Cluster Munitions Are Biden’s Latest Slow-Roll on Ukraine Aid

Yes, they can put some civilians at risk—but that should be the Ukrainians’ call to make.

By John Hardie, the deputy director of the Russia program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.JUNE 26, 2023, 8:34 AM

As it pushes to liberate its territory, Ukraine is asking the United States for a controversial weapon: cluster munitions. These projectiles scatter small bomblets over a wide area and are thus much more effective than single artillery rounds for killing infantry and destroying armored vehicles. As a senior U.S. Defense Department official testified to Congress on Thursday, these munitions could help Ukraine clear Russian trenches and other obstacles to Kyiv’s counteroffensive. They would also ease Ukraine’s shortage of traditional artillery ammunition.

Ukraine’s request has also set off opposition. Earlier this month, a coalition of prominent U.S. nongovernmental organizations published an open letter urging President Joe Biden to reject the request, noting that cluster munitions can kill or maim civilians who might encounter any unexploded bomblets. Kyiv understands this risk to its own citizens but counters with a compelling point of its own: These weapons would help defeat the Russian occupiers, who objectively pose a much deadlier threat to Ukrainian civilians than unexploded ammunition. After weighing the pros and cons, Kyiv has decided the former outweigh the latter. That’s the Ukrainians’ call to make.

Since the summer of 2022, Ukraine has been asking the United States for dual-purpose improved conventional munitions, or DPICMs. But Washington has dragged its heels on the request. Effective against both infantry and armored vehicles, this is a type of warhead that releases dozens of explosive submunitions over a targeted area, which increases lethality. In fact, the weapon was originally designed during the Cold War for a similar land war scenario, involving many of the same Soviet-made vehicles Russia is currently using against Ukraine. The United States reportedly has almost 3 million DPICMs in its inventory, many of which can be fired from Kyiv’s Western-donated artillery systems.

Speaking before Congress on Thursday, Laura Cooper, the Defense Department’s top official focusing on Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/cluster-munitions-would-be-useful-ukraine-pentagon-says-2023-06-22/ these munitions would be a big help for Ukraine. “Our military analysts have confirmed that DPICMs would be useful especially against dug-in Russian positions on the battlefield,” she said. Kyiv’s forces need all the help they can get in overcoming the formidable fortified defensive lines Russia has across the battlefield.

Several senior Republicans in the U.S. Congress have backed Ukraine’s requests over the past few months. The top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, also expressed openness to the idea last month. Some U.S. Defense Department officials reportedly support it as well.Yet Biden has demurred. Administration officials cite the need to maintain unity with European allies, some of which oppose Ukraine’s request. Most European Union countries, particularly those that are far away from Russia and surrounded only by friendly nations, have signed an international treaty banning cluster munitions because of the potential danger they pose to civilians. (Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Poland, and Romania are among the EU members that haven’t banned cluster munitions, perhaps because they are closer to Russia and don’t want to limit their options in case they need to fend off an attack.) The White House likely also fears blowback at home, including from the NGOs that wrote to Biden earlier this month.

Neither Moscow nor Kyiv has joined the international cluster munitions ban, and both sides have already employed them in the war. Washington, too, is not a party to the treaty, but U.S. law prohibits the export of cluster munitions with a rate of unexploded duds higher than 1 in 100. However, the law allows for the president to waive that restriction. According to Colin Kahl, the U.S. undersecretary of defense for policy, some of the DPICM rounds in the U.S. arsenal have a dud rate of just over 1 percent—a negligible difference. This range of rates is a vast improvement over past munitions, whose high dud rates were one reason for many countries to begin campaigning against their use.

The Ukrainian military intends to use these munitions in areas of the front that are largely depopulated and already littered with mines and unexploded ordnance. No matter the types of munitions used, Kyiv’s ordnance removal teams would have to clear those areas after the fighting before allowing civilians back, as they have done in other parts of liberated Ukraine.

Sending DPICMs to Ukraine would help offset Russia’s quantitative advantage in artillery ammunition and alleviate Kyiv’s shortage of shells. Like the Russian military, Ukrainian forces have traditionally depended heavily on artillery. In March, Ukraine’s defense minister said Ukrainian forces could fire at more than five times their current rate if they “were not limited by the number of available artillery shells.”

This shortfall has hindered the Ukrainian military in its defensive operations, such as in and around Bakhmut, which Russia took last month. The shortage could also undermine Kyiv’s ongoing counteroffensive if its forces run out of the ammunition they have set aside for the operation. Because one DPICM round is as effective as multiple traditional shells, it would also reduce wear and tear on Ukrainian artillery barrels, allowing more to stay in the fight.

As NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg noted earlier this year, Ukraine expends artillery shells “many times” faster than the Western defense industry can make them. Although Washington and its European allies are working to ramp up production, that process will take years and leave a dangerous gap in the medium term. Meanwhile, Russia is also racing to increase munitions output.

The artillery-fired cluster munitions could be lethal to Russian troops—and Ukrainian civilians.
It’s true that Western countries provided Ukraine with a significant amount of artillery ammunition ahead of the counteroffensive Kyiv launched earlier this month. A senior Pentagon official, however, described those supplies as a “last-ditch effort” given dwindling U.S. and European stocks. A reported deal to source ammunition from South Korea will merely delay the coming supply crunch.In all likelihood, Ukraine’s counteroffensive will burn through ammunition, especially if the offensive takes many weeks or even months, as seems likely. Despite U.S. efforts to help Ukrainian forces adopt a more Western style of fighting that expends fewer shells, the jury is out on whether that will significantly reduce Ukrainian shell consumption. More plausibly, Ukraine’s need for shells will remain high.

Sending DPICMs now would allow Kyiv to conserve its traditional artillery shells and use each type of munition selectively—for example, using DPICMs in areas where only Russian troops are present. If Biden continues to kick the can down the road, he may still be forced to send DPICMs later, when Ukraine’s ammunition shortage grows more dire. By that point, Kyiv may no longer have the luxury of being selective with where it uses DPICMs.

Some European allies may protest. But as with other types of arms where Washington initially dragged its feet, this issue is unlikely to fracture the unity with which the West has responded to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Proactive diplomacy will help. European countries that haven’t banned cluster munitions may support deliveries as well. In fact, the United States wouldn’t even be the first NATO member to supply DPICMs to Ukraine, as Turkey reportedly did so last year.

Ukrainian officials understand the risks of using cluster munitions. But facing an existential threat from Russia, Kyiv believes the pros outweigh the cons. Washington should respect that decision and send Ukraine DPICMs now.