Full Analysis Summary
2024 Landmine Casualties
Global casualties from landmines and unexploded ordnance surged to a four-year high in 2024.
The Landmine Monitor 2025 documented more than 6,000 people harmed - 1,945 killed and 4,325 injured - and noted that nearly 90% of victims were civilians and almost half were women and children.
Reports attribute the rise to intensified use in Syria and Myanmar, with Myanmar recording over 2,000 incidents, the most of any country, and to fresh signs of mine use in other theatres.
The reports underline the human toll on returning residents in Syria and on civilian populations across affected states.
Coverage Differences
Tone/Narrative emphasis
All sources report the numerical rise but vary in emphasis: Sri Lanka Guardian (Asian) foregrounds the civil‑humanitarian statistics and specific country incidents; Punch Newspapers (African) lists the casualty breakdown and civilian share; ThePrint (Asian) highlights the sharp rise “especially in Syria and Myanmar” and the risk to returning residents. These variations reflect differing editorial focus on human impact versus geographic hotspots.
Mine Ban Treaty erosion
The Landmine Monitor links a recent spike in casualties to an erosion of the Mine Ban Treaty framework.
Several European states have begun legal steps or are moving to withdraw — Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland — and Ukraine formally withdrew on June 29.
Reports warn those actions could concretely threaten or erode the global ban, placing the 1999 Ottawa Convention under strain as its membership of 166 states faces backsliding.
Coverage Differences
Word-choice/Severity
ThePrint (Asian, Reuters summary) uses the report’s phrase that these moves “concretely threaten” the health of the treaty, a stronger formulation than Sri Lanka Guardian (Asian) which warns they “could erode the global ban.” Punch Newspapers (African) frames withdrawals as reflecting security concerns about Russia and presents the departures as moves that the report “warns could erode the treaty.” These different phrasings change perceived immediacy and severity of the treaty’s weakening.
Locations of explosive hazards
Geographic drivers of the surge vary in coverage.
Myanmar is consistently singled out, reporting over 2,000 incidents, while Syria is cited for rising unexploded ordnance risk to returning civilians.
Some reports document alleged new mine use in Ukraine and along the Thailand-Cambodia border, expanding the problem beyond classic conflict zones.
Coverage Differences
Scope/Detail
Sri Lanka Guardian (Asian) explicitly lists Myanmar’s tally, Ukraine and the Thailand–Cambodia allegations; Punch Newspapers (African) stresses both state and non‑state actors in Myanmar and the risk to returning Syria residents; ThePrint (Asian) underscores both Myanmar’s incident count and the danger to returnees in Syria. Nation Thailand (Other) repeats the Syria/Myanmar focus but highlights regional/security framing tied to Russia for treaty withdrawals. These differences show some outlets broaden geographic scope while others emphasise civilian returnee risks.
Impact of donor funding cuts
Donor cuts have had immediate operational consequences, with reporting showing U.S. funding declines among the causes of program shutdowns and reduced survivor assistance.
ThePrint lists program endings in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Colombia, Tajikistan, and Zimbabwe, and notes the U.S. once supplied about a third of international funding, with further declines likely.
Sri Lanka Guardian and Punch Newspapers report that cuts, including from the United States, have forced termination of mine clearance and survivor assistance programs, leaving urgent needs unmet.
Coverage Differences
Detail/Specificity
ThePrint (Asian) offers the most detailed list of countries where programs ended and quantifies U.S. contribution (“about a third of international funding”), while Sri Lanka Guardian (Asian) and Punch Newspapers (African) describe cuts more generally but still attribute program terminations to U.S. and other donor reductions. This produces variation in how concrete the humanitarian funding picture appears across outlets.
Mine Ban Treaty in Geneva
States party are meeting in Geneva as the report's warnings circulate.
Media coverage frames the talks as a potential flashpoint for whether the Mine Ban Treaty can withstand withdrawals, new mine use, and shrinking budgets.
Outlets vary in tone: ThePrint quotes the report's stark language about the treaty's concrete threats, Punch and Sri Lanka Guardian warn of erosion and unmet humanitarian needs, and Nation Thailand links withdrawals to broader security concerns about Russia, but all cite the Geneva talks as the venue for addressing the crisis.
The convergence on a diplomatic response contrasts with divergence in emphasis on causes and solutions.
Coverage Differences
Tone and causal framing
ThePrint (Asian) uses the report’s stark phrasing that actions “concretely threaten” treaty health; Sri Lanka Guardian (Asian) frames withdrawals as moves that “could erode the global ban”; Punch Newspapers (African) connects withdrawals to security concerns about Russia; Nation Thailand (Other) highlights that withdrawals are being justified by states citing the “military threat posed by Russia.” These tonal choices shape whether reporting reads as an urgent legal collapse or a geopolitically driven policy shift.