gaps – ultimately strengthening the EU's overall defence readiness.' The statement also makes a central rationale clear: that SAFE will enable continued European support for Ukraine, linking its defence industry to the program. Despite not being an EU member, Kyiv will be able to participate in the scheme. Interestingly enough, the United Kingdom, despite leaving the EU, will also be able to participate via a separate agreement. Disbursements to interested member states upon demand, considered along national plans 'will take the form of competitively priced long-maturity loans, to be repaid by the beneficiary member states.' The scheme further anticipates the types of weaponry, euphemistically titled 'defence products', that will feature. As outlined by the European Council on March 6, these will comprise two categories: the first covering, amongst others, such products as ammunition and missiles, artillery systems, ground combat capabilities with support systems; the second, air and missile defence systems, maritime surface and underwater capabilities, drones and anti-drone systems and 'strategic enablers' including air-to-air refuelling, artificial intelligence and electronic warfare. The broader militarisation agenda is confirmed by linking SAFE with broader transatlantic engagement and 'complementarity with NATO.' It will 'strive to enhance interoperability, continue industrial cooperation, and ensure reciprocal access to state-of-the-art technologies with trusted partners.' Significantly, the emphasis is on collaboration: a minimum of three countries must combine when requesting funding for SAFE defence projects. There seems to be something for everyone: the militarist, the war monger and the merchants of death. Global Finance, a publication dedicated to informing 'corporate financial professionals', was already praising the SAFE proposal in April. 'The initiative has the potential to transform the business models of many top European defense groups – like Saab, which has traditionally relied on contracts from the Swedish state to grow its sales.' What a delight it will be for such defence companies to move beyond the constraints on sales imposed by their limiting governments. A veritable European market of death machinery is in the offing. The fund is intended for one, unambiguous purpose: war. The weasel word 'defence' is merely the code, the cipher. Break it, and it spells out aggression and conflict, a hankering for the next great military confrontation. The reason is traditional, historic and irrational: the Oriental despotic eminence arising from the Asian steppes, people supposedly untutored in the niceties of European good manners and democracy. Not that European manners and democracy is in splendid health. A mere glance at some of the candidates suggests decline in institutional credibility and scepticism. But we can always blame the Russians for that, deviously sowing doubt with their disinformation schemes. The initiative, and its tightening of ties with arming Ukraine, has made such critics as Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orbán sound modestly sensible. 'We need to invest in our own armies, but they expect us to fund Ukraine's - with billions, for years to come,' he declared in a post on X. 'We've made it clear: Hungary will not pay. Our duty is to protect our own people.' The approval of the fund by the European Commission has also angered some members of the European Parliament, an institution which has been treated with near contempt by the European Commission. European Parliament Presidente Roberta Metsola warned Commission President Ursula von der Leyen earlier in May to reconsider the use of Article 122 of the EU Treaty, which should be used sparingly in emergencies in speeding up approvals with minimal parliamentary scrutiny. Bypassing Europe's invigilating lawmakers risked 'undermining democratic legitimacy by weakening Parliament's legislative and scrutiny functions'. The Council's resort to Article 122 potentially enlivened a process that could see a legal case taken to the European Court of Justice. The European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) has also supported a legal opinion repudiating the Commission's cavalier approach in approving the fund. According to that tartly reasoned view, Article 122 was an inappropriate justification, as the threshold for evoking emergency powers had simply not been met. Ironically, the rearmament surge is taking place on both sides of the Atlantic, at both the behest of the Trump administration, ever aggrieved by Europe not pulling its military weight, and Moscow, characterised and caricatured as a potential invader, the catalyst for decorating a continent with bristling weaponry. The former continues to play hide and seek with Brussels while still being very much in Europe, be it in terms of permanent garrisons and military assets; the latter remains a convenient excuse to cross the palms of the military industrial establishment with silver. How Zweig would have hated it.
