Damn, that's a good one, 32 more Bradley's (186 Bradley's pledged in total now), 32 more Stryker's (157 Stryker's pledged in total now) and DPCIM's...It's about to turn into literal hell for Russians inside of trenches with the DPICMs. Still no ATACMS though.

"The bottom line is this: we recognize that cluster munitions create a risk of civilian harm from unexploded ordinance. This is why we deferred the decision for as long as we could. But there is also a massive risk of civilian harm if Russian troops and tanks roll over Ukrainian positions and take more Ukrainian territory and subjugate more Ukrainian civilians."

Joe Biden approved sending cluster munitions to Ukraine after a "unanimous" recommendation from his national security team, Sullivan says. He says it was a "difficult" decision and that the president ultimately made the decision "in consultation with allies and partners and in consultation with members of Congress".

Now, Mr. Biden's aides think they have little choice. Ukraine, which has deployed cluster munitions of its own in the war, is burning through the available supply of conventional artillery shells, and it will take time to ramp up production.

‘We Need Russia’s Complete Defeat’: Ukrainian Forces Upbeat On The Frontline | Ukraine | The Guardian

It's worth noting that neither the US, Ukraine nor Russia have joined the cluster munition convention. Some other Nato members like Turkey and Greece also did not ban their use.
Still, I don't like the idea to provide such a controversial weapon, but what I like even less is an armed conflict where the protagonist uses different sets of rules.
Also, I'm sure Ukraine may let Nato/close ally monitor planned usage to make sure civilians are out of range.

As for diplomatic repercussions, I think it should not amount to anything game-changer.
The ability for Russia to throw a tantrum on this is weak, but I'm sure they still will and show again how hypocritical they are.
The probability for 3rd party such as China to escalate support to Russia as a result of this is also very weak for the same reasons.
The probability for 3rd party to decrease support for Ukraine is moderate but I think common sense will prevail in the end and it certainly was the focus of US consultation with their ally.
Nato membership might be a little more complex as a result, but as this is out of the question until the conflict is over anyway it does not change much and the urgency of the situation is a priority

That is not the problem. Clusterfucks are aimed at military positions. The problem is that nonexploding pieces will just lie around after the bombs went off (partially). The when the farmers move in to plow their fields, they run into the unexploded pieces, and kids find "interesting toys" left around, maybe years after the war.

My Thoughts

Really, a counterpoint to some arguments, not really directly responding to you perse but I knew the issue would arise and wanted to provide some counterpoints, I understand the worry about the post war clean-up but I think the pros outweigh the cons, amongst other reasons I'm not against the decision.

1. The USA, Ukraine, Russia and multiple other countries haven't joined the agreement. It is also my understanding that the agreement is a pretty light one, it isn't really enforceable aside from moaning and countries can easily leave it whenever they want to.

2. Ukraine & Russia have been using cluster munitions since the start of the war, if anything, America's ones are probably better quality than the shit currently deployed by both sides because America has been working for years now on improving the dud rate. As an example, America is only sending cluster munitions with a dud rate of less than 1% to Ukraine.

3. They're largely going to be used on static trenches along the frontlines, nowhere near civilians, on areas which are already littered with UXOs (Unexploded Ordnances). Cluster Munitions or not, a large part of Ukraine is already going to be a UXO hellscape for decades, the cluster munitions will be a drop in the bucket all things considered.

Grenades, RPGs, Mortars, Artillery, etc. They all have dud rates too, as an example, 10m artillery rounds have an average dud rate of 300k. This is without even mentioning the thousands of mines which will be littering the grounds, also the mines swept by the dam which Ukraine now has no clue where they are, mines covering the entire frontline.

Cluster Munitions will largely be used for trenches and open fielded Russian positions where civilians are nowhere to be found, but unfortunately, post war, they will likely be civilians navigating these areas and they will likely trip off UXOs. At this stage, that is happening no matter what.

4. Ukraine however, will be the ones firing the cluster munitions on their own soil, as a result, they will be able to monitor and track the areas they're used in and clean them up as well as could be expected post-war, obviously they won't get them all but it's a large difference to someone else firing cluster munitions on your soil or hiding landlines across your country, because it's harder to track the area they're in.

5. A lot of countries who have banned cluster munitions have not recently had to make the difficult decision of whether to use them on their own soil or not because these countries have not been invaded lately, a lot of these countries which have banned cluster munitions have been the invaded of other countries, which then makes the decision even more understandable because it goes like this...

Western country invades some Middle-Eastern country (as per usual), spits cluster munitions all over their land and then fucks off and leaves the civilians to deal with it without cleaning up their mess. Western countries have made the decision largely to not use them on foreign soil because it's fucked up to use them on foreign soil and then fuck off afterwards, Lol.

Ukraine is making a decision to use them on its own soil and they will deal with the consequences afterwards (with our help) and they will have the capability and support to clean up after themselves after the war is over.

6. The biggest threat to Ukraine is currently Russians themselves, not cluster munitions or any other weapon that could be provided to Ukraine. If the cluster munitions shorten the war and get Russians out quicker then that would be a net positive because we've already seen what the Russians are doing to every city they come across, to the Ukrainians, to the environment, taking out entire regions environmentally for decades to come.

7. Russia already uses cluster munitions so they have no right to moan, China isn't part of the pact so likewise they can't moan, I don't see support dropping when support is already largely USA, UK won't care and Eastern Europe will likely cheer it on. Maybe France and Germany moans but I doubt it. I also don't think it will affect their NATO membership when some NATO members don't even recognise the pact.

8. Unfortunately, it's a truth that Western nations can't keep up with Ukraine's artillery demand because Western nations don't rely on artillery for wars, so it's either something else fills the gaps (cluster munitions) or the offensive comes to a slow and brutal grind, because Ukraine will start running low on artillery ammo and it's already hard enough breaking through mine riddled fields and entrenched Russian positions.

---

Sidenote: It's annoying to see "Human Rights" companies moan about this but barely mention all the times Russia bombs a Ukraine restaurant, a block of flats, or how quiet everyone was when Russia blew the dam and caused way more damage than cluster munitions with a dud rate of less than 1% will cause in the long term.

Yeah this sucks and is the real issue. Pretty much already an unavoidable issue though, cluster munitions will join the tons of other unexploded ordnances in the same area. Hopefully we can help Ukraine to clean up as much as possible post-war and Ukraine will monitor and close off the areas which the cluster munitions along with mines and other UXOs are, for a while at least.

But they'll never get them all, we're still finding and accidentally tripping off WW1/WW2 devices today.

Some brave farmers ain't waiting though - ‘We Couldn’t Wait’: Ukrainian Farmers Improvise to Clear Their Land of Mines | Ukraine | The Guardian

I don't know the question to this but I wonder if anti-mine tanks work on cluster munitions as well?

The little help out of this is as I said and as you said, it will be used mostly on trenches, on static lines, once Ukraine breaks through those static lines, they shouldn't have to use them as much, but breaking through the massively long trench lines and defensive positions along with trying to break through minefields is proving to be difficult without certain weaponry.

Majority will likely be used on the defensive lines, far away from cities, which aren't moving, so the main danger is farmers afterwards.

Ukraine Addressing Some Concerns

We welcome the decision of the US to provide Ukraine with the new liberation weapons that will significantly help us to de-occupy our territories while saving the lives of the Ukrainian soldiers.

Under Article 51 of the UN Charter Ukraine has a universal internationally recognised right to self-defence and thus we have been officially requesting these types of munitions for a long time. I would like to stress that in exercising our inalienable right to self-defence we will continue to strictly comply with all the international humanitarian conventions signed and ratified by Ukraine.

It is important to note that the russian federation has been indiscriminately using cluster munitions from day 1 of the unprovoked large-scale aggression. In February-March 2022 Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city with over a million population, was relentlessly bombarded by russians cluster munitions.

Our position is simple - we need to liberate our temporarily occupied territories and save the lives of our people. For this we need to inflict losses on the enemy - war criminals, rapists and looters - who are occupying our territories. The more losses we inflict on them the more lives of Ukrainian people we will be able to save.

It is in our interest to save the lives of our soldiers. This is why we will continue to do this using all lethal weapons available to us.

Regarding the cluster munitions, we have 5 key principles which we will abide by and which we have clearly communicated to all our partners, including the US. I have personally informed our US partners about these five principles in writing a long time ago.

1. Ukraine will use these munitions only for the de-occupation of our internationally recognised territories. These munitions will not be used on the officially recognized territory of russia.

2. We will not be using cluster munitions in urban areas (cities) to avoid the risks for the civilian populations - these are our people, they are Ukrainians we have a duty to protect.

Cluster munitions will be used only in the fields where there is a concentration of russian military. They will be used to break through the enemy defence lines with minimum risk for the lives of our soldiers. Saving the lives of our troops, even during extremely difficult offensive operations, remains our top priority.

3. Ukraine will keep a strict record of the use of these weapons and the local zones where they will be used.

4. Based on these records, after the de-occupation of our territories and our victory these territories will be prioritised for the purposes of de-mining. This will enable us to eradicate the risk from the unexploded elements of cluster munitions.

The Minister of Defence of Ukraine is by law acting as the Head of the national de-mining agency. In this capacity I will ensure the implementation of the relevant legal framework for the de-mining process after our victory.

5. We will report to our partners about the use of these munitions, and about their efficiency to ensure the appropriate standard of transparent reporting and control.

Thanks for the info. Knowing that it's even less of a concern.

Usage can still be mitigated and various ways eg. recording usage and limiting areas.

Russia is already using a far worse version of the same technology so as far as this concern goes so it's not like this will change post war concerns and conditions much.

Russia is committing genocide and terrorism in Ukraine so concerns for future civilian security which you could mitigate in various ways are much less valued than the immediate and actual danger facing Ukrainians in occupied territories today.

See the post above, addresses some of your concerns I think.