Summary: Non-signatory Argentina adopted the convention in 2008, but it has not undertaken any steps to accede. Argentina again abstained from voting on a key UN resolution on the convention in December 2016. It has participated in almost all of the convention’s meetings.Argentina imported cluster munitions in the past, but states it has never used or exported them. Argentina also states that it destroyed its stocks of cluster munitions before the convention and has no intention to produce them in the future.

Policy

The Republic of Argentina has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Argentine officials rarely comment on the government’s position on accession to the convention and last did so in November 2015.[1] At the UN General Assembly (UNGA) First Committee on Disarmament and International Security in November 2015, Argentina explained the reasons why it abstained from the vote on a UNGA resolution on the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which calls on states outside the convention to “join as soon as possible.”[2] It said “we do not find ourselves in a position to be able to sign” the convention at this time.[3] In December 2016, Argentina abstained from the vote on a similar UNGA resolution on the treaty banning cluster munitions but did not explain the reason for its abstention.[4]

Argentina actively participated in the Oslo Process and joined in the consensus adoption of the Convention on Cluster Munitions at the conclusion of the negotiations in Dublin on 30 May 2008, but was absent from the Oslo Signing Conference in December 2008.[5]

Argentina said it participated in the creation of the treaty in order to lobby for “a total ban” on cluster munitions achieved on “a non-discriminatory basis.” It has listed the same concerns that it has held since the convention was adopted in 2008, with respect to its definition of a cluster munition and the provision guiding relations with non-signatories (Article 21 on “interoperability”). Argentina regards the convention’s prohibitions as “discriminatory in nature” as they are not “comprehensive” and “specifically define one excluded category developed by some countries.” Argentina also alleged that the convention permits or allows States Parties to participate in joint military operations with countries that use cluster munitions. It claimed the convention “dispenses with the notion of complicity, which arises when one party participates in a prohibited or banned act.”

At the beginning of the Oslo Process, Argentina supported technical solutions to the cluster munition problem, noting that it was developing a new generation of cluster munitions with low failure rates.[6] It supported a definition that would have exempted cluster munitions containing submunitions equipped with self-destruct mechanisms.[7] During the process its position evolved into support of a broad definition prohibiting all cluster munitions and a total ban without exceptions.[8] Argentina strongly objected Article 21 of the convention and has long described this provision as a potential loophole allowing for cluster munition use.[9]

Argentina has participated as an observer in all of the convention’s Meetings of States Parties, including the Sixth Meeting of State Parties in Geneva in September 2016. It attended the First Review Conference in Dubrovnik, Croatia, in September 2015 and participated in the convention’s intersessional meetings in Geneva in 2011–2014 as well as regional workshops on the convention, most recently in Santiago, Chile, in December 2013.

In October 2014, Argentina—in its capacity as president of the Security Council for that month— expressed concern at the use of cluster munitions in Ukraine, stating, “We are naturally deeply perturbed by the reports of the use of cluster bombs in densely populated areas.”[10] Argentina has also voted in favor of UNGA resolutions condemning the use of cluster munitions in Syria, most recently in December 2015.[11] It has voted in favor of Human Rights Council resolutions condemning the use of cluster munitions in Syria, most recently in July 2015.[12]

Argentina is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty. It is also party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

CMC member Association for Public Policy (Asociación Para Politicas Publicas, APP) campaigns for Argentina’s accession to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

Argentina is not known to have ever used or exported cluster munitions. It does not currently produce or stockpile cluster munitions, but in the past imported and stockpiled them, and had the beginnings of a production program.

In 2009, Argentina stated that, “the Republic of Argentina doesn’t have cluster munitions, it hasn’t utilized or transferred them.”[13] The government has said it has no intention to produce cluster munitions in the future.[14]

In the past, the Armed Forces Center for Technical and Scientific Research (Centro de Investigaciones Técnicas y Científicas de las Fuerzas Armadas, CITEFA) developed and initiated production of the CME 155mm artillery projectile, which contains 63 dual-purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) submunitions equipped with a backup pyrotechnic self-destruct mechanism.[15] According to military officials, this effort did not reach full-scale production and was dismantled, and the projectiles were never fielded by the armed forces of Argentina.[16]

In May 2007, Argentina stated that it had already destroyed its stocks of cluster munitions.[17] Military officials informed Human Rights Watch (HRW) in September 2006 that stocks of French BLG-66 Belouga and US Rockeye air-dropped bombs were destroyed by 2005.[18]

Contaminated by: landmines (medium contamination) and unexploded ordnance, including cluster munition remnants, all in the Malvinas/Falkland Islands.

Article 5 deadline: 1 January 2020
(Not on track to meet deadline)

Contamination

The Republic of Argentina reports that it is mine-affected by virtue of its claim to sovereignty over the Malvinas/Falkland Islands.[1] Upon ratifying the Mine Ban Treaty, Argentina submitted a declaration reaffirming “its rights of sovereignty over the Malvinas, South Georgia and South Sandwich and the surrounding maritime areas which form an integral part of the territory.”[2] It reiterated this declaration at the Fifteenth Meeting of States Parties.[3] The islands were mined, mostly by Argentinian forces, during its armed conflict with the United Kingdom (UK) in 1982. Argentina has reported that no other territory under its jurisdiction or control is mine-affected.[4]

Program Management

Argentina has a Humanitarian Demining Office under the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces and a Humanitarian Demining Training Centre (Centro de Entrenamiento de Desminado Humanitario).

Land Release

Argentina has argued that it is unable to meet its Article 5 obligations because it has not had access to the Malvinas/Falklands due to the “illegal occupation” by the UK. It did, however, make an offer more than a decade ago to support demining of the islands. In May 2016, Argentina reiterated its claim of sovereignty over the islands and declared that if the UK entered into negotiations over sovereignty that an agreement on demining could be reached between the two countries.[5]

Article 5 Compliance

Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty, and in accordance with the 10-year extension granted in 2009 by the Second Review Conference, Argentina is required to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible, but not later than 1 January 2020.

At the Second Review Conference, Argentina said it was unable to meet its Article 5 obligations because it did not have access to the Malvinas/Falklands due to the “illegal occupation” by the UK. Argentina said that for this reason it had no other choice than to request an extension to its clearance deadline.[6]