The Hidden Dangers: Unveiling Ukraine’s Cluster Bomb Issue

The Troubling Question of Ukrainian Cluster Bombs

The Background

The war in Ukraine has been marked by a troubling development – the use of cluster munitions. Amnesty International published a report earlier this year condemning the extensive use of cluster munitions in Kharkiv, attributing their use to Russia. Cluster munitions are banned by more than 100 countries due to their indiscriminate and harmful nature. They can leave unexploded bomblets scattered over a wide area, posing a significant threat to civilians, especially children.

However, in a controversial decision, just days before the Nato summit in Vilnius, President Biden announced that the US would be delivering similar weapons to Ukraine. While the US and Ukraine are not signatories to the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions, this decision raises ethical questions and concerns about the optics of supporting the use of such weapons in a conflict.

The Ethical Concerns

The use of cluster munitions is highly controversial due to their inherent indiscriminate nature. Many countries, including the UK and most EU members, have banned them due to the potential harm they can cause to civilians. Cluster munitions have a greater potential to cause damage over a wider area than other munitions, providing the user with a more significant impact per use. This attractiveness in certain types of warfare is likely why some countries, including the US, have avoided signing the international convention that restricts their use.

The US argument for delivering cluster munitions to Ukraine rests on the premise that Ukraine needs these weapons and that the US has an abundance of them. As a “bridging” measure until other stocks are available, the US claims this decision is necessary to support Ukraine. However, the announcement of the decision, including extensive media trailing beforehand, indicates that the US administration was aware of the anticipated international scrutiny and criticism that followed.

The US Justifications

President Biden stated that the decision to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine had been a difficult one and that Ukraine had given assurances on how and where they would be used, with efforts to avoid civilian areas. Ukraine also pledged to keep records to facilitate a thorough clean-up operation once the conflict ends. The National Security Adviser, Jake Sullivan, tried to argue that US cluster munitions were less lethal to civilians than those used by Russia, citing comparative figures for the so-called “dud” rate. Nevertheless, these attempts to present US cluster munitions as more humane than Russian ones are tenuous at best.

To minimize dissent, the US administration made efforts to secure support at home and among Ukraine‘s European allies. Republican leaders in the US Congress praised the decision, claiming it would enable Ukraine to target and eliminate Russian forces more efficiently. The German government also issued a statement understanding the US decision while affirming that they wouldn’t supply similar munitions themselves. These efforts to minimize objections suggest a calculated attempt to present a united front before the upcoming Nato summit.

Timing and Concerns

The surprising acquiescence of European allies may be attributed to the timing of the announcement. Nato members aim to demonstrate unity before the Vilnius summit, where support for Ukraine will be a key topic. Any potential dissenters are likely keeping their objections quiet until after the summit.

However, concerns remain about the claims made by President Biden that Ukraine is running out of ammunition. If true, this raises questions about the capacity of Ukraine‘s US and European backers to adequately support its war effort. While early forecasts indicated that Russia would run low on weaponry first, it seems that Russia has been able to introduce new production capacity while Ukraine‘s supporters face limitations. If cluster munitions are indeed a last resort for Ukraine, it puts them in a double bind. Not only is their war effort struggling, but any use of cluster bombs, even if presented as more discriminate than Russia’s, undermines their claim to occupy the moral high ground.

Conclusion

The decision to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine raises ethical concerns and challenges the perception of those supporting Ukraine‘s war effort. While the US is within its legal rights to provide these weapons, the implications of their use in terms of civilian harm and the erosion of Ukraine‘s moral high ground cannot be ignored. As the conflict persists, it is crucial for international actors to reflect on the broader implications of their actions and consider alternative ways to support Ukraine without resorting to such controversial weaponry.