On 20 February Poland formally ceases to be a organization to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Storage, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on their Destruction. This decision is simply a consequence to changes in the safety environment following Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Poland thus regains freedom in defence planning and possible usage of specified weapons.
Element tests Shields of the East on the ground in Orish.
The process of exiting the Republic of Poland from the Ottawa Convention was the consequence of a political decision and legislative procedure which began in the spring of 2025. In May, the government prepared and directed to Parliament a draft law on denunciation of the convention. This task passed through parliamentary committees and was put to the vote in the Sejm.
June 26, 2025 The Sejm adopted the law on denunciation of the Convention: 413 Members voted, 15 voted against and 3 abstained. After this step, the bill went to the Senate, which supported it without amendment on July 17. A week later, then president Andrzej Duda signed the bill, which formally ended the national legislative process.
Pursuant to Article 20 of the Ottawa Convention, denunciation shall take effect six months after the authoritative notification to the Depositary of the Agreement, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Poland submitted specified notification after the president signed the Act, which means that on 20 February 2026 Poland formally ceases to be a organization to the Convention.
What is the Ottawa Convention?
The paper was adopted in 1997 at a diplomatic conference in Ottawa and entered into force 2 years later. Its main nonsubjective was to destruct anti-personnel mines completely as a means of armed combat. The Convention prohibits States Parties from producing, using, storing and transferring anti-personnel landmines and imposes an work to destruct their stocks and to take demining action in areas where specified facilities are located.
The Convention was a consequence to the experiences of the 20th century armed conflicts in which anti-personnel mines caused crucial losses, especially among civilians, frequently besides long after the end of the war. Due to its humanitarian nature, this settlement has become 1 of the pillars of global humanitarian law and has been supported by over 160 countries.
Poland signed the convention in 1997, nevertheless She only ratified her 15 years later.. In the following years, our country has fulfilled its obligations under the Convention by destroying existing reserves of anti-personnel mines (about 17,000 pieces) and adapting its defence strategy and training processes in accordance with the applicable restrictions.
Change of the safety environment
For many years, the Ottawa Convention has not been the subject of an in-depth strategical debate in Central and east Europe. The situation began to change from 2014, after the annexation of Crimea and the beginning of the conflict in Donbasa, and a major breakthrough followed the full-scale aggression of the Russian Federation to Ukraine in February 2022. This war illustrated the scale and nature of modern land conflicts in Europe, including the mass usage of engineering equipment, field dams and mine systems.
Russia is not organization to the Convention and does not respect its provisions in the course of its armed action. It uses a full spectrum of military engineering equipment. In practice, this has led to states complying with this paper acting under legal and military asymmetry to the possible opponent.
These challenges are interpreted in a akin way other NATO east flank countries, in peculiar countries bordering straight with the Russian Federation or Belarus. In fresh years, decisions to denounce the Ottawa Convention or to start formal exit procedures have been taken by the Baltic States, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, pointing to the request to adapt national defence systems to the realities of the high-intensity war. akin decisions were besides made in Finland, which, after joining NATO, has the longest border in the Alliance with Russia.
In this context, Poland's decision to terminate the Ottawa Convention is part of a broader process of revision of existing legal constraints conducted by the countries of the region. These countries, acting independently in their constitutional procedures, appear from akin strategical assumptions: the request to supply the armed forces with a full scope of defence measures where the possible opponent is not bound by comparable global commitments.
The importance of decisions for defence planning
In the military doctrine, anti-personnel mines are not regarded as a stand-alone means of destruction, but as part of an area defence strategy and engineering dams. Their primary task is to slow down the enemy's attack, defend their own positions and increase the effectiveness of indirect fire by limiting the freedom of manoeuvre of attacking forces. The experience of the war in Ukraine shows that mine dams are an integral component of the defence linked to another means of combat, including reconnaissance and artillery.
However, the exit of Poland from the Ottawa Convention does not mean the automatic usage of anti-personnel mines or the resignation of global law of armed conflicts. This step, on the another hand, results in the regaining of decision-making freedom in defence planning, production, retention and the possible usage of specified weapons, in accordance with the safety assessment and procedures in force.
Decisions on the applicable usage of mines stay the work of political and military authorities and are subject to civilian control. At the same time, Poland retains the capacity to conduct minimizing activities and to evidence engineering dams, which is crucial in terms of reducing long-term threats to civilians.
The decision to denunciation of the convention is met with criticism of humanitarian organisations, which indicate the possible long-term effects of mines on civilian safety. In response, the state authorities emphasise the defensive nature of the decision and its connection with the request to adapt the defence strategy to the reality of military threats in the region. In the assessment of the government and military side, ensuring the safety of the state in conventional war conditions requires the fullest possible spectrum of defence measures.
