US anti-personnel mines to Ukraine both desperate and depressing

In the final weeks of his presidency, Joe Biden, has agreed to give Ukraine a further hand in shaping the land war against the Russians.

On October 17, he granted permission for Ukraine’s armed forces to use the long-range ATACMS missiles against targets in Russia, a move that prompted the UK to do the same. Ukraine has reacted by using both countries’ missiles in attacks on Russian soil, prompting a stern warning from Moscow.

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, subsequently signed off on changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, which makes it easier for Russia to launch a first strike.

But Biden’s decision to send anti-personnel mines (APLs) to Ukraine to help it shore up its defenses against the relentless Russian offensive has sparked controversy. These landmines are reported to be “non-persistent,” meaning they can be set to be active for a limited amount of time and deactivated once their batteries fail.

But in an era when the use of anti-personnel mines carries such a taboo – 164 countries (but not the US or Russia) are signatories to the Ottawa Convention (also known as the mine ban treaty) that prohibits the use, stockpiling or transfer of APLs – the move has been condemned by international humanitarian organizations.

Details have yet to emerge as to what sort of landmines have been promised to Ukraine by the US except that they are non-persistent APLs. The US has several APL and non-persistent landmine systems as well as mixed APL and anti-tank (AT) systems.

Dedicated APL systems are pursuit-denial munitions and area-denial artillery munitions (Adam). As an example of a mixed AT and APL system, the M87 (Volcano) is a mine-laying system that uses prepackaged mine canisters, which can contain multiple APL or AT