Conflict Ends, Mines Still Lurk

Until the Maoist insurgency erupted in 1996, most Nepalis had scarcely heard the word mine in the sense of a landmine. What was once an unfamiliar term associated with foreign wars became a deadly domestic reality during the decade-long conflict that ended with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2006. Two decades on, Nepal continues to grapple with the enduring consequences of this indiscriminate weapon.

Five years after the signing of the CPA, Nepal marked a significant post-conflict milestone. On 14 June 2011, former Prime Minister Jhala Nath Khanal, together with the leadership of the Nepali Army, detonated the final remaining landmines from the decade-long conflict, formally declaring Nepal a minefield-free country. Prior to this declaration, the Nepali Army had cleared 53 minefields under its leadership, substantially reducing landmine-related risks across affected areas.

Remnants of war

Despite this achievement, the danger has not been entirely eliminated. Heavy monsoon rains have triggered mudslides and landslides that displaced some landmines from their originally marked locations. These dislodged mines and unexploded ordnance (UXO)—also known as remnants of war—remain active and continue to injure, maim, and kill civilians while they carry out daily activities such as herding cattle, collecting fodder, working in agricultural fields, fetching water, or, in the case of children, playing in open grounds and fields.

This lingering risk has once again entered the policy discourse. The Public Policy and Delegated Legislation Committee of the National Assembly organised a meeting on January 9, 2026, with the Nepali Army, Nepal Police, Armed Police Force, and Nepal Campaign to Ban Landmines (NCBL) to discuss the perceived security threat posed by the possible use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), landmines, and cluster munitions in the context of the elections to the House of Representatives scheduled for 5 March 2026.

While the NCBL representative expressed apprehension about the potential use of arms and ammunition looted during the Gen Z movement, representatives of the security forces ruled out the use of looted arms and cluster munitions. A cluster munition is a type of weapon that releases multiple smaller explosive submunitions (bomblets) over a wide area instead of detonating as a single blast.

Although cluster munitions were not used during Nepal’s armed conflict, the concept remains relevant when discussing explosive remnants of war, international humanitarian law, and Nepal’s post-conflict commitment to disarmament and victim protection. In this broader context, NCBL has been advocating for Nepal to sign the Mine Ban Treaty, which seeks a comprehensive prohibition on the production, transfer, stockpiling, and use of landmines.

To date, around 5,000 people have been killed, maimed, or injured by landmines, UXOs, and IEDs, according to NCBL. A significant number of families have been displaced, and the social and economic losses have been immense and destabilising for society. In addition, large numbers of livestock have been killed, the environment degraded, and rural livelihoods undermined.

The Maoists have asserted that all IEDs planted for security purposes during the conflict have been cleared. While the number of remaining IEDs may indeed be relatively small, a few continue to cause casualties. During the insurgency, the rebels lacked the capacity and resources to systematically map and mark every device they planted. In many cases, those who emplaced the explosives were either killed in combat or permanently displaced, leaving the locations undocumented and unknown.

Although both parties to the conflict maintain that they have removed the mines and IEDs laid during the insurgency, the legacy of these weapons persists. Even today, civilians—predominantly women and children—continue to bear the consequences of a war in which they had no role. Tragically, some of the victims were not even born at the time these deadly devices were planted, underscoring the enduring and intergenerational human cost of the conflict.

Long after the guns fell silent, the war in Nepal continues to claim victims—quietly, invisibly, and without warning. Buried beneath fields, footpaths, and forgotten battle lines, pastures, government establishments, police stations, cantonments, and former Maoist hideouts, landmines laid during the insurgency still injure and maim people, shatter livelihoods, and haunt non-combatants. Whether planted by the state or the Maoists, these weapons did not choose sides; they punished civilians. The lingering question, then, is not merely who laid the mines, but who will take the responsibility for the lives they continue to destroy.

Broadly, landmines are categorised into two types: anti-personnel and anti-vehicle. During Nepal’s decade-long insurgency, only anti-personnel mines were employed, primarily by state security forces. These mines were used largely for defensive purposes—to secure military bases and safeguard critical state infrastructure such as Nepal Telecom’s repeater towers, electricity transmission lines, and the broadcasting installations of Nepal Television and Radio Nepal, among others. Owing to Nepal’s rugged terrain, limited motorised military movement, and the absence of large-scale armoured operations, there is no credible evidence to suggest the use of anti-vehicle mines during the conflict.

Risk of IEDs 

The Maoist insurgents, by contrast, relied predominantly on command-detonated IEDs rather than conventional landmines. These devices were locally manufactured using readily available materials and included pressure-cooker bombs, socket bombs, booby traps, pipe bombs, and other homemade explosive mechanisms. IEDs were strategically deployed to target security patrols, convoys, and government installations, and were often concealed along footpaths, trails, culverts, and approach routes frequently used by security forces.

Unlike factory-made landmines, these devices were rarely standardised, systematically mapped, or clearly marked. In many cases, they were dismantled hurriedly, abandoned during tactical withdrawals, or left behind when insurgents were killed, arrested, or displaced. As a result, a number of these devices either failed to detonate as intended or remained hidden as unexploded or partially functional ordnance, continuing to pose serious risks to civilians long after the cessation of hostilities.

(Sedhai is a freelance writer.)