Cluster Munition: What Is Cluster Munition, Why Is It Controversial

Though a contentious topic in international politics, cluster munitions have become central to discussions on humanitarian law and arms control. As their use continues in certain regions globally, the multifaceted implications – particularly the indiscriminate harm to civilian populations – demand a more in-depth examination.

Now, even though forbidden by international law, cluster munitions have come to public attention as the US sends them to Ukraine. The reason is that the US considers that Ukraine needs cluster munitions to defend its territory now, as the ammunition stock is depleting. The international community doesn’t agree with this view.

Not even NATO members agree regarding cluster munitions, and NATO’s Secretary General underlined on Friday, July 7, that the decision to supply cluster munitions to Ukraine belongs entirely to the US.

On the other hand, the US made it look like a very pondered decision. In fact, Ukraine has asked for cluster munition since the war began, so sending these controversial bombs to Ukraine is just the fulfillment of Ukraine’s request.

Understanding Cluster Munitions

Cluster munitions, also known as cluster bombs, are a type of weapon that can deliver multiple explosive submunitions over a wide area. Designed to destroy a range of targets – from infantry to armour – they are a controversial part of the modern military arsenal.

A cluster munition, often dispensed from aircraft or fired from the ground or sea, opens mid-air, releasing tens or even hundreds of submunitions. These can saturate an area of up to several football fields in size. While some argue that this gives cluster munitions a strategic advantage, it also fuels the controversy surrounding them.

Apparently, the Russian Army has used cluster bombs during this special operation, as they name it. This is why the Ukrainian Army doesn’t consider cluster bombs forbidden. They are defending their territory, and more than that, they proved not to be much concerned about the international treaties, as they recently proved regarding the issues with the Bystroye Canal scandal.

The supplying of cluster bombs to Ukraine will not cause anything else but a scaled retaliation from the Red Army. While Ukraine will start using this controversial type of munition, Russia will also feel more than entitled to increase its use. This will cause a further escalation of the conflict, which, we should understand, will take many more months or even years.

The Controversial Implications of Cluster Munitions

The controversy surrounding cluster munitions lies primarily in their impact on civilians and their lingering threat even after conflicts have ended. The broad area effect of cluster munitions makes it challenging to control their impact, leading to what many international humanitarian law experts consider an unacceptable risk of civilian casualties.

Moreover, many submunitions fail to explode upon impact, becoming de facto landmines. According to Handicap International, as many as 40% of these “duds” may not detonate on impact, posing a continued threat to civilians long after a conflict has ended.

The munitions have caused controversy over their failure – or dud – rate, meaning small unexploded bombs can linger on the ground for years and indiscriminately detonate later. This would make Ukraine a vast territory of unexploded cluster bombs, hazardous for the civilian population after or during the war.

Humanitarian Concerns over Cluster Bombs

The humanitarian consequences of cluster munitions have led to widespread calls for a comprehensive ban. The indiscriminate harm they can inflict upon civilians, coupled with the enduring post-conflict dangers, led to the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) creation in 2008. This international treaty prohibits the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of cluster munitions.

As of 2023, the Convention has been ratified by 110 countries. However, some significant military powers, including the USA, Russia, and China, have not joined the CCM. Their abstention is primarily based on the perceived military utility of cluster munitions, particularly in large-scale conventional warfare.

Critics argue that the humanitarian cost far outweighs any military advantage, pointing to the long-term suffering of civilian populations in Southeast Asia, the Balkans, and the Middle East. It’s estimated that 60% of cluster munition casualties are children, often attracted to the unexploded ‘bomblets’ because of their toy-like appearance.

Yet, we all live in a military world, as all the superpowers proved during the last decade, and this is what we all must understand. The military interest replaced the civilian good, and all decisions are taken from the military perspective rather than in the interest of all citizens.

The Case for Universal Prohibition of Cluster Bombs

While the Convention has successfully stigmatized cluster munitions, the continued abstention of key military powers presents a significant barrier to achieving a universal ban.

Efforts continue, spearheaded by non-governmental organizations, humanitarian agencies, and the United Nations, to urge these countries to ratify the Convention. For many, the only acceptable way forward is the complete and total elimination of cluster munitions, ensuring the protection of civilians during and after conflict.

The ongoing debate on cluster munitions brings into sharp focus the struggle between military strategy and humanitarian concerns. As the world grapples with these weapons’ legacy and potential future use, the necessity for a comprehensive, universal prohibition becomes increasingly apparent.

There will be disturbing news from the war after using this sort of controversial munitions, no doubt about it. We should get used to this as well.