By Cernig
So, over 100 nations get together and ban the use and stockpiling of cluster bombs as being too indiscriminate to use, but the U.S. joins other giants of human rights observance like Russia and China in their refusal to sign the treaty.
The reason? "Cluster munitions have demonstrated military utility", said the Pentagon's statement.
So do exploding bullets, napalm, blinding lasers, bio-weapons and nerve gas - but in all cases the military utility is overwhelmed by their effects on those targeted. All are banned by international laws and the US is a party to those treaties.
The British Red Cross explains thusly:
Why are their laws about weapons? In a word, humanity. Wars are dreadful, causing death and injury to very large numbers of people. But if there were no banned weapons, the death and injury � and therefore the suffering � would be much, much worse. So there are international agreements which ban some types of weapons entirely, and limit the use of others.
It is helpful to think of three central ideas. One is that weapons should not be indiscriminate. Another is that weapons should not cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury. The third is that the use of weapons in war should be guided by principles of "distinction, proportionality and military necessity".
Cluster bombs fail all three of those tests. They should be banned - and the next U.S. president should make a point of signing the treaty.
Uh, no they don't fail those three tests. Cluster munitions have been around for decades - suddenly they're indiscriminate, etc.?
ReplyDeleteThe problem with cluster munitions is that not all the submunitions detonate so they leave behind a uxo threat. That aspect is a definite problem, but one can be addressed and fixed.
Hi Andy,
ReplyDeleteNo, it's not "suddenly" that they've become indiscrimninate, any more than landmines did. But a whole bunch of nations have finally banned anti-personnel mines and even the US (which again, didn't sign the treaty) has largely stopped using them.
A good study of the problem:
www.sipri.org/contents/armstrad/report_cluster_weapons.pdf/download
UXO isn't the only problem. Although several nations have said cluster munitions have their only remaining military utility in attacking mobile armored columns, few said they expected to face such threats in the forseeable future and those that did had targetable submunitions of greater utility (although greater cost).
Regards, C
You're right that more advanced munitions will probably replace current cluster munitions, but for now they still do serve a purpose. I do think, however, they should not be used until the UXO problem is solved.
ReplyDelete