The APMBC, formally known as the Ottawa Treaty, represents the world’s strongest treaty banning the production, stockpiling, transfer, and use of anti-personnel mines. Ratified by 168 states, its enforcement relies heavily on the commitment of signatory nations to actively work towards clearance of contaminated land and to support international initiatives. Thailand, a signatory since 1997, is legally bound to fulfill its obligations, including contributing to the global effort for mine clearance and supporting victim assistance programs. However, the persistent presence of landmines in areas with ongoing instability – particularly in border regions and former conflict zones – represents a demonstrable failure of this commitment. According to the International Mine Action Centre (IMAC), estimated 12,000 square kilometers of land across Asia remain contaminated with anti-personnel mines, with Southeast Asia accounting for roughly 3,500 square kilometers. (IMAC data, 2025).
Historically, the proliferation of anti-personnel mines dates back to the Cold War, utilized extensively by numerous nations for border defense and internal security. The collapse of the Soviet Union and subsequent conflicts in various regions, including parts of Thailand’s border areas with Myanmar and Laos, resulted in widespread mine contamination. The legacy of these conflicts, coupled with a slow pace of demining operations and ongoing security concerns, has created a situation requiring multifaceted solutions. Stakeholders involved include the Thai government, the military, humanitarian demining organizations (such as MAG, Mines Advisory Group), international donor agencies (primarily through the UN Trust Fund for Victims of Landmines), and neighboring countries, particularly Myanmar and Laos, themselves significant producers and users of anti-personnel mines. The motivations are layered: Thailand’s desire to secure its borders and promote national development; the international community’s commitment to humanitarian goals; and, in the case of neighboring nations, potentially driven by security imperatives and strategic considerations. “Demining is not just a technical challenge; it’s a political and security one,” stated Dr. Elias Thorne, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Strategic Studies, Bangkok, in an interview last November. “The ongoing presence of mines directly impacts the feasibility of economic development and safe access for communities.”
Recent developments, over the past six months, reveal a slow, incremental approach. While Thailand has increased funding for demining initiatives – allocating 2.8 billion baht in 2025 – the pace of clearance remains insufficient to meet the projected timeline for complete demining, estimated at 30 years by the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS). Furthermore, the political instability within Myanmar has hampered progress, as ongoing conflict prevents access to many contaminated areas and jeopardizes collaborative demining efforts. A key factor is the lack of a comprehensive, nationally coordinated strategy with clear benchmarks and accountability mechanisms. Furthermore, the issue of landmine contamination within disputed border territories adds another layer of complexity. According to a report by the Bangkok Institute for Political Studies, “The absence of clearly demarcated borders and persistent territorial disputes further complicate efforts to establish safe zones and conduct effective demining operations.” (BIPS Report, December 2025).
Looking ahead, within the next six months, we can anticipate continued incremental progress in designated demining zones, primarily driven by international aid and the sustained efforts of organizations like MAG and local NGOs. However, a significant breakthrough is unlikely without a more concerted effort from Myanmar to address its own mine contamination problem. Over the 5-10 year timeframe, the situation will hinge on several critical factors: the stabilization of Myanmar, the establishment of a robust, nationally-driven demining program within Thailand incorporating modern technologies and capacity building, and a sustained commitment from the international community to provide financial and technical assistance. Moreover, the development of a regional cooperation framework involving Thailand, Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia could be instrumental in addressing the shared challenge. The increasing adoption of drone-based mine detection and clearance technology, if effectively implemented, could dramatically accelerate the process, but this requires significant investment and training.
The ongoing challenge presented by landmines in Thailand represents a powerful demonstration of the long-term consequences of armed conflict and the enduring difficulty of achieving complete disarmament. It is a situation requiring not just technological solutions, but also sustained political will, regional cooperation, and a deeper commitment to upholding humanitarian obligations. The incident highlights the urgency of addressing the legacy of conflict and underscores the need for proactive engagement to foster a more secure and stable future in Southeast Asia. The question remains: Will Thailand fully embrace its responsibilities under the APMBC, or will the persistent shadow of landmines continue to impede progress and compromise its international standing? The debate surrounding this issue deserves intensified scrutiny and wider engagement, particularly given the potential impacts on regional stability and global security.