Pentagon aims for less deadly cluster bombs

advertisement

WASHINGTON — Faced with growing international pressure, the Pentagon is changing its policy on cluster bombs and plans to reduce the danger of unexploded munitions in the deadly explosives.

The policy shift, which is outlined in a three-page memo signed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, would require that after 2018, more than 99 percent of the bomblets in a cluster bomb must detonate.

Limiting the amount of live munitions left on the battlefield would lessen the danger to innocent civilians who have been killed or severely injured when they accidentally detonate the bombs.

Also, by next June the Defense Department will begin to reduce its inventory of cluster bombs that do not meet the new safety requirements.

The new Defense Department plan comes more than a month after 111 nations, including many of America's key NATO partners, adopted a treaty outlawing all current designs of cluster munitions. The agreement also required that stockpiles be destroyed within eight years.

Opponents have complained that the Pentagon has moved too slowly to reduce the cluster munitions from its inventory.

Cluster bombs scatter hundreds of smaller explosives over a large area, where those bomblets can sit for years until they are disturbed and explode.

U.S. leaders boycotted the May talks, as did Russia, China, Israel, India and Pakistan, all leading cluster bomb makers who cite the military value of the deadly explosives.

At the time, Cmdr. Bob Mehal, a Pentagon spokesman, said the elimination of cluster bombs from the U.S. stockpile "would put the lives of our soldiers and those of our coalition partners at risk."

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who has led efforts to outlaw cluster munitions, said the Pentagon's move is a step back. A defense policy issued by then-Defense Secretary William Cohen in early 2001, Leahy said, called for a similar reduction in submunitions from the cluster bombs by 2005.

"Now the Bush administration's 'new' policy is to wait another 10 years," said Leahy, calling it "another squandered opportunity for U.S. leadership." He said that in wake of the international treaty agreement, the Pentagon's plan to wait another decade before requiring the 99 percent detonation rate cannot be justified.

The use of cluster bombs has seen opposition in Congress, which last year passed a one-year ban on U.S. exports of such munitions to other countries. It is expected that the ban, which received bipartisan support, will be extended again by Congress.

The new Pentagon policy appears to plan for a possible end to that ban. The memo states that until 2018, the Defense Department would seek to transfer cluster munitions that don't meet the new 1 percent failure rate to other foreign governments. Any transfer would require that the foreign government not use them after 2018, and the sale would have to be "consistent with U.S. law," according to the memo.

The policy defends the use of the cluster bombs as effective weapons that "provide distinct advantages against a range of targets and can result in less collateral damage" than other weapons.

And the memo concludes by saying that "blanket elimination of cluster munitions is unacceptable" and commanders will use them in accordance with the law and international agreements "in order to minimize their impact on civilian populations."

A June report by the Congressional Research Service questioned whether it is feasible to design a bomb that will indeed detonate to the planned level of more than 99 percent.

"While such a high level of performance might be achievable under controlled laboratory conditions," the report said, other uncontrollable circumstances, such as landing in soft ground or getting caught in a tree or vegetation, could result in more unexploded duds.

According to the congressional report, the U.S. dropped more than 1,200 cluster bombs — containing nearly 250,000 submunitions — in Afghanistan from 2001-2002. And the U.S. and British forces used about 13,000 of the bombs — with more than 1.8 million bomblets — during the first three weeks of combat in the Iraq war.

When the international treaty was adopted, backers predicted that the U.S. would never again use the weapons, and it left open the possibility that European allies could order U.S. bases within their borders to remove cluster bombs from their stocks.

International leaders expect to sign the treaty in December.

  • 3 Votes
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
2.4
{"commentId":2136306,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

"Less deadly" cluster bombs? LOL!

{"commentId":2136306,"threadId":"308277","contentId":"1645926","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}
    Reply#1 - Mon Jul 7, 2008 6:58 PM EDT
    {"commentId":2138253,"authorDomain":"techgnostic"}

    Less killing, tastes great.

    {"commentId":2138253,"threadId":"308277","contentId":"1645926","authorDomain":"techgnostic"}
    • 3 votes
    #1.1 - Mon Jul 7, 2008 11:20 PM EDT
    Reply
    {"commentId":2136687,"authorDomain":"gatorhater"}

    Anything would be better than having unexploded ordnance laying around for decades, thereby posing a threat to innocent civilians. If 99% is the minimum target, then go for it.

    {"commentId":2136687,"threadId":"308277","contentId":"1645926","authorDomain":"gatorhater"}
      Reply#2 - Mon Jul 7, 2008 7:48 PM EDT
      {"commentId":2137878,"authorDomain":"baachus61"}

      It's a bomb, it's supposed to be deadly. The whole idea of this technology is to cover a wide area without resorting to carpet bombing with larger explosives. (Arc Light anyone?) Ideally the military would prefer 100% detonation but alas that level has not been achieved. I can already predict the response. "But they do want to leave unexploded ordanance laying about." Bull&*%!. That is called a minefield using mines with predictable results. 100% detonation provides your own units the ability to manuver thru the area without fear of injury.
      That is the ideal and the goal.

      {"commentId":2137878,"threadId":"308277","contentId":"1645926","authorDomain":"baachus61"}
      • 1 vote
      Reply#3 - Mon Jul 7, 2008 10:29 PM EDT
      {"canLink":false,"threadId":"308277","isPrivate":false}
      Leave a Comment:
      You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
      As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
      {"threadId":"308277","contentId":"1645926"}
      Start TrackingStart Tracking
      Stop TrackingStop Tracking