US Refrains From Cluster Ban

US Refrains From Cluster Ban

After a two-year effort, an international ban on the use of cluster bombs will go into effect on Aug. 1. And, just as it did with the landmark landmine ban, the United States refused to sign the treaty and has no plans to scrap its inventory of cluster bombs. But the world’s sole superpower may find it more difficult to use them thanks to European allies who agreed to the ban last month.

“The United States is not a party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions and is not bound by its obligations,” Department of Defense spokesman Bob Mehal told Military​.com in a Feb. 25 e-mail. “Cluster munitions are legitimate weapons with clear military utility and can result in less collateral damage than unitary weapons when used in accordance with the law of armed conflict principles of discrimination and proportionality and military rules of engagement.”

Cluster bombs are weapons that are generally derided in civilian circles but that some countries are reluctant to abandon. They’re air-dropped or missile-delivered bombardment systems that break apart before impact and scatter hundreds of smaller bomblets. While most explode right away, some don’t — and that’s where the controversy surrounding the weapons is centered.


According to an official with a London-based group that advocates for the worldwide ban on cluster bombs, the U.S. may not be bound as a signatory to the new treaty when it goes into effect, but key American allies will be. Thomas Nash, coordinator for the Cluster Munitions Coalition, said the prohibition will bar these allies, including Germany, France and Great Britain, from taking part or even planning operations that will involve use of cluster bombs.

“It’s going to make using cluster munitions … very difficult if not impossible in joint operations,” he said.

Mehal denies that.

“While allies and coalition forces may not be able to use cluster munitions and may not be able to actually [release] cluster munitions when embedded in our forces, we can certainly use cluster munitions in joint operations,” Mehal said. He said Article 21 of the new convention specifically allows for interoperability between countries that sign the convention and those that do not.

“There is nothing in the Convention on Cluster Munitions, for example, that would preclude us from providing cluster munitions for fire support if allies request assistance,” Mehal said. “They cannot specifically call for the use of cluster munitions but we can certainly use them in response to a call for assistance,”

In reality, the U.S. has not used cluster bombs since 2003, in the early days of the invasion of Iraq. In 2001, it deployed them for the opening salvos against Taliban and al-Qaida forces in Afghanistan.

Mehal said combatant commanders retain the authority to use the weapons.

The munitions have earned a particularly bad reputation because of instances wherein civilians came across unexpended bomblets and were killed or injured. Both Russia and Georgia used them against each other during their short war in 2008, and Israel used them in its war against Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006.

Mehal said the U.S. fully supports the spirit of the ban, which was ratified by 30 countries on Feb. 16, to minimize the potential harm to civilians that can result from using cluster bombs. He said the U.S. is committed to working cooperatively within existing international law to address humanitarian concerns associated with cluster munitions, but “in a way that accommodates our legitimate national defense considerations.”

Nash argued that the new ban will oblige European allies to encourage the U.S. not to use cluster munitions. Even more important, he said, nations such as France, Germany and Britain will be unable to help plan or take part in operations if the missions include cluster bombs.

The Convention on Cluster Munitions was drafted in Dublin, Ireland, in May 2008, and approved by more than 100 countries. Countdown toward its establishment on Aug.1, 2010, began with its formal ratification a few weeks ago by 30 countries.

According to a May 2007 Inter Press Service News Agency report, the six largest makers of cluster munitions are Lockheed Martin, EADS, Thales, GenCorps, Textron and Raytheon.

Share |

Join the Conversation

It is a good thing the United States did not sign this foolish ban. Our European allies can harm their combat capabilities if they wish, but there are no reason for the US to do the same. Cluster munitions can be very useful in plenty of scenarios and we have been striving to increase the reliability of cluster munitions over the years.

While cluster bombs are usefull weapons… they do more harm then good. If we can be 100% sure that they wont be left behind for a kid to find, then sure keep them. But right now… it wont do much good if we litter a country with “shiny toys” for a kid to be blown up. So much for hearts and minds…

So we presume that we will never face large conventional enemy forces again? It is better to keep cluster munitions stockpiled and not need them, than need them and not have them.

Even in Afghanistan there must be some scenarios were cluster bombs are useful. A remote outpost under attack by a large force of Taliban for example. I imagine F-16s loaded with CBUs could cause more havoc than F-16s loaded with regular Mk.82 bombs.

Never said we would never face a conventional enemy again. I did say with all the precision weapons we have now, blanketing a area with bombs is basically obsolete. As for a remote outpost under attack… use mortars/artillery. Or call in strafing runs with the mighty A-10. (Which we greatly need more of).

Good Morning Folks,

I can see that the wingers didn’t bother to read Adm. Mullens article last week on the Armed Forces Network. It’s to bad that all of you cheer leaders who never played the game are so ready to give you opinions.

The days of air power, overwhelming force and bombing them back into the stone age are over, thank what ever idol you believe in for that. People don’t like to be killed and it kinda pi**es off family and friends and they try and get even with the folks who killed there parents, daughter, son, husband, child, wife, friend what have ya. It’s not a video game there is no reset button. CBU’s, like Land Mines and are needless excess, that studies have shown kills or injures more collaterals then combatants. This in management terms is called counter productive.

The future way of war is to go in light. No more mega US base camps that show the locals how wealthy we are and how poor they are, the use ISR to it fullest and employing precision weapons to take out the bad guys and minimize the killing of those not our enemy and do it while leaving a smaller US foot print.

This make a whole lot more sense then a US “Blitz” of armor chewing up roads and dropping bombs from 10K feet that tear farm land and kills those who’s only sin is being unlucky to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but none of the bad guys.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

The cluster ban is just another moronic attempt by leftists to “ban” war. Idiots.

Why ban it outright? Just keep it in the inventory and choose not to use it until the proper time presents itself.

Except the best artillery rounds to use against large numbers of infantry contains cluster munitions. The best round for counterbattery uses cluster munitions. The best warhead for airfield denial uses cluster munitions, etc. It is not just bombs that they are trying to ban.

In a world where precision weapons are the common, we don’t need cluster bombs. In any form, or fashion. Just a waste of money buying, maintaining, and then doing PR control when a kid picks one of the many dud cluster bombs up thinking its a toy, just to have it take his arm off. Cluster bombs need to go the way of napalm. (Same with white phosphorus ).

Cluster munitions, e.g., CEM (CBU-87) are a very useful weapons. Have employed them to create devastating effects. Have employed “precision” weapons and they are useful but different tools. The US has and likely will be involved in a variety of conflicts from IW to high intensity fights with nation states. Cluster weapons will continue to be a valuable tools for current and future JFACCs. Blunder350 and Skinner are short sighted and evidently short on expertise in the full spectrum of threats that the US will face…but they do provide “savage amusment”.

byron also doesnt seem to understand what Mullen was saying either

Scoffing at those ‘ignorant’ of the virtues of military expedience is easy when it’s not your kids and loved ones being killed and maimed by mines and CBU bomblets.

You might feel differently if it was your backyard …

You say that like war somehow is a good thing.….

Our enemies have no problems decapitating prisoners and blowing themselves up in subways, markets, and streets. If it was our backyard they would use far worse than CBUs.

Remember what Sherman said:

“Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster. ”

@ Thunder . . .You are a fool and know nothing of military strategy, tactically or strategic. Do yourself a favor and don’t opine on things you clearly know nothing about.

If my backyard was being used to launch rockets at a 1st rate military or was for some reason a soft-target rich environment.… .I’d get the hell out of my back yard or just pick up and MOVE!!

So you’re saying that those enemies are the kids and peasant farmers who are getting blown up? Or are you saying that because some people are vicious callous monsters who believe that the ends justify ANY means, we therefore have no moral obligation to safeguard the lives of innocents?

As for Ret: Fine for you, You probably have a car, a bank account, and either a marketable skill or a pension. You can go whereever you want and make a living. Not so easy when you’re an illiterate farmer with nothing but a donkey living in a place infested with armed thugs

And I’m not so sure if you’d like never being able to go back to the home you’ve invested so much in without worrying about the grandkids getting blown up if they wander off the porch…

What it boils down to is that the US military DOES posess the means to accomplish its goals without resorting to the use of categorically irresponsible and unethical weapons. You’re not advocating the use of gas or bio-weapons, because they may at times be the expedient solution to the problem, are you?

One should not try to safeguarding the lives of innocents by putting their own forces at greater risk and allowing the enemy to fight on their terms. There are times to use and not use cluster munitions, but when their can be used effectively we shouldn’t back down for the sake of political correctness. Same applies for white phosphorous munitions the Europeans love to complain about. Hell, I would be perfectly fine if we used some tactical nuclear bunker busting bombs on cave complexes.

If I had that much to fight for and was that dedicated to my plot of land, then I (emphasis on “I”) would be the one fighting the insurgents off MY land with whatever means were available. I wouldn’t be waiting until the Americans took notice and decided to do anything about it. And if I would choose not to do anything about the insurgents using my home/house/land as a staging area, then I have no one to blame accept myself for the ruin that follows.

except*

Who let the troll in? Clearly you have nothing to add, and instead resort to name calling… must be a liberal..

Good Morning Folks,

I’m in agreement with what both Ret. USMC and Thunder350 said. The problem with CBU’s is though not during hostilities but afterwards and cleaning up the mess.

I would say that General Colon Powells most brilliant analysis of a military problem is his now “famous” Pottery Barn analogy of “You broke it, you bought it.”

The smaller, greener and less destructive foot print we leave behind in theses seemingly non ending “small wars” will be far cheaper in both American lives lost in combat and in economic costs when it come time to rebuild what we destroyed.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Lets see here, precision weapons that can pinpoint a target and you know its destroyed, with minimal collateral damage. Or blanket a area with cluster bombs, taking the target out, and the entire block. With maximum collateral damage, oh and lets not forget the cluster bombs that didn’t explode and been lying dormant until a kid comes along, sees the shinny “bomb” picks it up, then looses a arm.

Smaller, GREENER!?!?, and less destructive foot print.…??? YGBSM!?! There is only one imperative in war. Winning. No one is advocating CBU for COIN or urban fights but there will be high end fights where CBU weapons are more effective than a GBU-12, a JDAM or a SDB…that’s why the weapons were invented.

If we are fighting a war, I prefer we win with the least loss of life to our Service men. We can use Napalm, W.P. or Cluster munitions and I will not blink an eye nor shed a tear. If we are going to send our people into harms way then fight to win.

Just pin point a precision bomb on each of those targets you want cluster to death… People on this site hate wasteful weapons programs, yet defend the worst of the bunch… obsolete weapons..

I swear that’s basically what my first post said, yet you claim to disagree with it… hmm

Besides for the standard CBU-87 there is the smart CBU-97 carrying munitions designed to seek out and knock out enemy armor. Your standard MLRS rocket carries cluster munitions and is far more effective than a unitary HE rocket would be, and 155mm DPICM can be very effective in certain situations. Besides for these I am sure that I am forgetting a number of other cluster munitions in American service.

Obsolete? Hardly. What sort of aircraft is going to carry enough precision weapons to take out spread out infantry and every entrenched enemy soldier?

Not all cluster bombs are land mines folks, as a matter of fact most are air burst thermite for use against airfields and entrenched personnel, the tommahawk missile is a good example of this. Precision missles are too expensive to sustain in a war, we used up most of our stocks during Desert Storm playing with them and learned to use them more wisely this time around. There will always be a use for them for the above reasons, the only other option is the other weapon we refused to ban, NAPALM. ANTI personnel and tank mines will never go away, especialy in clandestine and unconventional war scenarios because that is all you have to wreak havoc when you dont have a tank brigade in country at your beckoning call or available air cover. There is no such thing as a humanitarian war and why the geniva code never really existed except behind the lines.

A use for cluster munitions that will never be removed or replaced by precision weapons is counter airfield work.

Think about it, you can hit a paved runway, with a precision weapon, creating a large pothole which can be filled / repaired in a few hours. OR… you can hit the entire length of the runway with cluster munitions, and create a massive headache for anyone wanting to use that runway for a while.

Not to mention the fact that if you have a hundred aircraft scattered over the tarmac, you COULD hit each separately with a precision bomb… or you could drop one cluster bomb and take out half of them.

As for making a smaller foot print to reduce cost to rebuild what we destroyed, WHY? Why are we rebuilding anything at all, should just go in kick butt and come home. Honestly — how many of you growing up or even now, offered to buy someone a new home, car and give them money after kicking thier 6 in a fight after they offended you or someone close to you. I never did, might have bought them a beer months later or shook thier hand but that was it. So why do so many feel it is our duty to rebuild an entire country after we kicked thier 6? I’m for turning our backs and coming home — they will be a lot less likely to offend us again concidering the consequences they faced the first time. Many countries do thier best to goad us into a battle just to boost or rebuild thier economy. it’s time to put that money into AMERICA and not some foreign country.

I think Ed’s saying that war cannot be “banned” owing to human nature. I agree. Owing to that nature, like the seasons, war is inevitable. If that is the case, then I’d rather be ready for it than not. I also agree that the US shouldn’t ban them. The US strategy (as with land mines and other useful weaponry) is to agree in principle but not to sign on and tie its hands. Thus, The US is trying to make cluster munitions more reliable so as to not create the problem in the first place. But if the crap hits the fan, it still wants to have some aces up the sleave. Since many European countries are backed up by the US, then they have a free hand to sign all the feel-good treaties they want (to feel like good humanitarians, I suppose), because they know Uncle Sam has a cereal box full of clustery goodness in his cupboard.

Whys it got to be aircraft? They got GPS/laser guided artillery shells now, they are working on getting GPS guided mortar shells, and then there’s other ground missile batteries that can fire GPS/laser guided missiles aswell. And lets not forget the US Navy..

As for taking out infantry, just call in the A-10’s! Strafing runs will destroy most, if not all infantry, even those entrenched.

If we had precision weapons during Normandy we could of bombed each of those MG bunker nest, anti-air guns, and artillery guns. Sent in fighters/bombers to pound what was left without having to worry about getting shot down. Then send our land forces in to clean up the mess. It would of saved ALOT of lives.

If we would of cluster bombed it, sure it would of did the same job, and destroy the defenders, but there would of been a high chance of our troops coming across one of the countless bombs that didn’t explode. And it would of been hell setting up base camp in the middle of basically a land mine field.

Give our current POTUS a couple of more months and he’ll sign a ban on harsh language.

MACMAN is stupid, these people use every kind of weapon they can on us and we can not retaliate to protect our selves and win the war. I do not think our POTUS would put american lives in harms way like that. The only way this would happen is if he dicided to not sign and then of course the republicans would have to object just as they object to everything that the POTUS tries to do. They are such sorry losers.

Banning a weapon system only works if all countries play by the same rules, unfortunately, that isn’t the real world. No option available to a theater commander should be taken off the table. Like the Geneva Convetion, which was never ratified by the United States and the US is not a signatory, the US can still observe those rules if the other side choses to observe them as well. North Viet Nam did not observe the Geneva Convetntion and neither did the US in that conflict. These idiotic treaties are feel good measures that will have no substance in a major conflict outside the brush wars the Eurpopeans now face.

End of discussion…well said. I believe a careful review of the wording from the opponents of cluster munitions will reveal their true viewpoint. OMG did he really say Greener!

Good, cluster munitions, mines, and NAPALM all have real practical legitimate use in warfare. Like the gun, cluster bombs are not the problem, those who use them unethically are the problem. There will always be unexploded ordinance, even for precision guided missles. So the arguement that cluster bombs cause colleteral damage to civ’s but precision weapons don’t is rediculous. Cluster bombs are absolutely necessary for anti-personel, destruction of airfields, denial of use sortees. Mines are a base defender’s best last hope against being overrun. And, Napalm is still the most effective anti personel weapon that can also creep into bunkers.
To state otherwise just show your ignorance of warfare.

With all due respect sir, but Adm. Mike is a squid and has no business advising anyone in LAND WARFARE!. Mike should stick to what he knows, how to waste taxpayers money with hes fleet of big canoes.

Wow really A-10’s huh. oh my how ignorant of you. you’d be planted in you position for quite sometime while waiting it be patched through to an air con, who would then relay that order to any available a-10 in, you hope, his kill box. then you better hope that a-10 pilot recognizes you as a friendly. meanwhile, you’d be sitting there growing roots while your tangos are disbursing. OR just call in a fire mission to artillery. Try to guess what the artillery com is gonna pick for the ordinance.

Just like our stock of weaponized small pox.

Gee uhh, no, it doesn’t. It uses GUNS. That’s why it’s called a GUNship.

I can attest to the unexploded ordnace aspect, although not largely known outside those assigned the recovery and disposal tasks, during the first gulf war there were a number of smart bombs, missiles, and tomahawks that failed to explode (wouldnt think a million dollar weapon would fail huh?). Like dumpbox said it happens, and the old tried and true munitions still have a legitimate use, the ones screaming the most are those that faced thier wrath in the field or know they cannot compete against ours, and there are those who flat out dont like us — envision challenging us in the future — and dont want to face effective weapons in battle.

Just 1 more attempt to emasculate the United States Military. It’s becomming more obvious every day that with the muslim takeover in Europe thier influence is spreading at the highest levels. The cluster munitions are some of the most effective in our arsenal and have saved many a US and UK troops lives. Keep ‘em, build more of ‘em, build ‘em bigger & better and, use ‘em MORE frequently.

SHHH Boomer…were not suppose to talk about the unexploded tomahawks! Tomahalks and Smart bombs ALWAYS explode-perfectly-as planned– on target-everytime!…are we clear soldier ;)

Every weapon has its place on the battlefield. Use CB munitions and watch the enemy desert and surrender in huge numbers. Short wars are sweet and protracted wars are way too expensive! France and Germany still suck big time.

Weeell, there is one.…the Spectre :)
If you can get them to the target on time :O
Gee uhh doesn’t the Spectre use cluster munitions?.….

The AC-130 Spooky II has a 25 mm Gatling gun, a 40 mm Bofors cannon, and a 105 mm howitzer.

Oh so waiting for a A-10 is different then waiting for a F-15? Or a B-52?

In the example I used above, we would of already had the needed air support close by waiting to be called in. Rather A-10’s or what have you. As for friendly fire… there’s something called GPS, soldiers can lase the targets. We got UAV’s, satellites, and ground units that can all provide the coordinates to the air units. Oh and lets not forget about infrared beacons they can set to show who’s friendly and who’s not.

US isn’t a signatory to the Geneva Conventions? Fail:

http://​www​.icrc​.org/​i​h​l​.​n​s​f​/​C​O​N​V​P​R​E​S​?​O​p​e​n​V​iew

*required

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement