§ Mr. Tom ClarkeTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what conclusions for United Kingdom policy he has drawn from the recent report commissioned by the United States Department of Defence concerning the military utility of anti-personnel mines to the United States armed forces;
(2) whether Her Majesty's Government will commission a report on the military utility of anti-personnel mines for the armed forces.
§ Mr. FreemanWe are not aware of any specific United States Government report concerning the military utility of anti-personnel mines for the United States armed forces. The need for, and the role of, land mines for the United Kingdom armed forces is assessed as part of overall military strategy.
§ Mr. Tom ClarkeTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of Her Majesty's armed forces have been(a) killed and (b) injured by anti-personnel mines since 1980; in which countries, and with what effects on operations in which British armed forces have been involved.
§ Mr. SoamesPrecise data are not available on the individual weapons systems responsible for deaths and injuries of service personnel.
§ Mr. Tom ClarkeTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what research he has conducted into the impact of anti-personnel mines on civilian populations; and what conclusions he reached.
§ Mr. FreemanNo such research has been carried out by the Ministry of Defence. The use of anti-personnel land mines by United Kingdom armed forces is fully in accordance with the laws of war, which prohibit the use of land mines against civilians.
§ Mr. Tom ClarkeTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what research he has conducted on the failure rates of anti-personnel mines with self-destruct or self-neutralising mechanisms; and if he will publish specific details of failure rates and the general conclusions of the research.
§ Mr. FreemanI refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given in reply to a question from the hon. Member for Oxford, East (Mr. Smith) on 18 April 1994,Official Report, column 416.
§ Mr. Tom ClarkeTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what research he has conducted to compare the levels of military utility to the United Kingdom armed forces of anti-personnel mines and anti-tank mines; and with what conclusions.
§ Mr. FreemanAnti-personnel mines and anti-tank mines have separate roles although they are often laid within the same area. The anti-tank mine is intended to prevent physically the passage of military vehicles with750W consequential effect on the enemy's fighting capability. Anti-personnel mines are intended to lower the enemy's general effectiveness. Consequently, the military utility of the two cannot be compared to useful advantage.