Interview with Mr. Jürg Streuli, President of the Fondation suisse de déminage (FSD), conducted jointly by FSPI and the Swiss Diplomacy Student Association (SDSA), on the occasion of the FSPI debate on demining in Ukraine.
****
FSPI / SDSA: Could you briefly describe the Swiss Foundation for Mine Action (FSD)?
The Swiss Foundation for Mine Action (FSD) is a Swiss humanitarian organization dedicated to all aspects of mine clearance. It was founded in 1997 and is currently active in 7 countries with over 600 employees. It is funded by governments and donors on a project-by-project basis.
FSPI / SDSA: How is the Swiss Confederation, through an organization like yours, involved in demining war zones? How can the strengthening of Switzerland’s commitment to humanitarian demining, recently announced by the Federal Council, ensure a greater impact for the FSD?
Up until now, the Confederation’s support has been relatively small. The bulk of subsidies went to the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD). The Confederation supported us by co-financing some of our projects. Since Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis declared demining to be one of the priorities of Swiss aid to Ukraine at the end of September 2023, and the Federal Council decided to allocate CHF 100 million in this area, the Confederation’s contribution to the FSD has increased significantly.
FSPI / SDSA: How do you collaborate with other humanitarian demining organizations such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) or the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD)?
We make extensive use of the research and publications of the GICHD, but our activities in the field are very different. We work more with local governments and demining authorities in the areas concerned.
FSPI / SDSA: Mine clearance requires the support of a number of local players. Can you work with non-state actors and groups that are sometimes hostile to their own government?
In principle, we don’t work with this type of actor. The rule when we set up a project is that we have to be accredited by the government. A visible NGO like ours can’t do anything without the agreement of the governments of the countries in which we operate. It is the authorities responsible for mine clearance in each country who allocate the areas where organizations can clear mines. In this sense, we are apolitical.
FSPI / SDSA: How is FSD doing in Ukraine? What do you plan to do there in the near future? In what other parts of the world is FSD currently active?
We’ve been working in Ukraine since 2014, in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. We were present on the frontline on the Ukrainian side, and worked there on the full range of mine clearance, from risk education to mine destruction. When Mr. Putin’s Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, we had to move everything to the south of the country and restart our activities.
As for our other places of operation, we have projects in Afghanistan – which are currently running at a standstill, but also in Tajikistan, the Philippines, the Central African Republic, Iraq and Colombia. We are also setting up projects in the field of the environment, sanitation, pesticide depots, soil clean-up – activities similar to the one we do with mined land.
FSPI / SDSA: What conditions are attached to contributions from companies, donors and private foundations, and more generally from the private sector in financing the FSD?
We propose projects, and donors don’t usually specify the intended use of the funds. In the case of Ukraine, donors have specifically requested that we use the funds in the field of agriculture.
FSPI / SDSA: What are the major challenges facing your Foundation in the future?
We are following the U.S. elections very closely, and hope that despite a possible change of President, the support from the State Department in Washington will at least remain the same. This is our biggest support in years.
Another major challenge concerns Ukraine. Many NGOs operating in Ukraine are expressing concern about the prolongation of the conflict, wondering whether, in the long term, donor fatigue could set in. If so, we could be faced with difficulties too.