home > by publication type > backgrounders > The Campaign to Ban Cluster Bombs
Email
| Prepared by: | Lionel Beehner |
|---|
November 21, 2006
International law does not ban the use of cluster bombs, though humanitarian groups claim they have killed or maimed hundreds of innocents in recent armed conflicts. Cluster bombs scatter hundreds of bomblets over a large area but with limited accuracy and high failure rates. After last summer’s war between Israel and Hezbollah, in which both sides were accused of killing civilians with cluster bombs, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) called on countries to ban cluster bombs and destroy their stockpiles. A proposal to limit their use during wartime came under review at a November 2006 conference in Geneva on the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, a 1980 agreement that seeks to protect military troops from inhumane injuries and prevent civilians from being wounded or killed.
Human rights groups say increased use of the bombs from the Mideast to Afghanistan is putting more civilians in harm’s way. Groups pressing a ban say the fallout from cluster bombs covers a swath of land the size of a city block and they often leave behind unexploded ordnance. Many do not explode on impact and, like landmines, pose long-term threats to civilians. “The issue of proportionality and discrimination is what’s basically at stake,” says John E. Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org. Handicap International, a UK-based anti-cluster-bomb group, estimates civilians make up 98 percent of those maimed by these bombs’ munitions, one-third of them children. These bombs’ failure rate can be anywhere from 1 percent to 10 percent or even higher (The cluster bombs used by the British military in Bosnia during the 1990s, for instance, had an abnormally high failure rate). Pike says “there’s always going to be a dud rate” given that submunitions are small, cheap, and easy to manufacture, though the U.S. military is reportedly developing newer versions with higher success rates.
Cluster bombs can be surface delivered but often are dropped by parachute, making them susceptible to wind and unpredictable weather patterns. They scatter hundreds of soda-can-size submunitions like buckshot, and some contain shrapnel to pierce armored tanks and penetrate concrete. Others, equipped with phosphorus or napalm, are designed to start fires. Then there are “smart” cluster bombs, like the CBU-103, which use guided circuitry to locate targets or WCMD—a wind-corrected munitions dispenser—to navigate weather changes and minimize collateral damage (these were used by Coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan). Many of the munitions are left on the ground as unexploded duds and become de facto landmines (though more clearly marked). In places like Afghanistan, they were mistaken for toys by children.
Military officials like them because they leave a large “footprint” and are highly versatile, if not accurate. “There is some category of targets where cluster bombs are the preferred ammunition,” Pike says. For example, he says, they are highly effective against soft, or unarmored, targets like airfields or an infantry battalion walking down the road. Dropping one 1,000-pound bomb may not find enemies in a foxhole, says Ivan Oelrich, vice president of the Strategic Security Project at the Federation of American Scientists. “But if I drop a thousand one-pound bombs,” he says, “a certain fraction will find people in a foxhole. It’s many times more effective to take my explosive package and divide it up into smaller subdivisions.” British, like U.S. military officials, say cluster bombs play a legitimate role in wartime and are effective; eliminating them, they say, would put British soldiers in the field at a disadvantage (though fresh signs are emerging the British may eventually support the ban).
Through small steps, experts say. Several states have introduced a new protocol to the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. The protocol aims to prohibit cluster bombs in or near populated—or “mixed use” (military-civilian targets)—areas and urges countries to eliminate their stockpiles and phase out older-style cluster bombs, which seem to have higher failure rates (i.e. Many of Israel’s U.S.-made munitions were reportedly Vietnam-era). UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has called for a temporary freeze on their use and European states like Belgium and Norway have already banned them (Belgium also has a bill before its parliament that would bar investment in countries that produce antipersonnel mines, a tactic human rights groups say might work to stigmatize producers of cluster bombs). A separate treaty, which came into force on November 19, 2006, requires countries to clean up unexploded munitions and other ordnance from weapons like cluster bombs.
Not very likely. “Cluster bombs are so incredibly effective as weapons, it will be very hard to get countries to keep their militaries from using them,” says Oelrich. No majorbreakthrough emerged from the November 2006 Geneva conference. Experts say without the backing of Washington, Moscow, and Beijing—which, according to Handicap International, stockpile a quarter of the world’s four billion cluster bombs—there is little hope for an international moratorium. Even the European Union, against the wills of many of its members, indicated it would not back a ban on cluster bombs. Still, humanitarian groups remain optimistic. “We have reached a tipping point, on cluster munitions,” says Steve Goose director of Human Rights Watch’s Arms Division. “It’s no longer a small group of isolated states calling for a new treaty.” In Geneva, twenty-four states supported a proposal to curb the use of cluster bombs and several countries’ individual parliaments are considering banning their usage. Early next year, the ICRC will hold an expert meeting on the subject of cluster bombs.
Yes. Experts point to the largely successful efforts in the 1990s to ban antipersonnel landmines. Previous attempts—the 1980 Convention on Conventional Weapons and an additional protocol revised and approved in 1996—were deemed insufficient because neither called for outright bans. But the 1997 Ottawa Treaty, signed by 154 states, calls for a permanent ban on the development and stockpiling of landmines within four years of a state’s accession (some exceptions are made for mines used for training purposes) and has resulted in the clearing of hundreds of thousands of landmines. Absent from the treaty are China, Russia, and the United States.
First used in World War II, cluster bombs came into fashion during the 1960s and 1970s and were used by U.S. forces during aerial attacks in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Around the same time, the United States and the Soviet Union developed cluster bombs capable of carrying chemical weapons like sarin or tear gas. Dozens of nations now own or have used cluster bombs. Humanitarian groups say their use has risen in recent years, beginning with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s use of the bombs in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s up through the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, where they were used by U.S.-led forces. Most recently, Israel used them heavily in southern Lebanon and Hezbollah fired them on northern Israel in last summer’s war.
They left dozens dead or maimed on both sides of the conflict. The reason, says Oelrich, is because the “fighting in southern Lebanon was often in villages and towns where people were living.” Israel dropped up to four million submunitions on Lebanese soil, one million of which remain unexploded “duds,” according to the UN Mine Action Coordination Center. Throughout the thirty-four-day conflict, the United States resupplied Israel’s arsenal of cluster bombs, which prompted an investigation by the State Department to examine if Israel had violated secret agreements it signed with the United States governing their use. Hezbollah, meanwhile, fired thousands of cluster munitions—a Chinese-made Type 81 122mm rocket—into northern Israel, a number of which targeted civilian populations, according to human rights groups. Experts say the collateral damage from the conflict galvanized a number of nations to throw their support behind a ban on cluster bombs.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.