OCHA press conference : Explosive weapons in populated areas

The United Nations Office at Geneva

Multimedia Newsroom

Edited News Press Conferences Statements Images B-roll Conferences Upcoming All Stories

OCHA press conference : Explosive weapons in populated areas

40:55

MP4

288.2 MB

16-06-2022

Edited News , Press Conferences | OCHA

OCHA press conference : Explosive weapons in populated areas

ENG

Shotlist Story

STORY: Political Declaration On Explosive Weapons

TRT: 2 min 25s

SOURCE: UNTV CH

RESTRICTIONS: NONE

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH / NATS

ASPECT RATIO: 16:9

DATELINE: 16 June 2022 GENEVA, SWITZERLAND

SHOTLIST

Exterior medium shot, Palais des Nations flag alley, nations’ flags moving gently in the wind, a lovely day.
Medium shot, press room with participant in foreground, speakers seated at podium.
SOUNDBITE (English) — Dominique Gassauer, Humanitarian Affairs Officer, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA): “Today, some 50 million people are estimated to be living in situations of urban conflict or at the threat of urban conflict and are exposed to the acute risks and dangers posed by these weapons. So, the political declaration tomorrow that will be presented by Ireland that has been stewarding this process for the last three years is going to be a key step to step up on the protection of civilians.”
Medium shot, participants sitting in front of laptop and looking at mobile phone.
SOUNDBITE (English) — Eirini Giorgou, Legal Advisor, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): “This political declaration establishes a framework for further work among States and it signals there is political will, there is determination to take action to address this problem that States recognise as an urgent concern and the need to better protect civilians.”
Close up, journalist’s hand holding pen, laptop and coffee cup coming into focus.
SOUNDBITE (English) — Dominique Gassauer, Humanitarian Affairs Officer, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA): “Last year, some 1,234 incidents involving the use of explosive weapons in populated areas were recorded in 21 States affected by conflict, causing death or injury of over 10,000 people; 89 per cent of those were civilians.”
Medium shot, podium speakers.
SOUNDBITE (English) — Eirini Giorgou, Legal Advisor, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): “This may surprise you to hear this, but even in populated areas, explosive weapons with wide area effects can be used in accordance with international humanitarian law, but now – with a very big but – this is extremely difficult to achieve.”
Medium shot, participants seated in foreground, a wall of books forms the backdrop.
SOUNDBITE (English) — Laura Boillot, Coordinator, International Network on Explosive Weapons (INEW): “We need to see restrictions put in place on the use of heavy explosive weapons in populated areas. We are particularly concerned about weapon systems that impact a wide area: heavy aircraft bombs, rockets, missiles, artillery; these are heavy weapons that are often inaccurate, outdated and were designed for use in open battlefields. They are wholly inappropriate for use in towns and cities.”
Medium-wide shot, participants listening to podium speaker.
SOUNDBITE (English) — Laura Boillot, Coordinator, International Network on Explosive Weapons (INEW): “Over the past decade there have been incidents in 123 different countries, so this is really a very widespread and severe problem.”
Wide shot, press room with podium speakers flanked by TV screens.
Medium shot, participants in foreground and to rear, along with podium speakers.

STORYLINE

Ireland leads push for new curbs on explosive weapons in urban warfare settings

A UN-partnered bid to address the use of explosive weapons in towns and cities took a further step forward on Thursday, as Member States prepared to gather in Geneva to examine a concrete new plan of action.

The development has been driven by the recognition that civilians are at increased risk from armed conflicts that have become more protracted, complex and urbanised.

The weapons that continue to be used in urban settings are totally unsuited to heavily built-up areas, a fact highlighted by the UN Secretary-General’s annual report on the protection of civilians, which first urged combatants not to use explosive weapons in such settings in 2009, said Dominique Gassauer, Humanitarian Affairs Officer, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

“Today, some 50 million people are estimated to be living in situations of urban conflict or at the threat of urban conflict and are exposed to the acute risks and dangers posed by these weapons,” she said. “So, the political declaration tomorrow that will be presented by Ireland that has been stewarding this process for the last three years is going to be a key step to step up on the protection of civilians.”

Last year, more than 1,200 incidents involving the use of explosive weapons in populated areas were recorded in 21 States affected by conflict, causing death or injury of over 10,000 people, the OCHA official noted. Nearly 90 per cent of the victims were civilians, underscoring the need for updated international norms on the use of these weapons.

“This may surprise you to hear this, but even in populated areas, explosive weapons with wide area effects can be used in accordance with international humanitarian law, but …this is extremely difficult to achieve,” said Eirini Giorgou, Legal Advisor, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

She added: “This political declaration establishes a framework for further work among States and it signals there is political will, there is determination to take action to address this problem that States recognise as an urgent concern and the need to better protect civilians.”

Echoing that message, civil society actor the International Network on Explosive Weapons (INEW) noted that there was particular concern about weapon systems “that impact a wide area: heavy aircraft bombs, rockets, missiles, artillery; these are heavy weapons that are often inaccurate, outdated and were designed for use in open battlefields,” said Laura Boillot, INEW Coordinator. “They are wholly inappropriate for use in towns and cities.”

Over the past decade there have been incidents involving explosive weapons in urban settings in 123 different countries, “so this is really a very widespread and severe problem”, Ms. Boillot said.

She added that the issue of explosive weapons destruction had been “highly contested” by many unnamed States, before recalling that for over 100 years, explosive weapons had been the “weapons of choice”, not least in carpet-bombing cities during World War II.

But mindsets changed on the use of such destructive weapons after that conflict, Ms. Boillot noted, adding that international pressure for new limits of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas were signalled in international meetings in Maputo in 2017 and in Santiago in 2018.

The “Political Declaration on Strengthening the Protection of Civilians from the Humanitarian Consequences arising from the use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas” is to be presented to Member States at the Palace of Nations on Friday 17 June. About 60 delegations are expected to take part in the consultations ahead of a formal signing ceremony later in the year.

If the Final Declaration text is adopted as it stands, it is expected that the UN, the ICRC and civil society will be involved in putting it into effect, said Ms. Giorgou.

ends

Teleprompter

Good morning everyone and welcome to our press conference today we were the very happy to have 3 speakers with us today just on the on the subject of of the briefing as you will have seen tomorrow Ireland is actually presenting.

The draught declaration the political declaration on the use of explosive weapons in populated areas it is a declaration that has been about 3 years in the making and now this work has come to fruition so we wanted to give you a briefing on on that in advance.

Our speakers today and I'll introduce them in a minute we'll first give their brief introductory remarks and then we'll take your questions from the room and online for those online and I've put it in the chat box as well please just raise your virtual hand and we will take them as they come in so to my left I have Dominique kassauer who's Humanitarian Affairs officer with my office the office for the coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

Next to her to her left is Irene georgiou who is legal adviser with the international committee of the Red Cross and at the far end of the table we have Laura boyo coordinator international network on explosive weapons so without further ado I'll give you the floor first Dominic for your introductory remarks thank you thank you Jens good morning to you here present in the room and and for those of you online.

First of all thank you very much for your time and and taking interest in this extremely important topic because indeed tomorrow the political declaration will be presented to the delegations of member states the United nations the ICRC and civil society organisations but in fact this process started many many years before that when it became clear that from the evidence collected that.

The use of explosive weapons in populated areas was a significant cause of humanitarian harm to civilians and civilian objects in situations of armed conflict so we're here today to brief you on on what that actually means what the humanitarian consequences look like in the short medium and long term and why it is so urgent for states to act and act now.

So as you may have seen the secretary general 's annual report on the protection of civilians in armed conflict spoke extensively on the prevalence of the use of explosive weapons in in the year 2021 and has been since 2009 which is when the secretary general first called on states to commit to avoid the use of these weapons.

So just for some key figures that you will probably be familiar with last year some 1234 incidents involving the use of explosive weapons in populated areas were recorded in 21 states affected by conflict causing death or injury of over 10,000 people 89% of those were civilians taken across 10 years.

Analysis by different sides of society organisations partners has shown that the average is about 90% of civilians being the victims of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas compared with 10% when those weapons the same weapons are used in other areas so that that difference is flagrant and it also calls on us to see what can this be avoided can it be done differently can the conduct of hostilities be done differently.

But explosive weapons are not only used by states they're also used by non state actors non state armed groups and there we also have staggering figures that are around in the same realm so for last year the highest number of civilian victims from sorry from from IEDs were also around 10,000 victims in predominantly Afghanistan the OPT and Syria.

So when we talk about explosive weapons we speak about conventional weapons including artillery shells missiles aircraft bombs and as I said IEDs.

Populated areas refer to permanent or temporary sites where civilians either live or conglomerate so that can include anything between an IDP camp and internally displaced persons camp to a city they can include hospitals schools water sanitary plants so these are all objects that are essential to the survival of human beings of civilians.

And today some 50,000,000 people are estimated to be living in situations of urban conflict or at the ****** of urban conflict and are exposed to the acute risks and dangers posed by these weapons so the political declaration tomorrow that will be presented by Ireland that has been stewarding this process for the last 3 years is going to be a key step to step up on the protection of civilians and enhance the protection of civilians in these contexts.

From the UN side we deal with the consequences everyday in contexts around the world that deal with the immediate trauma injury also death of civilians and then also the longer term impact when healthcare services are no longer available when water.

Sanitation plants are no longer functioning and can cause the spread of communicable diseases and further along the lines is when we deal with the debris the millions of tonnes of debris that are left by these weapons that have to be cleared that are often contaminated with explosive ordinance making an already extremely dangerous job even more dangerous.

So we call on member states to follow through we've seen initiatives and interest from different blocs and regions and countries around the world recognising the importance of this cause of the importance to act we saw the Maputo conference we saw the Santiago conference that both came with declarations that were signed on by over 40 states committing to the avoidance of the use of these weapons the secretary general has consistently called on this and his position will not change because the humanitarian.

Sequences are what they are and the pattern of harm is so consistent I will stop here and happy to answer any further questions and I will pass on to my colleague Irene thank you thank you very much Dominique and I would also like to warmly thank you all for being here today and for your interest in this very important topic.

In conflicts around the world the use of heavy explosive weapons in cities and other populated areas has taken an unacceptable toll on civilians in recent years and the international committee of the Red Cross witnesses this daily first hand when we work in many contexts reducing the grave risk that these weapons posed to civilians is an urgent humanitarian imperative it is also a legal requirement.

To comply with international humanitarian law militaries must review and adapt their policies and practises to reflect not only operational realities but also humanitarian issues this means taking into consideration the potential civilian harm when assessing the legality of their attacks and the choice and use of their weapons it means implementing concrete measures to avoid or at least minimise the risk of civilian harm.

This may surprise you to hear this but even in populated areas explosive weapons with wide area effects can be used in accordance with international humanitarian law but now for the very big but.

This is extremely difficult to achieve militaries must take specific measures to limit the risk of civilian harm this requires identifying developing planning for and implementing alternative weapons munitions and tactics to the use of such heavy explosive weapons.

Ultimately in the view of the international committee of the Red Cross this means that as a matter of policy they should avoid the use of heavy explosive weapons in populated areas and we have been calling for this for over a decade now we published earlier this year a report titled explosive weapons with wide area effects a deadly choice in populated areas.

In this report we recommend that political authorities and armed forces avoid where possible conducting hostilities in populated areas ensure alternatives to the use of explosive weapons with a wide impact area identify and implement good practises to limit the effects of these weapons.

And very importantly that they train and equip their armed forces so that they can actually fight in populated areas in a manner that respects international humanitarian law and minimises the risks for civilians the report also advises armed forces to avoid the use in cities and other populated areas of a number of weapons most prominently unguided multi barrel rocket launchers.

Air to ground rockets and air delivered bombs among other weapons these are weapons that we see in widespread use in many conflicts around the world today armed forces should also ensure we're feasible that engineers with relevant expertise urban planners and weapons effects experts participate in decisions on which targets to strike alongside of course the required legal advisors.

Now considering that every state involved in armed conflict over the last decade claimed to have fully complied with international humanitarian law simply recommitting to do so is unlikely to change the situation in a meaningful manner This is why we urge states to keep the bar **** and to adopt a strong political declaration tomorrow with concrete meaningful commitments capable of affecting real change on the ground adopting this text.

Is not enough however it must be ultimately put into practise in the real world this political declaration is a great tool to both strengthen the protection of civilians when fighting takes place in populated areas and to facilitate compliance with international humanitarian law it's clear that existing policy and practise in urban warfare do not adequately protect civilians from the devastating humanitarian consequences?

It's clear that a commitment to take the measures necessary to change the situation is urgently needed and this is what we hope states will take a first step towards tomorrow thank you thank you arini and Laura.

Thanks very much and good morning everyone I'm here on behalf of I knew the international network on explosive weapons we are an international civil society partnership that is working to prevent civilian harm from the use of explosive weapons in populated areas.

When towns and cities are bombed it is always civilians that suffer the most Ukraine is one very current example of the devastating consequences that civilians face when explosive weapons are used in populated areas in Ukraine there has been daily shelling of residential neighbourhoods in major towns and cities from heavy artillery multi barrel rocket launchers?

Artillery missiles and air strikes we've seen images of people taking shelter in basements with their children trying to escape the bombing which is a terrifying experience for for any parent and as a result 7.3 1,000,000 people have now fled Ukraine for safety but this is a deadly pattern of harm that we have seen not just in Ukraine but in many different countries and contexts around the world.

In Gaza in Yemen Syria Iraq Ethiopia the data our networks collected finds that when explosive weapons are used in populated areas 90% of the victims are civilians but not only are civilians killed and injured homes schools hospitals and critical infrastructure is damaged and destroyed.

In raqqa city 80% of the city was completely destroyed from from air strikes and 5 years on people are still living amid rubble 80% of schools are still damaged having a significant impact on the provision of education to children we need to see restrictions put in place on the use of heavy explosive weapons in populated areas.

So we're particularly concerned about weapon systems that impact a wide area heavy aircraft bombs rockets missiles artillery these are heavy weapons that are often inaccurate outdated and were designed for use in open battlefields they're wholly inappropriate for use in towns and cities and so such use of heavy explosive weapons in populated areas must be avoided.

We want to see states join on to this new international political declaration aimed at strengthening the protection of civilians in conflict the declaration which Ireland is tabling tomorrow most crucially commits states to impose limitations on the use of explosive weapons in populated areas in order to avoid civilian harm it also commits states to assist victims.

And to address the long term impacts that stem from damage and destruction to infrastructure and it requires states to do this by making changes in their national policy and practise agreement of the political declaration will be a major step forward but there's going to be a lot more that needs to be done by States and this is going to this is going to come down to making sure that the declaration is implemented effectively.

The states will need to make significant changes to their military policies and military practise movement away from the use of explosive weapons in populated areas is going to be a long term undertaking but we need to start this process of work now so the key thing now is that states support this international political declaration and by doing this they're recognising the problem.

And then go on to sign it and implement it and we're this is something that we will need to work together to implement effectively thank you thank you very much Laura and to all our speakers let me just give our journalists online a minute to raise their hand.

OK we'll go first to Peter Kenny yeah thanks for taking my question I missed the very start of this so you might have said something about it but is the tendency in global conflicts for more and more.

Use of explosive area explosive weapons in civilian areas can somebody comment on that please thank you very much Peter I I don't know who wants to go first probably all 3 of you have some comments on that arini please go ahead.

Sure thanks a lot for that question indeed what we've observed over the last decade but even more so is that conflict takes place more and more in cities and other areas where civilians are are found in in large numbers and this is for a number of reasons first and foremost because the world 's population is more and more urbanised.

But also because cities take a really strategic importance in conflicts and and a number of other reasons so indeed when fighting occurs more and more in populated areas the problem is that the weapons that parties to a conflict used to fight have not adapted sufficiently to this new battlefield this new environment.

And of course war taking place in cities is not a new phenomenon we've seen it already in mediaeval times the problem is that the catastrophic force of weapons that are used such as the ones that Laura mentioned the heavy artillery the large bombs have evolved and they are inappropriate for use in towns and cities and this is where our concern lies that while the battlefield has now moved to cities.

The weapons and the tactics of many militaries around the world have not changed to adapt to this new battlefield and all the challenges that it poses for the lives of civilians for entire for the entire structure of cities that gets destroyed and.

And also for respecting international humanitarian law which as I mentioned is very difficult to achieve when such heavy explosive weapons are used so I would say definitely we see a tendency of more and more use of these weapons in cities especially because fighting takes place more and more in cities and and similar environments.

Thank you very much Laura did you want to comment on that yeah very briefly I mean I think for over 100 years we've seen explosive weapons be the weapon of choice in conflict.

And so it's going to take quite a lot of work to to provide this movement away from the use of explosive weapons in populated areas but I think it's important to recognise that there there has been other efforts to address this I think this initiative builds on after World War 2 there was a movement away from from the carpet bombing that we saw in in World War 2 so.

There has been some progressive changes put in place but over the last decades like Irene said there has been extensive and widespread use of explosive weapons in a range of different countries the data that our network has collected has found that over the past decade there have been incidents in 123 different countries so this is really a very widespread and severe problem.

Thank you very much Laura then we go to Nina Larson from AFP yes hi thank you for taking my question I I'm also sorry I didn't I didn't catch the the start but I was wondering if you could say a little bit more about.

What specifically will be happening tomorrow?

How many countries are you expecting to sign on to this declaration?

Are you expecting, is there a chance that Russia would sign on to this?

And also, this is a, a declaration, I assume that there are no, I mean, there's no obligations to to follow up on this.

If if countries sign on, you know, what are the next steps to ensure that this moves into more law territory?

[Other language spoken]

Dominic would like to take that question 1st and then if you would have additional remarks, we'll go to you.

OK, I'll, I'll especially speak to the first part of that question and I'll, I'll leave the legal territory to our colleague from the ICRC on the, on what will, what will happen tomorrow?

So tomorrow the text declaration, the declaration text, sorry, will be presented as, as we have all said, this has been a consultation process that has been going on for three years now with different draughts going back and forth and different delegations contributing to crafting that text.

So tomorrow there will, it will not yet be the actual signatory ceremony that will follow on later in the year, but it'll just allow Ireland that has been stewarding this process to present the text formally and then for delegations to react.

In terms of numbers.

The the last meeting that we had on this in April, we saw about 60 odd delegations present.

So it's, you know, it'll be interesting to see how many, how many states are are going to show up.

What the particular inclination is of, of particular member states we are obviously not able to say.

But what we can say is that there has been an interest in this topic from a number of different countries and regions across the world.

I mentioned earlier the the Maputo Conference and the Santiago conference that met with African States and Latin American Caribbean states, for example.

So this has been a very multilateral and inclusive process which which the UN in particular has been supporting in terms of the follow on mechanism.

The actual implementation of the declaration's commitments will be the responsibility of the individual member States and then also coming together as a collective.

We've seen different similar instruments in the past, like the Safe Schools Declaration for example, where we've had a signatory rate that was relatively progressive over the years.

And now today we have over 110 member states that have signed on to the safe Schools declarations.

And we're actually seeing positive results in the field when it comes to schools occupied by military or security forces, for example.

So it is, it is something, it is definitely a step up and, and the commitment will be the, the, the follow on commitments will be followed up on by the UN and by partners to make sure that the support is there and that the pressure is, is kept on for, for states to act and intervene.

So we are hopeful that many member states will join on to this initiative, if not in the media term, at least in the medium term.

And we can, we can change course on this.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you Dominic.

I just want to see if any of the other panellists want to comment on that.

[Other language spoken]

Thanks for the question.

Just maybe 2 very brief points to add to what Dominique said.

The first one.

So this political declaration establishes the framework for further work among States and it signals there is political will, there is determination to take action to address this problem that states recognise as an urgent concern and the need to better protect civilians.

So the declaration provides guidance of what they need to do and what they commit to do.

And then as Dominique said, states will likely agree to meet regularly to discuss and decide what practically needs to be done, what practical measures they need to take to implement the commitments they will have made by means of this declaration.

And if the declaration is adopted as the current draught stands, then we expect that the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN, and also civil society will be largely involved in this follow up process of identifying what concretely needs to change to, to put this declaration into effect.

And the other point I wanted to make, Dominique alluded to this, is that change of behaviour, especially behaviour that has been, that has solidified in the military mindset over time.

I mean, the use of these heavy weapons is the go to for most militaries and has been the go to for several decades now.

Change of behaviour takes time.

It's not something that happens overnight.

And so we should not expect to see an immediate impact of this declaration on Monday morning.

Endorsement by states will also likely take some time.

So even if not all states come on board already tomorrow or in the next coming weeks, we are hopeful that more and more states will adopt the declaration later on and that support will grow and this will strengthen these standards over time to better protect civilians.

So it's definitely something that we, we need to keep pushing for urgent measures, but also at the same time have some degree of patience because this kind of processes and change of behaviour do take often time.

Thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

We can't really hear you.

[Other language spoken]

But we're trying to fix it.

Our end here.

[Other language spoken]

Well, that's a follow up to Nina's question, basically.

So the plan is that the states will formally adopt this declaration tomorrow, am I right?

And secondly, I was wondering why, why has it been taken so long to come up with a political declaration which is not legally binding?

You've been saying that it has taken almost three years to come up with a political declaration.

So where, where, what kind of sticking points were in the way to adopt this declaration?

[Other language spoken]

Perhaps on the on the first bit, Dominic, you can answer that.

[Other language spoken]

If I wasn't, sorry if I wasn't clear earlier.

So tomorrow the text will only be presented, but it will not yet be open for signature.

That will come later in the year.

So tomorrow is literally just a conference to present this, this new text, the contours and then the actual signatory process will begin later in the year.

Just a brief thought on the the reasons why the consultation process took so long and then I'll I'll hand the mic to to the other colleagues.

One reason is, is very simply COVID and the fact that the in person consultations were not possible for a significant amount of time.

So there were larger gaps than anticipated between the consultations in terms of the actual deliberations.

We, we saw relatively speaking, three large groups of states.

We had groups that had a very progressive approach to the the, the debate to the question and, and very much pushing in favour of a strong and, and meaningful commitment for states to even avoid the use of these weapons.

And then we had more reticent States and in the middle there were states that were relatively undecided or, or had a mixed position.

So those were the general trends.

But ultimately the the question was whether international humanitarian law as it presently stands, would suffice in guaranteeing the protections of, of civilians in in these contexts.

Another sticking point was whether the focus should be on lawful, the lawful use of these weapons or the indiscriminate or unlawful use of these weapons.

So those were the the key areas.

And I also invite you to visit the website of the Irish Foreign Ministry dedicated to this and you can access the different delegations, contributions and reactions to the text.

And that can also elucidate their positions.

The individual, which is of course, I'm not at at ease to do right here, but I'll just pass the mic to the other colleagues.

[Other language spoken]

Thanks very much and hi, Jan.

So the plan tomorrow is that Ireland will put forward this text of the declaration that was shared a couple of weeks ago with delegation.

So they've had a chance to look at it and some hopefully will be in a position to announce whether they will go on & this declaration when it's open for signature later this year.

And why has it taken so longwell, yes, COVID, I think it's been one problem there.

But I think overall, I mean, it's been 10 years since we've raised the alarm on this.

And the United Nations and the ICRC have also been saying for many years that action needs to be taken on this issue because of the humanitarian impacts and calling for avoidance of use of explosive weapons when I've got wide area effects in populated areas.

And the issue has been highly contested.

I think many military states have refused until now to recognise even that when explosive weapons are used in populated areas that it causes distinct and repeated humanitarian problems.

And as a result, and as Dominique was saying, many have objected to any reference even of the term explosive weapons in populated areas.

In other international documents.

We've seen the position of some of these states shift and we saw that in the last round of negotiations in the beginning of April.

So we hope that that some states will be able to join onto the political declaration when it's open for signature later this year and they will join.

I think the many that recognises that this is a really important problem to address, that there is distinct humanitarian and issues that that need to be worked through and this is a pattern of harm that that cannot be ignored.

But as said, this is a new international agreement.

We want to see states sign on to it, adopt it and in their national policies and practises, incorporate new standards that will impose limits on the use of explosive weapons when they've got wide area effects in populated areas and really drive forward the changes that are necessary.

Thank you very much.

Next up, we have Rolf Wendell from Reuters.

[Other language spoken]

Rolf.

[Other language spoken]

Is it possible to or for anyone on the panel, are NATO members part of the group that are part of the group of countries that are pushing back for these changes?

And the second question relates to what Laura had suggested earlier on imposing restrictions on the use of these weapons.

Could you, could you please elucidate a little bit more on that?

I mean, imposing restrictions, is this in terms of, let's say the, the weight, the explosiveness of it?

Could you just explain a little bit more on what these ambitious restrictions are seeking to do and whether or not they are, how difficult it might be to actually implement them?

And I think the to, to, to, to, to enforce compliance further down the line.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

I think first question was for Dominic on the NATO membership.

I mean, NATO comprises about 30 members to the alliance.

So it is difficult to have a a general position and there wasn't a common position by the NATO states as a bloc.

There were states that perhaps had a more conservative view on this, but I cannot say that that was representative of the entire block per SE.

No, I will leave the more technical questions to my colleagues.

I think they are better placed to offer you an answer on that.

[Other language spoken]

Thanks very much.

So in in terms of the restrictions on use of explosive weapons, I mean, the text itself in the preamble recognises that there are a number of risk factors when it comes to particular factors around weapons.

These are the explosive power of the weapon.

So here we're talking about large aircraft bombs that have a large blast and fragmentation radius.

And the text also recognises that accuracy is an issue and that weapon systems that have a number of different munitions so that fire multiple munitions across an area.

So this really speaks to the need to put limits on explosive weapons that impact a wide area and this is going, this needs to be done through policy changes and changes in practise.

So it requires militaries to have an understanding of the area effects of their weapons and of the populated area and what's in that populated area, obviously civilians, but also civilian infrastructure.

So factoring in these understandings in decisions around the use and critically imposing restrictions and avoiding use when explosive weapons are likely to have wide area effects and and putting these avoiding such use in populated areas.

Thank you very much.

I have one question from John Sarah Costas.

[Other language spoken]

I just would like to get some data from the experts on the podium.

What is the number of cases of explosive weapons used in sub-Saharan Africa?

You mentioned Iads are included if you have data because the UN is supposed to be tracking this along with the ICRC.

It would be nice to share the data country by ordinance used and the possibility of war crimes committed through the use of these weapon systems.

In a follow up to my colleague from Reuters, has there been any change in the reservations by the US, the UK, Canada, Israel and Sweden?

On the text?

They were hesitant in the April negotiations.

And with reference to Laura, I think carpet bombing was exacerbated after World War 2, especially in Vietnam with napalm carpet bagging the Vietcong.

Thank you very much, John, as usual, very good questions.

I don't know who wants to go first on that.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

So for the detailed data we'll have to get back to you.

I don't have that information on hand right now.

What, what we have, sorry.

The, the question is an important one because it also speaks to the question of, of impact and how do you measure impact.

And there's a lot of effort that's gone in, in developing tools to make sure that we have a better understanding indeed of correlating the ordinance used or the, the type of weaponry used and the effect that this has on, on civilians and civilian objects.

So that is a very, very key element.

So we'll get those, get that available information to you as soon as possible possible.

In terms of the reservations since the April consultations, we understand that Ireland has been undertaking bilateral meetings with the different delegations.

I am not able to tell you what's or whether that position has shifted.

We'll have to wait until tomorrow and depending on how they react.

So I'm, I'm sorry, I'm unable to answer that question.

[Other language spoken]

I think there was a question for some elaboration from Laura as well.

Liam, we're just on the data.

I mean one of our members actually on our violence collects data on casualties from the use of explosive weapons.

It looks at civilian casualties and it looks at casualties in populated areas disaggregated by where they're used and the types of weapons systems.

So I don't have the data for sub-Saharan Africa to hand, but we can pull it off and it's available on the the UOV website.

And then just in terms of tomorrow, I mean we will hear tomorrow what states views are on this, but hopefully some states will be in a position to announce their support for the text and we expect to see some change in some states position.

So yeah, thank you very much.

If we can on with Ralph again.

He had a follow up from Reuters.

[Other language spoken]

I've been covered by my colleague in the previous question.

[Other language spoken]

Good to see you coordinate on your end as well.

[Other language spoken]

Derek, let me give you the floor back to you perhaps.

Yes, yes, thank you very much.

Just procedural questions, at at what time will this presentation take place tomorrow and where in the parle which solves?

And secondly, could you please share the declaration with us or the draught I should say that would be great.

Yes, we're very happy to to send you that documentation.

The meeting will start tomorrow at 10:00 AM in Room 16, I believe 26.

Sorry.

[Other language spoken]

26 tomorrow at the Palais.

[Other language spoken]

I don't know if Ireland are planning to do a a press statement afterwards, but again we can find out for you.

[Other language spoken]

All right, very good.

I don't see any more hands raised.

[Other language spoken]

That is not the case and not in the room.

So with that, thank you very much.

To you here in the room, thank you very much to those following and asking questions online and of course, thank you to our panellists.

[Other language spoken]

We hope to see a lot of momentum behind this.

It has been going on for quite some time and I think we see in the news every single day the importance of fighting against this and protection, protecting civilians at all costs.

So thanks to you and of course, thanks to Ireland.

And with that, I will close the press conference.