Thailand
Cluster Munition Ban Policy
Summary: Non-signatory Thailand supports the convention’s humanitarian objectives, but has not taken any steps to accede besides studying the implications of joining. Thailand has participated in every meeting of the convention and voted in favor of a key UN resolution on the convention in December 2016.
Thailand is not known to have produced or exported cluster munitions, but it has imported them and possesses a stockpile. Thailand’s only known use of cluster munitions was in Cambodia during a February 2011 border dispute.
Policy
The Kingdom of Thailand has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
Thailand supports the convention’s humanitarian objectives, but has not taken any steps to join besides studying the implications of accession. At the convention’s Sixth Meeting of States Parties in September 2016, Thailand said it was participating, “to reaffirm our support to the humanitarian objectives of the Convention.”[1]
Previously, in October 2015, Thailand stated that it was “in the process of verifying scope and meaning under the CCM [Convention on Cluster Munitions], with a view to possible accession in the future.”[2]
After Thailand used cluster munitions in early February 2011 during a border conflict with Cambodia, Thailand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Kasit Piromya, told the UN Security Council, “We are seriously considering joining the Convention on Cluster Munitions.”[3] Yet Thailand does not appear to have progressed towards accession beyond its study of the convention.
In December 2016, Thailand voted in favor of a UNGA resolution that urges states outside the Convention on Cluster Munitions to “join as soon as possible.”[4] It also voted in favor of the first UNGA resolution on the convention in December 2015.[5]
Thailand participated in most of the diplomatic conferences of the Oslo Process that created the Convention on Cluster Munitions, but attended the formal negotiations in May 2008 only as an observer and did not sign the convention when it was opened for signature in Oslo in December 2008.[6]
As Thailand has noted, it continues to engage in the Convention on Cluster Munitions without joining it. It has participated as an observer in every Meeting of States Parties of the convention, including the Sixth Meeting of States Parties in Geneva in September 2016. Thailand also attended the convention’s First Review Conference in 2015 and intersessional meetings in 2011–2015.
Thailand has participated in regional meetings and workshops on the Convention on Cluster Munitions, most recently one organized by the European Union (EU) Nonproliferation Consortium and held in Bangkok on 16–17 March 2017.[7]
Thailand has voted in favor of UNGA resolutions condemning continued use of cluster munitions in Syria, most recently in December 2016.[8]
Thailand is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty. It is not party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.
Production, transfer, and stockpiling
Thailand is not known to have ever produced or exported cluster munitions.
Thailand possesses a stockpile of cluster munitions, but has not disclosed information on the types or quantities possessed. In December 2008, Thailand announced that it does not intend to acquire more cluster munitions.[9]
The United States (US) supplied Thailand with 500 Rockeye and 200 CBU-71 air-dropped cluster bombs at some point between 1970 and 1995.[10] Thailand also received 2,806 cluster munitions containing 850,268 submunitions from the US after the US War Reserve Stock in Thailand (WRS-THAI) was dissolved by a 2002 agreement.[11]
Thailand also possesses French-made NR-269 ERFB extended-range 155mm artillery projectiles, each containing 56 M42/M46-type[12] dual-purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) submunitions.[13] Based on the types of submunitions identified in Cambodia after the February 2011 artillery strikes, Thailand also possesses a cluster munition that delivers M85 self-destructing DPICM submunitions.
Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) has provided the government with advice and information on possible solutions for the destruction of Thailand’s stockpile of cluster munitions.[14]
Use
In 2009 and 2010, Thai and Cambodian military forces engaged in several brief skirmishes over disputed parts of the border near the Preah Vihear temple, resulting in claims and counter-claims of new antipersonnel mine use.[15] In February 2011, the Cambodian Mine Action Centre (CMAC), a government entity, claimed that Thai military forces fired cluster munitions during fighting on the border at Preah Vihear.[16] Separate missions by CMC members in February and April 2011 confirmed that ground-delivered cluster munitions were used by Thailand on Cambodian territory, including M42/M46 and M85-type DPICM submunitions.[17]
Thailand’s use of cluster munitions elicited widespread concern and a strong international response.[18] Thailand at first denied using cluster munitions.[19] It then stated that it “fully understands the concerns raised” over the cluster munition use and promised to “remain committed to engaging with the international community on this issue.”[20]
[1] Statement of Thailand, Sixth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, Geneva, 6 September 2016.
[2] Statement of Thailand, UNGA First Committee on Disarmament and International Security, New York, 26 October 2015.
[3] Statement by Kasit Piromya, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Thailand, UN Security Council, New York, 14 February 2011. Government officials also expressed Thailand’s intent to accede to the convention in “the near future.” Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meetings, Geneva, 27 June 2011. Notes by the CMC.
[4] “Implementation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions,” UNGA Resolution 71/45, 5 December 2016.
[5] “Implementation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions,” UNGA Resolution 70/54, 7 December 2015.
[6] For details on Thailand’s policy and practice regarding cluster munitions through early 2009, see Human Rights Watch and Landmine Action, Banning Cluster Munitions: Government Policy and Practice (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, May 2009), pp. 245–246.
[7] EU Nonproliferation Consortium, “Cooperating to implement the Convention on Cluster Munitions: the country coalition concept,” Bangkok, 16–17 March 2017.
[8] “Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic," UNGA Resolution 71/203, 19 December 2016. Thailand voted in favor of similar resolutions in 2013–2015.
[9] Interview with Cherdkiat Atthakor, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bangkok, 24 February 2010; and statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Signing Conference, Oslo, 4 December 2008. Notes by Landmine Action.
[10] US Defense Security Assistance Agency, Department of Defense, “Cluster Bomb Exports under FMS, FY1970–FY1995,” obtained by Human Rights Watch in a Freedom of Information Act request, 28 November 1995.
[11] Department of State, “Memorandum of Agreement between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and THAILAND Signed at Bangkok November 26, 2002.” The stockpile was comprised of 1,000 M483 and 432 M449A1 artillery projectiles, and 200 CBU-58, 200 Mk-20 Rockeye II, 100 CBU-52, 800 CBU-71, and 74 CBU-87 air-dropped bombs. The cluster munitions were stored at the Korat Munitions Storage Area at the time of the 2002 agreement. See, Andrew Haag, “Thailand received cluster munitions from the United States in 2002–2005,” Landmine and cluster munitions blog, 19 January 2016.
[12] The DPICM submunition is often called a “grenade.” A certain amount of contradictory information exists publicly about the specific type of DPICM submunition contained in the NR269 projectile. France lists it as an “M42 type” in its initial Article 7 report in January 2011. Other international ammunition reference publications list the type as M46. There is little outward visual difference between the two types: the M46 DPICM is heavier/thicker and has a smooth interior surface. A portion of the interior of the M42 DPICM body is scored for greater fragmentation.
[13] NPA, “Impact Assessment Report: Preah Vihear Province, Cambodia,” undated, but circulated 3 April 2011.
[14] Email from Lee Moroney, Programme Manager, NPA, 17 August 2010.
[15] See, ICBL, Landmine Monitor Report 2009: Toward a Mine-Free World (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2009), pp. 243–244 and pp. 719–710; and ICBL, Landmine Monitor 2010: Toward a Mine-Free World (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2010).
[16] CMAC press release, “CMAC Mine Risk Education (MRE) teams to raise awareness of mines, ERW and Cluster Munitions for the communities in Prah Vihear,” 10 February 2011.
[17] For full analysis of the 2011 use incident, see CMC, Cluster Munition Monitor 2011 (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, October 2011), pp. 319–320. The missions were conducted by Cambodia Campaign to Ban Landmines and Cluster Bombs (on 9 February and 12 February) and NPA (1–2 April). CMC press release, “CMC condemns Thai use of cluster munitions in Cambodia,” 5 April 2011.
[18] For example, the Beirut Progress Report issued by the convention’s Second Meeting of States Parties stated: “Several states have reported actions reacting to the instance of use of cluster munitions by Thailand in 2011. This includes individual and joint demarches, support for fact-finding missions and condemnation of the use in public statements. The President of the Convention has also issued a statement, stating his concern over the use of cluster munitions. States and civil society have reported on how they follow up, in terms of actions to increase the understanding and knowledge of the Convention. States and civil society have had a good dialogue with Thailand.” “Draft Beirut Progress Report: Monitoring progress in implementing the Vientiane Action Plan from the First up to the Second Meeting of States Parties,” CCM/MSP/2011/WP.5, 25 August 2011.
[19] Guy De Launey, “Thailand ‘admits cluster bombs used against Cambodia,’” BBC News, 6 April 2011.
[20] Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munitions Intersessional Meetings, Geneva, 27 June 2011. Notes by the CMC.
Mine Ban Policy
Policy
The Kingdom of Thailand signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997 and ratified it on 27 November 1998, becoming a State Party on 1 May 1999.
Thailand has not enacted domestic legislation to implement the Mine Ban Treaty. Since 2002, Thailand has attempted to implement the convention by executive measure, but the directive has never been issued.[1]
Thailand submitted its sixteenth Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report on 30 April 2014, covering calendar year 2013.[2]
Thailand has attended all of the Mine Ban Treaty’s Review Conferences held in 2004, 2009, and 2014 as well as most of the treaty’s Meetings of States Parties and many of the intersessional meetings held in Geneva, including in April 2014.
Production, transfer, stockpile destruction, and retention
Thailand states that it has never produced or exported antipersonnel mines. Thailand formerly imported antipersonnel mines from China, Italy, the United States, and the former Yugoslavia. It completed destruction of 337,725 stockpiled antipersonnel mines on 24 April 2003.
In its Article 7 report submitted in 2014, Thailand stated that at the end of 2013 it retained 3,227 antipersonnel mines for training purposes, a reduction of 23 mines from the previous year.[3] Twenty-three antipersonnel mines held by the army were transferred for training of new deminers. Thailand has never reported in any detail on the intended purposes and actual uses of mines kept for training—a step agreed upon by States Parties at the Review Conferences in 2004 and 2009.[4] At the end of 2013, the Royal Thai Army retained 2,646 mines, and the Royal Thai Air Force retained 581 mines.[5]
In June 2011, Thailand stated, “Inventories of mines retained will continue to be done so that our article 7 submissions accurately reflect mines in official possession.”[6] In June 2010, Thailand said that since the number of mines retained is high compared to the number used each year, it would review its retention and destruction plans.[7]
Thailand is not known to have undertaken physical modifications of its Claymore mine stockpile to ensure use only in command-detonated mode. Officials have previously stated that all units have received orders that Claymore mines are to be used only in command-detonated mode.[8]
Use
The insurgency in southern Thailand has seen extensive use of command-detonated improvised explosive devices (IEDs). There were previously reports of use of homemade mines that function as victim-activated IEDs.[9] Insurgents used these devices against Buddhist Thai owners of rubber and fruit plantations, and also against the Malay Muslims working in those places. Several incidents were recorded between 2009 and 2012, however in 2013 and early 2014 no further use of victim-activated explosive weapons by the insurgency have been recorded.[10]
There were no allegations of new use of antipersonnel mines on the Cambodian border with Thailand in the second of 2013 or first half of 2014.
Previously, in March 2013, three Thai soldiers were injured by what the Thai military described as newly planted mines near the Ta Kwai Temple in Phanom Dong Rak district. Cambodia investigated and in its report to States Parties stated that it had found the mines to be old, dating from the Cambodian civil war.[11] Other allegations made by Thailand of Cambodian use of antipersonnel mines on the Cambodian-Thai border in 2008 and 2009 were never resolved.[12]
[1] Interview with Lt.-Gen. Tumrongsak Deemongkol, Director-General, Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC), Bangkok, 25 February 2010. Thailand’s Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 reports submitted from 2007–2009 state, “The issuing is still in progress.” The 2010 report apparently mistakenly dropped that phrase, as the regulations have not yet been adopted and are still in progress; they had not been entered into the Royal Thai Government Gazette as of late July 2010. TMAC reported in 2009 that the Subcommittee on Administration and Evaluation is responsible for this process and that in early 2009 it was in the process of submitting the draft regulations to the National Committee for Humanitarian Mine Action for consideration. The draft was first developed by TMAC in 2002. Thailand has reported that the draft regulations have been pending approval of various entities each year. See previous editions of the Monitor available on the Monitor website; and Landmine Monitor Report 2009, p. 718. On 7 September 2012, the representative from the military’s Judge Advocate General’s Office suggested in a meeting of the sub-committee on Facilitating, Monitoring, and Evaluation that the military issue an order for the implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty as it would be less complicated. Response to Monitor written questions by Col. Jirat Seetachan, Deputy Head of Special Affairs Unit, TMAC, 20 May 2013.
[2] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, 30 April 2014. Thailand has provided annual updated Article 7 reports every year since the initial report was provided on 10 November 1999.
[3] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2013.
[4] The Royal Thai Army, Navy, Air Force, and National Police Department initially retained a total of 4,970 antipersonnel mines for training. In the past 10 years, Thailand has reported that 504 mines have been consumed by its training programs. The number of retained mines did not change from 2001 to 2004. In 2005–2006, Thailand reduced the number of mines retained by 257. There were discrepancies in the reporting on the number of mines. See Landmine Monitor Report 2007, p. 665. In 2007, it reduced the number by another 1,063 mines. It appears that 63 of the mines retained by the National Police Department were consumed during training activities, and all of the 1,000 mines retained by the navy were simply destroyed, presumably because they were no longer deemed necessary. See Landmine Monitor Report 2008, p. 678. In 2008 and 2009, Thailand destroyed another 12 mines per year. In 2010, Thailand reported transferring 200 mines for training, apparently 13 M2, 84 M14, 39 M16, and 64 M26 antipersonnel mines. Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on General Status and Operation, Geneva, 20 June 2011; and Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2011. The types transferred are not noted in the Article 7 report.
[5] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, 30 April 2014.
[6] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on General Status and Operation, Geneva, 24 June 2011; and Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form D, Geneva, 30 April 2011. The number of mines retained by the Air Force has remained unchanged since 2006. It is unclear why different services retain mines and whether each has a training program for mine clearance.
[7] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on General Status and Operation, Geneva, 21 June 2010.
[8] Interview with Lt.-Gen. Deemongkol, TMAC, Bangkok, 19 March 2009. TMAC stated this in 2007 as well as in 2008. In its Article 7 report for 1999, Thailand reported that it had 6,117 M18 and M18A1 Claymore mines in stock.
[9] Craft landmines are explosive devices made out of locally available materials that are designed to detonate due to the proximity or activity of a human being. Such devices are banned under the Mine Ban Treaty.
[10] While no new incidents have been known to have occurred, indicating a change in policy, there has been no public statement pledging non-use of victim activated explosive devices. For previous incidents see Landmine Monitor 2013, 2012, 2011, and 2010 profile for Thailand.
[11] See Landmine Monitor 2013, Thailand Mine Ban Policy profile. According to a request made by the ICBL, Cambodia conducted a fact-finding mission to the site from 10–12 May 2013 that determined the Thai solders were injured by mines laid during the Cambodian civil war. It said its soldiers found indications of the incident on the same day, and recorded a GPS reference that differed from the reference declared by the Thai military. Cambodia stated that the incident took place to the side of, not on, a specially cleared path used for military-to-military meetings between the Thai and Cambodian military in the area. The Cambodian delegation provided copies of the report at the May 2013 intersessional meeting in Geneva.
[12] In October 2008, two Thai soldiers stepped on antipersonnel mines while on patrol in disputed territory between Thailand and Cambodia, near the World Heritage Site of Preah Vihear. Thai authorities maintained that the area was previously clear of mines and that the mines had been newly placed by Cambodian forces. Cambodia denied the charges and stated that the Thai soldiers had entered Cambodian territory in an area known to contain antipersonnel mines and were injured by mines laid during previous armed conflicts. In April 2009, another Thai soldier was reportedly wounded by an antipersonnel mine at the same location during further armed conflict between the two countries. In September 2009, Commander in Chief of the Royal Thai Army, Gen. Anupong Paochinda, stated that Cambodian troops were laying fresh mines along the disputed areas and close to routes where Thai soldiers make regular patrols. See Landmine Monitor Report 2009, pp. 243–244 and 719–720; and also ICBL-CMC, “Country Profile: Cambodia: Mine Ban Policy,” 6 August 2010.
Mine Action
Contaminated by: mines (massive contamination) and explosive remnants of war (ERW).
Article 5 deadline: 1 November 2018
(Five-year extension requested)
By July 2017, the Kingdom of Thailand had an estimated 410km2 of suspected mined area. In 2016, a total of 28.19km2 was released, of which 98% (27.72km2) was canceled by non-technical survey. Just over 0.07km2 was reduced by technical survey and 0.39km2 was cleared, with the destruction of 1,231 antipersonnel mines. Land release results for 2016, including clearance, were a decrease from 2015.
Recommendations for action
- The Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) should complete non-technical survey of all mined areas to international standards.
- Thailand should increase its capacity to conduct survey and clearance; as of mid 2017 it already appeared to be behind on its new extension request target.
Contamination
Thailand is affected by mines as well as by ERW, including both abandoned explosive ordnance (AXO) and unexploded ordnance (UXO), the result of conflicts on its borders with Cambodia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, and Myanmar.
At the end of 2016, Thailand reported that 14 of 77 provinces are still mine-affected with a total of 309 suspected hazardous areas (SHAs) covering 422km2 (see table below). Three-quarters of this suspected contamination (approximately 319km2) was concentrated in seven provinces bordering Cambodia. Of the remainder, 69.6km2 or 16% was on the border with Lao PDR; 33km2 (8%) was on the border with Myanmar; and the remaining fragment was in Yala province along the border with Malaysia.[1] By July 2017, the Thai Mine Action Center (TMAC)’s estimate of total contamination had fallen to less than 410km2.[2]
Mine contamination by province (km2)[3]
|
Region |
Province |
End-2014 |
End-2015 |
End-2016 |
|||
|
CHAs* |
Area |
SHAs* |
Area |
SHAs |
Area |
||
|
North |
Chiang Mai |
4 |
28.97 |
5 |
35.49 |
4 |
25.62 |
|
Chiang Rai |
1 |
0.92 |
1 |
0.92 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Mae Hong Son |
1 |
5.43 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Nan |
1 |
2.65 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Pitsanuloke |
1 |
32.99 |
1 |
32.99 |
1 |
32.99 |
|
|
Tak |
2 |
10.06 |
1 |
0.37 |
1 |
0.37 |
|
|
Uttaradit |
1 |
3.35 |
1 |
3.35 |
1 |
3.35 |
|
|
Northeast |
Buriram |
15 |
19.48 |
15 |
19.48 |
15 |
19.48 |
|
Surin |
32 |
39.56 |
32 |
37.60 |
32 |
30.54 |
|
|
Sisaket |
56 |
93.47 |
54 |
88.87 |
54 |
88.87 |
|
|
Ubon Ratchathani |
75 |
122.85 |
71 |
119.95 |
71 |
112.42 |
|
|
East |
Sakeo |
32 |
9.78 |
29 |
10.11 |
29 |
9.56 |
|
Chanthaburi |
24 |
5.13 |
24 |
5.13 |
21 |
4.69 |
|
|
Trad |
75 |
91.55 |
72 |
88.41 |
72 |
86.65 |
|
|
South |
Chumporn |
2 |
6.92 |
2 |
6.92 |
2 |
6.92 |
|
Yala |
6 |
1.15 |
6 |
1.15 |
6 |
1.15 |
|
|
Total |
328 |
474.26 |
314 |
450.74 |
309 |
422.61 |
|
* As part of a re-survey of contaminated areas TMAC reclassified confirmed hazardous areas (CHAs) as SHAs.
Program Management
The National Committee for Humanitarian Mine Action (NMAC), chaired by the prime minister, has responsibility for overseeing the national mine action program, but has not met since 2008. The NMAC was reconstituted in May 2017, still with the prime minister as chairman.[4] The engagement of national leadership in the committee was seen as important in facilitating policy direction and progress on issues affecting national security, notably regarding cooperation with neighboring countries on clearing border areas.[5]
TMAC, which is under the Armed Forces Supreme Command, coordinates, monitors, and conducts mine/UXO survey, mine clearance, mine/ERW risk education, and victim assistance. TMAC is also responsible for establishing a program to meet Thailand’s obligations as a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty.[6] However, TMAC has had to contend with limited funding and, as a military organization, with regular rotation of personnel at all levels.[7] Lieutenant-General Wittaya Wachirakul took over as Director General in April 2015, becoming the ninth director since TMAC became operational in 2000 and the fifth in the last five years. General Wittaya was promoted in 2016 and handed over to a new director, Lieutenant-General Prasopchai Kongburan in October.[8]
Strategic planning
Thailand’s revised Second Article 5 Extension Request, submitted in August 2017, set out a two-phase program for completing clearance, seeking an extension of just over five more years to 31 December 2023. Phase 1, spanning 2017 and 2018, expected release of 63.8km2 of suspected contamination, leaving the remaining 358.8km2 to be tackled in the requested five-year extension period.
Planned land release 2017–2023[9]
|
Province |
Area to be released in Phase 1 (m2) 2017–2018 |
Area to be released in Phase 2 (m2) 2019–2023 |
|
Sa Kaeo |
366,850 |
9,192,948 |
|
Trat |
19,199,151 |
67,454,225 |
|
Chanthaburi |
754,820 |
3,936,224 |
|
Buriram |
0 |
19,483,928 |
|
Surin |
1,869,334 |
28,670,745 |
|
Sisaket |
17,981,799 |
70,883,609 |
|
Ubon Ratchathani |
22,478,947 |
89,945,265 |
|
Uttaradit |
0 |
3,345,061 |
|
Phitsanulok |
0 |
32,990,520 |
|
Tak |
0 |
366,772 |
|
Chiang Mai |
0 |
25,615,188 |
|
Chumphon |
0 |
6,924,647 |
|
Yala |
1,145,139 |
0 |
|
Total |
63,796,040 |
358,809,132 |
The request draws attention to potential obstacles to completion, including border demarcation, difficult terrain, financial constraints, and unforeseen circumstances such as flooding and political upheavals. Border demarcation poses a particular concern. The request states that Phase 1 is intended to release all SHAs outside border areas, leaving Phase 2 to tackle areas to be demarcated on its borders covering 358.8km2, or 85% of the outstanding suspected contamination.[10]
The extension request also proposed a Phase 1 budget of THB443.4 million (US$12.3 million[11]) for Phase 1, including THB 376 million from TMAC and THB48.5 million from two internationally funded humanitarian operators, Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) and the Thai Civilian Deminers Association (TDA). TMAC’s costs, however, have far exceeded the Thai government funding of TMAC in the two previous years (THB 69 million in 2015 and THB 68 million in 2016).[12]
Standards
A revision of the national mine action standards was completed on 1 April 2015, mainly amending chapters on land release and evidence-based survey.[13]
Operators
TMAC completed accreditation of operators for the first time in March 2015, accrediting its four Humanitarian Mine Action Units (HMAUs), one international NGO (NPA), and two national NGOs (TDA and Peace Road Organization Foundation, PRO). Operators are now required to renew their accreditations annually.[14]
TMAC reported employing a total of around 276 operations staff and 61 headquarters personnel in 2015.[15] The extension request said TMAC would employ 330 operations personnel in the four HMAUs and 172 headquarters staff.[16]
NPA, the only international operator working in Thailand, has supported TMAC operations since 2011, conducting non-technical survey in the north in cooperation with HMAU 3 in 2015 and shifting to Ubon Ratchathani province in 2016, working with 18 personnel, half of them women, in three six-strong teams.[17] National NGO TDA conducted operations on the border with Cambodia.[18] PRO received funding to conduct demining in Ubon Ratchathani province in 2015 but suspended operations pending receipt of additional funding.[19]
TMAC said it planned to train additional civilian deminers to work in border areas because of sensitivities about deploying military personnel to these locations. It said it would work closely with NPA and TDA on this.[20]
Land Release
Thailand released a total of 28.19km2 in 2016, 98% of it canceled by non-technical survey. The total was almost one-third less than in 2015, which was a record year for land release in Thailand when NPA and HMAU 3 were able to cancel large areas of SHAs in northern Thailand that proved to be uncontaminated and TMAC reported an almost tenfold increase in area cleared.[21]
NPA-HMAU3’s survey results in 2016 reinforced earlier findings indicating that only a small percentage of Thailand’s SHA is actually mined. NPA-HMAU 3 teams conducted non-technical survey on a total of 16,247,355m2 in Ubon Ratchathani province in 2016, of which 10,163,208m2 was canceled, 4,027,868m2 was designated “area without evidence,” and only 2,056,279m2 was identified as hazardous. A further 156,918m2 outside the SHAs it surveyed were also found to be contaminated. For areas without evidence, HMAU 3 later in 2017 conducted the technical survey and so far, none of them was identified as hazardous.[22]
Land release in 2016[23]
|
Province |
Area released by NTS (m2) |
Area reduced by TS (m2) |
Area cleared (m2) |
Total area released (m2) |
AP mines destroyed |
|
Chiang Mai |
9,879,650 |
0 |
0 |
9,879,650 |
0 |
|
Chiang Rai |
920,297 |
0 |
0 |
920,297 |
0 |
|
Ubol Ratchathani |
7,580,562 |
0 |
0 |
7,580,562 |
0 |
|
Surin |
6,812,494 |
0 |
246,671 |
7,059,165 |
469 |
|
Trat |
1,679,746 |
0 |
77,624 |
1,757,370 |
518 |
|
Chanthaburi |
383,243 |
0 |
65,750 |
448,993 |
223 |
|
Sakeo |
472,665 |
71,537 |
4,193 |
548,395 |
21 |
|
Total |
27,728,657 |
71,537 |
394,238 |
28,194,432 |
1,231 |
Note: NTS = non-technical survey; TS = technical survey.
Survey in 2016
Thailand released 27.8km2 through survey in 2016, continuing the focus on survey that TMAC started five years earlier. Of the total, 27.7km2 was canceled by non-technical survey and 0.07km2 reduced by technical survey. This included 14.39km2 canceled in the northeast (Surin and Ubon Ratchathani provinces), 10.8km2 in the north (Chiang Mai and Chiang Rai), and 2.06km2 canceled in eastern Thailand (Trat and Chanthaburi).[24]
NPA, after working with HMAU 4 in 2015 conducting non-technical survey in northern Thailand, shifted operations back to the border with Cambodia, working in 2016 in the northeastern province of Ubon Ratchathani where teams identified additional contamination of 155,918m2 and canceled 7.6km2. NPA started conducting survey in Sisaket province in 2017.[25]
Clearance in 2016
After record clearance results in 2015, TMAC’s clearance rate fell sharply in 2016, releasing only 0.39km2, of which nearly two-thirds was in Surin province and most of the rest in Trat and Chanthaburi provinces bordering Cambodia. TDA started clearance in Surin in September 2016.[26]
Cooperation between the Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) and the Norwegian People's Aid (NPA) is extended to at least one more year. In 2017, NPA-HMAU3 will continue conducting the baseline survey in Si Sa Ket province. NPA will assist the HMAU2 conducting the desk assessment of SHAs in Trad province and will stand by to assist TMAC to update the National Mine Action Standards.
Mine Ban Treaty Article 5 Compliance
Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty (and in accordance with the nine-and-a-half-year extension granted by States Parties in 2008), Thailand is required to destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible, but not later than 1 November 2018.[27] Thailand will miss its deadline and submitted a request for a five-year extension in April 2017, followed by a revised request in August.
The extension request benefits from the progress of non-technical survey in the past four years, providing a much clearer assessment of remaining contamination, but the timelines appear ambitious set against the record of land release in the past five years (see tables below). To fulfil the Phase 1 targets set out in its extension request, TMAC planned to release 34.74km2 in 2017 and 29.05km2 in 2018.[28] By the end of July 2017, TMAC appeared to be slipping behind schedule and had released a total of only 12.88km2.[29]
Extension request 2019–2023: land release targets (km2)
|
2019 |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
|
72.12 |
72.06 |
73.23 |
74.54 |
66.86 |
With 85% of Thailand’s remaining contamination in border areas where access may be restricted by security or demarcation issues, its ability to meet its revised deadline is contingent on developing cooperation with its neighbors.
Land release in 2012–2016 compared to 2008 extension request targets (km2)[30]
|
Year |
Mined area cleared |
Area released by survey |
Total area released |
Extension Request target |
|
2016 |
0.39 |
27.80 |
28.19 |
64.18 |
|
2015 |
2.05 |
39.67 |
41.72 |
61.95 |
|
2014 |
0.23 |
24.84 |
25.07 |
62.92 |
|
2013 |
0.31 |
31.91 |
32.22 |
41.05 |
|
2012 |
0.29 |
20.6 |
20.89 |
41.95 |
|
Total |
3.27 |
112.91 |
148.09 |
272.05 |
The Monitor acknowledges the contributions of the Mine Action Review (www.mineactionreview.org), which has conducted the mine action research in 2017, including on survey and clearance, and shared all its resulting landmine and cluster munition reports with the Monitor. The Monitor is responsible for the findings presented online and in its print publications.
[1] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2016), Form D; and Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. 22.
[2] Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. iii.
[3] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2016), Form D.
[4] Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. 7; and interview with Lt.-Gen. Prasopchai Kongburan, Director General, TMAC, Geneva, 8 June 2017.
[5] Interview with Lt.-Gen. Kongburan, TMAC, Geneva, 8 June 2017.
[6] TMAC website, “About us: Thailand Mine Action Center,” undated.
[7] Interview with Col. Terdsak Trirattanagool, Assistant Director General, TMAC, Bangkok 15 May 2017.
[8] Email from Shushira Chonhenchob, Programme Manager, NPA, Bangkok, 10 October 2016.
[9] Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. 21.
[10] Ibid., pp. 3−5, 21−23.
[11] Oanda.com currency exchange rate US$1 = THB 36.67, 1 January 2017.
[12] Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, pp 26−28; Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2015), Form D.
[13] Thailand’s National Mine Action Standards, 1 April 2015.
[14] Blog by Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief of Cooperation and Evaluation Unit, TMAC, undated; and interview with Aubrey Sutherland-Pillai, Country Director, Humanitarian Disarmament Programme, NPA Thailand, Bangkok, 8 May 2015.
[15] Information provided by TMAC, 12 June 2015.
[16] Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. 25.
[17] Ibid.; and interview with Aubrey Sutherland-Pillai, NPA Thailand, Bangkok, 8 May 2015.
[18] See, TDA website.
[19] Embassy of Japan in Thailand, “The Government of Japan Provides Grant Assistance for the Project for the Clearance of Landmines/UXOs along the Thai-Cambodia border through the Land Release Method,” undated; and Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. 25.
[20] Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. 7.
[21] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2015), Form D; interview with Shushira Chonhenchob, NPA, Bangkok, 13 May 2016.
[22] Interview with Shushira Chonhenchob, NPA, Bangkok, 5 May 2017; and email, 29 September 2017.
[23] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2016), Form D.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Data provided by TMAC, 5 May 2017; and interview with Shushira Chonhenchob, NPA, Bangkok, 5 May 2017.
[26] See, TDA’s Facebook page.
[27] Revised Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 7 August 2008, p. 7.
[28] Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2016), Form D.
[29] Revised Second Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 8 August 2017, p. 9.
[30] Compiled from: Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2015), Form D; and Revised Article 5 deadline Extension Request, 7 August 2008, p. 23.
Support for Mine Action
The Kingdom of Thailand has not reported any national contributions to its mine action program since 2008, when it provided US$3.2 million.
From 2010–2012, Norway had been Thailand’s sole international mine action donor, contributing US$1.4 million toward clearance activities. In 2013, four donors—Germany, Japan, Liechtenstein, and Norway—provided a total of $1.5 million for clearance operations.[1] In 2014, international contributions totaled about $1million with only two donors (Japan and Norway) providing support.[2] In 2015, Thailand received some $700,000 of international assistance from Norway and Japan for clearance operations.[3]
In 2016, Japan and Norway contributed a combined total of $1.1 million to support clearance efforts in Thailand. This represents a 55% decrease compared to 2015.[4]
Since 2012, international contributions to mine action in Thailand totaled some $5 million, and averaged $1 million per year.
Summary of international contributions: 2012–2016[5]
|
Year |
International contributions (US$) |
|
2016 |
1,116,036 |
|
2015 |
720,946 |
|
2014 |
1,023,067 |
|
2013 |
1,525,915 |
|
2012 |
687,510 |
|
Total |
5,073,474 |
[1] Germany, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form I, 5 May 2014; Japan, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form I, 30 April 2014; response to Monitor questionnaire by Esther Schindler, Counselor, Swiss Office for Foreign Affairs, 20 March 2014; and email from Ingunn Vatne, Senior Advisor, Section for Humanitarian Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 28 April 2014.
[2] Japan, Convention on Cluster Munitions Article 7 Report, Form I, 30 April 2015; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Ingrid Schoyen, Senior Adviser, Section for Humanitarian Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 18 May 2015.
[3] Japan, Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form J, April 2016; and email from Ingrid Schoyen, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 May 2016.
[4] Japan, Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, Form J, 30 April 2017; and email from Ingrid Schoyen, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 31 May 2017.
[5] See previous Monitor reports.
Casualties
Casualties Overview
|
All known casualties by end 2016 |
At least 3,852 casualties |
|
Casualties in 2016 |
19 (2015: 9) |
|
2016 casualties by outcome |
9 killed; 10 injured (2015: 4 killed; 5 injured) |
|
2016 casualties by device type |
4 antipersonnel mine; 3 improvised mine (victim activated improvised explosive device, IED); 3 unspecified mine type; 9 explosive remnants of war (ERW) |
In 2016, the Monitor identified 19 mine/ERW casualties in the Kingdom of Thailand. Nine casualties were men, two were women, one was a girl, and seven were of unknown sex and age. Seventeen casualties were civilian and two casualties were deminers.[1]
The Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) recorded five casualties in 2016, five casualties in 2015, eight casualties in 2014, all casualties in 2013, 13 casualties in 2012, 24 casualties in 2011, and 23 casualties in 2010.[2] In 2016, casualties were also reported by the Thailand Civilian Deminer Association and identified through Monitor media scanning.
The most comprehensive casualty data collection for Thailand remains the Landmine Impact Survey (LIS), which identified at least 3,468 casualties as of May 2001 (1,497 killed; 1,971 injured).[3] From 1999 to the end of 2016, the Monitor recorded 732 mine/ERW casualties in Thailand: 50 people killed, 322 injured, and for 360 it was unknown if they survived. This number includes 384 casualties since 2002.[4]
[1] Information provided by Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC), Bangkok, February 2017; and Monitor media scanning for calendar year 2016.
Casualties and Victim Assistance
Summary of action points based on findings
- Employment, work training, livelihood incentives, and other economic opportunities continued to be areas with the greatest need for improvement for survivors.
- Representation of local survivors’ networks through survivor leaders should be maintained and developed through all levels of coordination.
- Improve the system for ordering prosthetic components and introduce functional waitlists in rehabilitation centers.
Victim assistance commitments
The Kingdom of Thailand is responsible for significant numbers of landmine and explosive remnants of war (ERW) survivors. Thailand has made a commitment to victim assistance through the Mine Ban Treaty.
Casualties
Casualties Overview
|
All known casualties by end 2014 |
3,560 casualties (1,505 killed, 2,055 injured) |
|
Casualties in 2014 |
7 (2013: 16) |
|
2014 casualties by outcome |
7 injured (2013: 1 killed; 15 injured) |
|
2014 casualties by device type |
4 antipersonnel mines, 3 victim- activated improvised explosive device (IEDs) |
Details and Trends
In 2014, the Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) reported four mine/ERW casualties in Thailand. All casualties were men: one casualty was a civilian Cambodian national collecting forest food in Sakaeo province. One casualty was an on-duty military personnel patrolling in Si Sa Ket province. The other two causalities were humanitarian deminers from the military. According to other sources, an additional two soldiers were injured when they drove over an IED and one man was injured by an IED that he stepped on. [1]
The total number of casualties for 2014 represented a significant decrease from 16 in 2013, 20 in 2012, 49 in 2011, and 35 casualties in 2010. The four casualties in 2014 was the lowest number recorded annually in Thailand since data collection began.[2]
The TMAC recorded all casualties in 2014 and 2013, 13 casualties in 2012, 24 casualties in 2011, and 23 casualties in 2010.[3] In 2014 and in 2013, all casualties recorded by TMAC occurred on the Thai-Cambodian border.[4] There was no report on casualties of improvised mines or similar improvised explosive devices in southern Thailand in 2013.[5]
The most comprehensive casualty data collection for Thailand remains the Landmine Impact Survey (LIS), which identified at least 3,468 casualties as of May 2001 (1,497 killed; 1,971 injured).[6] From June 1998 to the end of 2014, the Monitor recorded 697 mine/ERW casualties in Thailand: 37 people killed, 300 injured, and for 360 it was unknown if they survived.[7]
Victim Assistance
In total, at least 1,383 mine/ERW survivors were recorded in Thailand by the end of 2014.[8]
Summary of victim assistance efforts since 1999[9]
Since 1999, the number of services provided to survivors from both government agencies and civil society organizations/NGOs gradually increased. Government responses to ongoing advocacy efforts by NGOs and local survivors’ groups led to improvements in the quality and coverage of services for mine/ERW survivors. In 1999, few government agencies or civil society groups provided services to survivors, yet by 2013-2014 a wide range of victim assistance services were being maintained.
Coordination among governmental bodies responsible for victim assistance has improved steadily since 2000. NGOs completed a national mine/ERW survivor survey and needs assessment in 2009. By 2010, Thailand had linked victim assistance to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The linkages between disability-rights, victim assistance, and community-based rehabilitation (CBR) on the ground strengthened over time through improved interagency cooperation and identification of focal points in relevant ministries.
Access to free healthcare programs increased through universal health coverage, provided survivors were Thai nationals or registered refugees. Emergency transportation was widely available and rescue response time improved with training. CBR and its outreach worker network (which covered 99% of the country by 2007) expanded significantly since 1998–1999. Gradual improvements were made in the availability of employment opportunities, social inclusion activities, and accessibility of existing services. Inclusive education programs provided by the government and relevant organizations increased. There were slight improvements in responding to the specific economic-inclusion needs of survivors working in the agricultural sector.
Victim assistance in 2014
In 2014 government support for strengthening and promotion of local landmine survivor networks was further developed through close consultation with survivors. Changes to policy meant that all survivors, including stateless survivors living in Thailand without identification, were better able to access health services. Supply of prosthetic components to regional workshops was sometimes delayed causing interruptions to services.
Assessing victim assistance needs
TMAC and other government agencies demonstrated improved coordination in registering data on each new casualty and following up to ensure that they received assistance and support. Use of the record system, which had existed in past years, improved significantly in 2012 and continued improving through 2014.[10]
The National Office for the Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (NEP) under the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS) organized six workshops on landmine victim assistance in 2012–2013. These workshops were used as a forum to hear survivors’ concerns through local representatives of survivor groups.[11] It was found that survivors and persons with disabilities required access to updated information on their rights,services. Economic inclusion and microcredit were identified as priority needs.
TMAC and its Humanitarian Mine Action Units (HMAUs) visited landmine/ERW survivors to assess their needs. From late 2013 to October 2014, TMAC’s Coordination and Evaluation Division carried out a specific project and made 30 follow-up visits to survivors, while also providing small emergency funds to meet urgent needs.[12]
The greatest challenges TMAC found were the distance from communities to prostheses centers and economic inclusion.[13]
Victim assistance coordination[14]
|
Government coordinating body/focal point |
Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs |
|
Coordinating mechanism |
The National Sub-Committee on Victim Assistance under the National Committee for Humanitarian Mine Action, includes TMAC, relevant government ministries and agencies: Foreign Affairs, Public Health, Social Development and Human Security, National Office for the Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (NEP), Interior, and Labor, as well as NGOs |
|
Plan |
The Master Plan for Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016 |
The National Sub-Committee on Victim Assistance did not hold formal meetings in 2013 and 2014, however there was regular coordination among the victim assistance stakeholders including the TMAC throughout the two-year period.[15]
The Master Plan on Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016 provides five action plans to strengthen victim assistance efforts, in the areas of mine victim database management; physical and psychological rehabilitation; social and economic reintegration; CBR; and sharing of best practices and experience.[16]
Thailand connected its work on victim assistance both in line with planning and implementation of its obligations under the CRDP[17] and also its universal health coverage strategy. Thailand reported that to assist landmine survivors it has adopted a holistic and integrated approach to victim assistance. Care for landmine victims is integrated into the broader legal framework, national plans and programs for persons with disabilities, and is implemented under the umbrella of universal health coverage for all.[18]
Thailand stated that other legislative measures that guarantee the rights of persons with disabilities include: 1) the National Health Security Act; 2) the Emergency Medical Service Act; and 3) The Persons with Disabilities Education Act.[19] Thailand also revised the Persons with Disabilities’ Quality of Life Promotion Act, which provides a comprehensive legal and institutional framework regarding rights and entitlements for persons with disabilities. The revised act decentralized coordination of essential services to the local administrative authorities, which are closer to communities.[20]
In 2014, the National Commission on Promotion and Development of the Quality of Lives of Persons with Disabilities met twice to address issues including: increasing disability pensions; withdrawal of its interpretative declaration to the CRPD;[21] the establishment of provincial service centers for people with disabilities; amendments to regulations under the Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act; procedures for acquiring accessible public buses; approval of projects for income generating activities; house modifications; making government venues accessible; and the development of an smart phone application to monitor the accessibility of public spaces.[22]
The National Commission also met twice in 2013 to include organizations of persons with disabilities in coordination, activities, and funding opportunities. The Commission drafted or made amendments to seven rules and regulations under the Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act and developed implementation strategies for the Promotion and Development Quality of Lives of Persons with Disabilities National Plan (2012-2015), and related work on disability issues under the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Socio–Cultural Community (ASCC) framework.[23]
Thailand provided updates on victim assistance activities through statements at the Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference in Maputo in June 2014. Thailand also provided information about mine/ERW casualties in its Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report for calendar year 2013.[24] Thailand also made a statement on victim assistance at the Fourth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions in September 2013[25] and during the General Exchanges of Views at the Fifth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions in September 2014.[26]
Inclusion and participation in victim assistance
In 2013 and 2014, survivor participation continued to increase at the community and provincial levels, and several survivors remained active in leadership roles in their communities. Survivor leaders from different communities also met regularly to discuss local advocacy approaches and to share information and services as well as lessons learned, with the support of the Catholic Office for Emergency Relief and Refugees (COERR).[27]
Survivors were consulted about survey and clearance needs. They were also key informants during the baseline survey, non-technical survey and impact assessment processes conducted by demining operators.[28] Survivors and other persons with disabilities continued to participate in provincial coordination meetings in Chanthaburi.[29] Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) also supported the transportation, accommodation expenses, and other costs for survivor representatives to attend group meetings of survivor leaders.[30]
TMAC regularly visited mine/ERW survivors to consult them and leaders of survivor networks as did other concerned government agencies and NGOs about their needs.[31]
Through informal networks, survivor leaders assisted other survivors and people with disabilities in making referrals, completing paperwork such as registering for benefits or filling in other forms, and liaising with local authorities at the leader or province level including liaising with NGOs focal points working on victim assistance.[32]
Based on feedback from local landmine-survivor leaders received by Thailand’s governmental team of victim assistance experts which indicated that survivors wanted to meet with other leaders in order to share experiences, in May 2013 the NEP organized the first formal Meeting of Leaders of Landmine Survivors in Aranyaprathet district, Sakaeo province. Some 20 participants from five provinces along the Thai-Cambodia border shared experiences and visited several local victim-assistance facilities.[33]
In 2014, the MSDHS organized two workshops to raise awareness about the rights of persons with disabilities among persons with disabilities and other people in the community. In May 2013, the MSDHS organized a victim assistance workshop to build the capacity of leaders of survivors and relevant parties. It also carried out four workshops on the Quality of Lives of Persons with Disabilities plan, each in a different in mine-affected province.[34]
Service accessibility and effectiveness[35]
|
Name of organization |
Type of organization |
Type of activity |
Changes in quality/coverage of service in 2014 |
|
Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) |
Government |
Operated healthcare facilities in mine-affected areas and a network of emergency response teams |
Ongoing |
|
National Health Security Office (NHSO) |
Government |
Responsible for funding the provision of prosthetic and other mobility devices and managing individual rehabilitation programs for persons with disabilities |
Ongoing, rehabilitation funds allocated per person unchanged |
|
Ministry of Development and Human Security (MSDHS) |
Government |
Community-based program providing social support for persons with disabilities |
Ongoing |
|
Sirindhorn National Medical Rehabilitation Center |
Government |
Provided free prostheses, assistive devices, wheelchairs, and other aids for persons with disabilities through hospitals |
Ongoing |
|
Catholic Office for Emergency Relief and Refugees (COERR) |
National NGO |
Supplied basic essentials such as food to persons with disabilities, including mine survivors in Sa Kaeo province; provided income generating activities trainings and small funds for six persons with disabilities |
Ongoing and started income-generating activities trainings and funds for six persons with disabilities in September 2014 |
|
Prostheses Foundation |
National NGO |
Prostheses and assistive devices provided free-of-charge |
Continued to provide mobile prosthetic services in Thailand and other countries, i.e. Malaysia, Myanmar, Bangladesh, and Senegal |
|
Jesuit Relief Services (JRS) |
International NGO |
Assistance to mine/ERW survivors and their children as part of its broader programs, including visits to mine survivors, and emergency support such as dry food and blankets |
Ongoing |
Emergency medical care
The National Institute for Emergency Medicine (NIEM) maintained community emergency health volunteer groups in every province in Thailand.[36] In early 2015, the NIEM, in cooperation with TMAC was planning specialized emergency care training for all Humanitarian Mine Action Units (HMAU’s) together with relevant NGOs.[37]
Thailand improved its medical emergency services by integrating the three main government medical funding schemes. Emergency patients are to be sent to the nearest hospital without being asked about their eligibility, and patients’ expenses are settled directly at one shared focal point for the three funds without patients first having to pay fees out-of-pocket and then await reimbursement.[38]
Physical rehabilitation including prosthetics
The National Health Security Office (NHSO) remained responsible for providing funding for rehabilitation and mobility devices for persons with disabilities in Thailand.[39] Government funding budgeted for the rehabilitation of persons with disabilities increased in 2013 and 2014.[40]
The NHSO continued to promote a system of matching funds, which were integrated with the funds managed by other government agencies. The NHSO fund had two operational components. Under the first, not less than 90% of total resources were dedicated directly to rehabilitation and assistive devices. Under the second, not more than 10% of resources were dedicated to support and promotion of service provision. The NHSO fund also had a policy component that could allow the cost of transportation to services to be covered for persons with disabilities.[41]
The NHSO faced challenges to integrating the health services and benefit packages provided by the hospital-based NHSO with the activities of the community-based rehabilitation (CBR) network. The NHSO recognized the importance of CBR but was only able to provide funded health care services through hospitals or health care units. Therefore the benefits did not reach the community level. In response, the NHSO started to explore solutions and held a seminar to discuss the issues in March 2014.[42]
Continuing a trend ongoing over the past several years, the role of the Sirindhorn Center in providing mobility devices remained minimal compared to when it had been the primary national referral hospital for prosthetics.[43] In 2013 and 2014, the Sirindhorn Center continued to focus on research, development, and innovation of devices, applying more advanced technology and testing.[44]
In 2013 and through 2014, the two UNDP-established repair centers in Sa Kaeo province, which operated with co-support from subdistrict administrative offices, continued but due to reduced funding the quantity of services decreased. As of February 2015, it was uncertain if the subdistrict administrative office would be able to continue prostheses repair activities in 2015, depending on the availability budget support.[45]
Irregular supplies of prosthetics components to prosthetic department of Aranyaprathet hospital caused delays for people waiting for services. The prosthetic workshop did not have a coordinated waitlist so survivors in need either travelled needlessly, or had to call regularly to find out when services were available.[46]
Community-based rehabilitation
The national CBR program remained active in all provinces of Thailand.[47] The NEP, with support fromCBM (previously Christian Blind Mission), hosted the official launch of the Thai edition of the World Health Organization CBR guidelines to support and guide the CBR network in implementing disability work that focuses on community participation.[48]
Economic and social inclusion
Improvement in employment opportunities for survivors was reported. The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives provided small grants and fishery training to new survivors.[49] HMAUs also provided support for income-generation activities as well as for some basic needs.[50] TMAC and all four HMAUs coordinated with relevant government and non-government agencies to facilitate survivors access to services.[51]
Survey data presented in September 2013 found that 20% of all persons with disabilities of working age needed training and capacity building, while 77% needed support for economic inclusion.[52]
The Ministry of Social Development and Human Security and the Ministry of Labor established a task force on the “Promotion of Employment of People with Disabilities for Social Work in Local Community.” A pilot project on Section 35 of the Person with Disabilities Empowerment Action BE 2550 (2007)[53] matches persons with disabilities who live in remote areas with the companies who are required by law to employ persons with disabilities under the quota system, whereby the company supports the person to work in their own communities rather than for the company directly.[54] The Commission approved projects for income-generation activities for people with disabilities in rural areas for the period November 2014 to September 2015.[55]
In 2014, following the reductions in the level of services over several years, JRS focused facilitating/linking victim assistance activities between the field and the capital. In 2013-2014, it reduced services for survivors, citing a general increase of services by government and an internal reprioritization of the organization.[56]
The Community Based Rehabilitation Program and the Community Learning Center for People with Disabilities project operated in all provinces. Each province contained two centers, while Bangkok had 10 centers in 2013.[57] This marked a significant expansion from having at least one center of each province during 2012.[58]
The government provided five-year, interest-free, small business loans for persons with disabilities. Government regulations require private firms either to hire one person with a disability for every 100 workers or contribute to a fund that benefits persons with disabilities. However this provision was not uniformly enforced.[59]
National registration of persons with disabilities was completed by 2011. All survivors were reportedly registered and random monitoring through leaders of survivor groups in several provinces confirmed that their constituents were registered. Persons with disabilities, including mine/ERW survivors who are registered with the government, can receive monthly, free medical examinations, and assistive devices.[60]
For several years disability benefits were set at 500 Thai Baht (approximately US$15) per month. In November 2014, the Cabinet approved a proposal to increase the disability pension by 60% to 800 Thai Baht per month.[61]
COERR, with support from private donors, started a pilot income-generating project for six survivors and people with disabilities in Sakaoe province for the period September 2014 until March 2015, which included training.[62]
Modified buildings with accessible toilets for survivors and people with disabilities in Aranyapratet were provided through the donations of a small volunteer group. Toilet instillation based on the sanitation needs of the most vulnerable in the community was assessed through requests to local survivor leaders by survivors, persons with disabilities and their families.[63]
Laws and policies
The constitution and law prohibit discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities in education, transportation, access to health care, or the provision of other state services. Government enforcement was not consistently effective. The law also mandates that persons with disabilities have access to information, communications, and newly constructed buildings, but these provisions were not uniformly enforced.[64]
In 2013, Thailand issued the revised “Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act B.E.2556 (2013).” The key changes included increasing the role of the NEP, introducing focal points for disability with more authority and responsibility to work at the department level, expanding services to the persons with disabilities without legal status in Thailand, particularly stateless persons, and establishment of service centers by organizations of persons with disabilities and local authorities.[65]
Thailand has a Master Plan for Development of Women with Disabilities B.E 2556-2559 (2013-2016). The plan’s six key objectives include: promotion of accessibility to equal rights and ending discrimination against women and female children with disabilities; elimination of violence against women and female children with disabilities; promotion of health and quality of life for women and female children with disabilities; capacity building; promotion of the capacity of organizations of women with disabilities; and promotion of positive attitudes towards these groups.[66]
In what was regarded as a significant victory for the right of accessibility for persons with disabilities in Thailand, in January 2015 the Supreme Administrative Court ordered Bangkok Governor and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration to carry out three essential accessibility measures to facilitate use of public transit by persons with disabilities within one year.[67]
Thailand ratified the CRPD on 29 July 2008.
Services for Myanmar nationals in 2013
Mine survivors from Myanmar who went to Thailand for assistance received medical care and rehabilitation at hospitals in refugee camps, in public district hospitals in the Thai-Myanmar border provinces and from NGOs.[68] Hospitals in Thailand also provided medical care and rehabilitation to survivors from Cambodia.[69]
Victim assistance activities on Thai-Myanmar Border and in Thailand for Myanmar nationals
|
Name of organization |
Type of organization |
Type of activity |
|
Thai hospitals |
Government |
Providing medical care to mine/ERW survivors from Myanmar and Cambodia |
|
Prostheses Foundation of H.R.H The Princess Mother |
National NGO |
Prostheses and assistive devices provided free-of-charge |
|
The Mae Tao Clinic (MTC) |
National NGO |
Prosthetics and rehabilitation services, trauma surgery, psychological support, and other health services |
|
Shan Health Committee (SHC) |
Community-based organization |
Prosthetic services in Pang Ma Pha, Wieng Hang, Mae Fa Luang, and Loi Kai Wan; and economic inclusion activities |
|
Care Villa established by the Karen Handicap Welfare Association |
Community-based organization |
Assistance to blind amputee mine/ERW survivors in Mae La refugee camp |
|
Handicap International (HI) Burmese Border Project |
International NGO |
Physiotherapy, prosthetics, and accessibility to buildings; social inclusion activities |
|
ICRC |
International organization |
Covers costs of hospitalization and surgery for war injured people from Myanmar in Thai hospitals |
The Mae Tao Clinic (MTC), an NGO health facility run by and for asylum seekers and migrants from Myanmar, provided prosthetic limbs and other medical services near the join border. In addition to the successes, the program faced hurdles that were beyond the Clinic’s control. MTC reported that the supply of artificial feet (ordered from Cambodia by HI) often could not keep up with the demand. Loss of experienced technical staff who resettle overseas was also a challenge to capacity. The program’s financial future was more secure with a long-term support guarantee for the Clinic’s prosthetics program made by an Italian community organization.[70] In 2013 the number of MTC prosthetics fitted decreased by some 5% from in 2012.[71]
The refugee-run Care Villa facility continued to offer special care and assistance to blind amputee landmine/ERW survivors residing in the Mae La refugee camp. HI provided prosthetic limbs, orthotics, and other assistive devices for refugees in some of the camps and has also trained refugees in the Mae La camp to make the prostheses.[72] In 2013, Care Villa residents (mostly landmine survivors that are both amputees and blind) received only very basic rations. The United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCR) reported providing funding to help provide physical and psychosocial support at Care Villa as well.[73]
ICRC continued to pay for the surgical treatment in Thai hospitals of weapon-wounded people from Myanmar unable to be treated in their own country. Despite reduced fighting in parts of Myanmar, 42 weapon-wounded patients in 2013 from there sought treatment in Thai hospitals and had their medical costs covered. The number of people reduced from 111 in 2011 to 38 in 2012. It slightly increased to 42 in 2013.[74]
In 2013 and 2014, the peace talks between members of armed ethnic groups and Myanmar government representatives continued.[75] Although it was uncertain if the groups would reach a cease-fire agreement,it resulted in the possibility of refugees being returned, leading to a reduction in financial assistance by some donors to NGOs in order to focus on activities within Myanmar. Given the global economic situation and competing demands in other countries, particularly Myanmar, it was becoming harder to sustain enough donor funding to provide basic services to refuges living in camps in Thailand.[76] The work of the MTC was similarly threatened by the redirection of donor funding.[77]
HI also continued to produce prosthetics and to support rehabilitation in refugee camps as well as to support self-help groups. Key activities included functional rehabilitation services, livelihood and social inclusion for persons with physical disabilities in three camps in Tak province and two camps in Mae Hong Son province.[78]
As part of humanitarian mine action study visit organized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand in August 2013, a delegation from Myanmar visited the Aranyaprathet Hospital in Sakaeo province to observe services for landmine survivors including operations, prosthetic services, and rehabilitation, as well as the Prostheses Foundation in Chiang Mai Province and two community learning centers for persons with disabilities in Chiang Mai and Lampang Provinces which served as models for a community-based rehabilitation.[79]
[1] Information from TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2014 and 6 February 2015. Analysis of AOAV data received by email from Jane Hunter, Armed Violence Researcher, AOAV, 7 October 2015.
[2] See previous editions of the Monitor, www.the-monitor.org.
[3] Information provided by TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2013, 20 May 2013, 30 April 2014, and 6 February 2015.
[4] Information provided by TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2014; and Monitor media monitoring for calendar year 2013.
[5] Based on Monitor analysis of media reports for 2013 and 2014.
[6] Survey Action Center and Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), “Landmine Impact Survey: Kingdom of Thailand,” 2001, p. 18
[7] See previous editions of the Monitor, www.the-monitor.org. The LIS recorded 346 new casualties between June 1998 and May 2001. This total includes some casualties injured in Myanmar and recorded in Thailand, which could not be separated from the data.
[8] A survey completed in the beginning of 2009 identified 1,252 survivors in Thailand; another 50 survivors were identified during 2009 and 2010. See Handicap International (HI), “Mine Victim Survey and Situation Analysis: Findings, Analyses and Recommendations,” Bangkok, June 2009, p. 3. These figures are thought to differ from the high number of injured reported in the LIS, as they include only Thai nationals resident in Thailand.
[9] Unless otherwise noted, information presented in this section is drawn from the Thailand country reports and profiles from 1999 to date, www.the-monitor.org.
[10] TMAC, “Database sheet of casualties and follow up, Special Affairs Unit,” provided to the Monitor by TMAC, Bangkok, 30 April 2013 and 30 April 2014; and data from TMAC, 6 February 2015.
[11] Interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, Disability Specialist, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013, 5 December 2014; and telephone interview with Saowalak Vijit, NEP, 2 February 2015.
[12] TMAC’s Humanitarian Demining Operations Thailand, TMAC's Coordination and Evaluation Division, accessed 30 December 2014; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Head of TMAC’s Coordination and Evaluation Division, TMAC, Bangkok, November and December 2014.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2012 and 2013), Form J; and Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 24 June 2014.
[15] Telephone interview with Chidchanok Suwakhon, National Institute for Emergency Medicine, Bangkok, 19 January 2015.
[16] Thailand’s Master Plan on Mine Victim Assistance 2012–2016.
[17] Interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013.
[18] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 24 June 2014.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid.
[21] On 5 February 2015, Thailand informed the Secretary-General of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities that it had decided to withdraw the following interpretative declaration made upon ratification:
“The Kingdom of Thailand hereby declares that the application of Article 18 of the Convention shall be subject to the national laws, regulations and practices in Thailand,” UN Treaties Collection.
[22] Minutes, National Committee on Promotion and Development Quality of Lives of People with Disabilities (NCPDQo-PwD) (2nd/ 2014), 4 November 2014; and Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (1st/ 2014), 7 August 2014.
[23] Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (2nd/ 2013), 18 September 2013; and Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (1st/ 2012), 27 May 2013.
[24] Statement of Thailand, Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-Economic Reintegration, Geneva, 29 May 2013; Mine Ban Treaty Thirteenth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 3 December 2013; Article 7 Report (for calendar year 2012 and 2013), Form J; and Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 24 June 2014.
[25] Statement of Thailand, Convention on Cluster Munition Fourth Meeting of States Parties, Lusaka, 11 September 2013.
[26] Statement of Thailand, General Exchanges of Views, the Fifth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, 2 September 2014.
[27] Telephone interview with Supranee Deerada, Senior Operations Officer, COERR, Aranyapratet, 8 February 2015.
[28] Interview with Aubrey Sutherland-Pillai, Country Director, Norwegian People’s Aid Humanitarian Disarmament Programme Thailand, 7 February 2015.
[29] Telephone interview with Chusak Saelee on 1 May 2013 and 8 February 2015.
[30] Interview with Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 28 December 2014.
[31] Telephone interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Head, Landmine Survivors and People with Disabilities in Pan-suk Subdistrict, 1 May 2013; and telephone interview with Chusak Saelee, Landmine Survivors and People with Disabilities in Pong Nam Ron District, 2 May 2013; email from Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 3 May 2013; email from Chidchanok Suwakhon, NIEM, 10 May 2013; interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, 20 December 2014; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief, Coordination and Evaluation Unit, Thailand Mine Action Center, 5 February 2015.
[32] Interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Landmine Survivors and People with Disabilities in Pan-suk Subdistrict, 24 November 2012; and field mission notes and interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Sakaeo, 20 December 2014.
[33] Email from Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 23 May 2013.
[34] Information provided by Mayuree Pewsuwan, Disability Specialist, Bangkok, 16 March 2014 and 29 January 2015; and telephone interview with Saowalak Vijit, NEP, 2 February 2015.
[35] Interview with Pairoj Boonsirikamchai, Maputo, 27 June 2014; Interview with Prachaksvich Lebnak, NHSO, 27 June 2014 and 28 December 2014; information from Mayuree Pewsuwan, former Disability Specialist, NEP, Bangkok, 16 March 2014 and 29 January 2015; and telephone interview with Saowalak Vijit, NEP, 2 February 2015; Sirindhorn National Medical Rehabilitation Center, http://www.snmrc.go.th/index.php/en/, accessed 21 December 2014; interview with Suleepun Solanda, Public Health Technical Officer and Sarinee Kaewsawang, Physiotherapist, Sirindhorn National Medical Rehabilitation Center (SNMRC), Ministry of Public Health, 21 February 2014; Telephone interview with Supranee Deerada, Senior Operations Officer, COERR, Aranyapratet, 8 February 2015 and COERR www.coerr.org; Prosthetics Foundation, www.prosthesesfoundation.or.th; and interview with Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, 28 December 2014.
[36] Statement of Thailand, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 4 December 2012.
[37] Telephone interview with Chidchanok Suwakhon, National Institute for Emergency Medicine, Bangkok, 19 January 2015.
[38] The National Institute for Emergency Medicine, “Documents for the Briefing of Policy: Medical Emergency – Care Services Anywhere-For Everyone” (in Thai), 31 March 2013; and NHSO, “Yingluck gears up towards equality of Vehicle Fund, setting the goal that people can access service quickly, no burden of three health funds” (in Thai), 26 April 2013.
[39] Interview with Dr. Prachaksvich Lebnak, NHSO, 28 December 2014; and NHSO, “NHSO Funds Management Manual for Fiscal Year B.E.2557 (2014)”, Section 5, pp. 162-398.
[40] Funding increased from 12.88 Thai Baht per capita for 48.445 million people in 2013 fiscal year (1 October 2012 to 30 September 2013) to 14.95 Thai Baht per capita or 730,337,440 Thai Baht total in 2014 fiscal (1 October 2013 to 30 September 2014) NHSO, “NHSO Funds Management Manual for Fiscal Year B.E.2557 (2014)”, Section 5, pp. 162-398
[41] NHSO, “NHSO Funds Management Manual for Fiscal Year B.E.2558 (2015)”, Section 5, pp. 126-140.
[42] Interview with Ms. Orajitt Bumrungskulswat, Director of Medical Rehabilitation, Traditional Medical and Community Health Care Program, National Health Security Office (NHSO), Nonthaburi province, 17 March 2014; and telephone interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 16 March 2014.
[43] Sirindhorn Center, “Mission,” see http://www.snmrc.go.th/index.php/en/..
[44] Sirindhorn Center, “Programme and Important Plans according to the Four-Year-Plan of Action 2010-2013” (in Thai), and notes from Monitor visit, 21 February 2014.
[45] Telephone interview with Saichon Konto, Chief Administrator, Tapsadet Subdistrict Administrative Office, 6 February 2015; presentation by Saichon Konto, Chief Administrator, Tapsadet Subdistrict Administrative Office, to the participants of the Fieldtrip to Humanitarian Mine Action Units, Sa Kaeo and Chanthaburi provinces, 7 June 2012; “Thailand’s Experiences on Victim Assistance” side event presentation, Geneva, 5 December 2013;Thailand’s Subcommittee on Victim Assistance: “Thailand’s Experiences on Victim.Assistance,”YouTube,24 November 2012.; and interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013.
[46] Notes from Monitor field mission, Aranyapratet, Sakaeo province, 21 December 2014.
[47] Telephone interview with Saowalak Wijit, NEP, Bangkok, 20 February 2014 and 20 January 2015.
[48] CBM, “The official launch of CBR Guidelines, Thai edition,” 3 June 2013.
[49] Information from Database Unit, TMAC, 29 January 2015.
[50] Telephone interview with Chusak Saelee, Head, Landmine Survivors and Persons with Disabilities Network in Pong Nam Ron District, 3 May 2013 and 8 February 2015.
[51] Information from Database Unit, TMAC, 29 January 2015; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief, Coordination and Evaluation Unit, Thailand Mine Action Center, 5 February 2015.
[52] According to the survey there were 1,379,103 registered people with disabilities (2% of population). Of this number, 703,078 were of working age (age 15 to 60); 38% were working and 51% were not working; 11% were unable to work. People with disabilities who were employed through the quote system under by law were 19,211 (section 33) and 2,513 (section 35). Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (2nd/ 2013), 18 September 2013.
[53] Thailand, “Persons with Disabilities Empowerment Act B.E. 2550,” pp. 18-19.
[54] Ministry of Labour, “Ministry of Labour Discussed Employment in Local Communities” ; and Information from Mayuree Pewsuwan, , NEP, Bangkok, 29 January 2015.
[55] Minutes, NCPDQo-PwD (2nd/ 2014), 4 November 2014.
[56] Email from Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, Bangkok, 3 May 2013; and interview with Sermsiri Ingavanija, JRS, Bangkok, 28 December 2014.
[57] US Department of State, “2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 27 February 2014.
[58] US Department of State, “2012 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 17 April 2013.
[59] US Department of State, “2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 27 February 2014.
[60] Monitor interviews with survivors 1 January to 13 June 2012: Prakaikul Teppanok, Nid Chabathong, Chamroon Pengpis and Lao Sena, in Surin; Chusak Saelee from Chanthaburi; Wiboonrat Chanchoo, Tongsao Soiwijit, Supan Kota and Somkiat Chuesingh from Sa Kaeo; Vichai Pokkapan from Si Sa Ket; Pinya Siwilai from Trad province; and interview with Wiboonrat Chanchoo in December 2014 and Chusak Saelee in February 2015; and statement by Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-economic Reintegration, Geneva, 22 June 2011; and interview with Mr. Ram Chintamas, Director of the Division of Social Welfare, Department of Local Administration, Ministry of Interior, Bangkok, 19 February 2014.
[61] Cabinet Resolution, 25 November 2014, accessed 30 December 2014.
[62] Telephone interview with Supranee Deerada, Senior Operations Officer, COERR, Aranyapratet, 8 February 2015; and COERR, Activities.
[63] Notes from Monitor field mission, Sakaeo province, 20 December 2014.
[64] US Department of State, “2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Thailand,” Washington, DC, 27 February 2014.
[65] “Person with Disabilities Empowerment Act (Second Revision) B.E.2556 (2013),” Thailand Royal Gazette, Volume 130, 29 March 2013, p. 6, para 30; and interview with Mayuree Pewsuwan, NEP, Bangkok, 1 May 2013 and 8 February 2015.
[66] NEP, “Master Plan for Development of Women with Disabilities B.E 2556-2559 (2013-2016).”
[67] “The disabled win one”, Bangkok Post,22 January 2015.
[68] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand, “3 disabled Myanmar Children got 'New Legs, New Life' in Thailand.”
[69] Presentation by Aranyapratet Hospital to the participants of the Field Trip to Humanitarian Mine Action Units, Sa Kaeo and Chanthaburi provinces, Sa Kaeo, 7 June 2012; and interview with Col. Suchart Chantrawong, Chief, Coordination and Evaluation Unit, TMAC, 5 February 2015.
[70] Mae Toe Clinic, “Prosthetics.”
[71] Mae Tao Clinic, Annual Report 2013, p 8. In 2013, 256 new and replacement prosthetic limbs were fitted compared to 268 in 2012.
[72] Edward Winter, “A Refuge for Myanmar’s Disabled Refugees,” Reliefweb, 1 February 2013.
[73] UMCOR, “Myanmar and Thailand: Limiting Landmine Danger,” July 2014.
[74] ICRC, “Annual Report 2013”, pp. 319-321.
[76] The Committee for the Coordination of Services to Displaced Persons in Thailand (CCSDPT) and The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Strategic Framework for Durable Solutions 2013/14 (Version 5, 2013), p 5.
[77] Belinda Thompson, “Burmese refugees the forgotten victims of AusAID cuts,” 24 October 2013.
[79] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand, “Thailand Supports Myanmar in humanitarian mine action efforts.”