In the ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia, cluster munitions have emerged as a controversial and powerful element of the Ukrainian arsenal. The recent 2024 report from the Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC) has brought to light a number of significant revelations regarding the use of these weapons by Ukraine, specifically involving munitions from Turkiye, Israel, and potentially Poland. The use of cluster munitions in this conflict has raised substantial concerns among the international community, as these weapons, although effective in combat, pose a severe risk to civilians due to their indiscriminate nature and the potential for unexploded ordnance to remain on the battlefield long after hostilities cease.
According to the 2024 report, Israeli-made or copied M971 120mm cluster munition mortar projectiles were discovered in the possession of Ukrainian forces as early as December 2022. The origins of these munitions remain unclear, with no definitive information on how or from whom Ukraine acquired them. However, the presence of these munitions in the conflict zone has added a new dimension to the global discussion on the legality and ethics of cluster munition use in modern warfare.
This report also highlights the involvement of Turkiye in supplying cluster munitions to Ukraine, despite official denials from both Turkish and Ukrainian officials. In January 2023, U.S. media reports indicated that Turkiye had transferred cluster munitions to Ukraine in November 2022. These reports were promptly denied by high-ranking officials from both countries, who insisted that no such transfers had taken place. However, new evidence emerged in August 2023 when a photograph posted on social media depicted the 155mm M483A1 dual-purpose improved conventional munitions (DPICM), which were produced in Turkiye, being used by Ukrainian forces. This discovery prompted further scrutiny of Turkiye’s role in the conflict, although Turkish officials continued to deny any official transfers of cluster munitions to Ukraine.
In addition to Turkiye and Israel, there is speculation that Ukraine may also be using cluster munitions acquired from Poland. While the Cluster Munition Coalition did not provide definitive proof of such transfers, the possibility remains open, further complicating the geopolitical landscape surrounding Ukraine’s military support. Poland, a close ally of Ukraine, has been a key player in providing military assistance to Kyiv throughout the conflict. However, the potential involvement of cluster munitions in this support raises questions about Poland’s adherence to international treaties and the ethical considerations of supplying such weapons to a conflict zone.
The Cluster Munition Coalition, a global network of non-governmental organizations based in Geneva, Switzerland, has long advocated for the banning of landmines and cluster munitions. The organization promotes the implementation of treaties aimed at eliminating these weapons from modern warfare due to their devastating impact on civilian populations. Despite these efforts, the use of cluster munitions in the Russia-Ukraine war continues to be a significant issue, with both sides reportedly deploying such weapons at various points in the conflict.
Cluster munitions are designed to disperse multiple smaller submunitions over a wide area, making them particularly effective in targeting large concentrations of enemy troops or equipment. However, their indiscriminate nature and the high rate of unexploded ordnance make them especially dangerous for civilian populations. Unexploded submunitions can remain on the battlefield for years, posing a lethal threat to anyone who comes into contact with them. For this reason, cluster munitions have been widely condemned by the international community, and their use is restricted under the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), a treaty that prohibits the use, production, and transfer of these weapons.
Neither Ukraine nor Russia are signatories to the CCM, which has led to the continued use of cluster munitions in the conflict. Ukraine, in particular, has argued that its use of these weapons is necessary for its defense against Russian aggression. However, the deployment of cluster munitions by Ukrainian forces has drawn criticism from human rights organizations, which argue that the long-term consequences of these weapons far outweigh their immediate tactical benefits.
The use of cluster munitions by Ukraine has also raised concerns about the potential for these weapons to be used in urban areas, where the risk to civilian populations is significantly higher. Although the Ukrainian government has insisted that it takes all possible measures to minimize civilian casualties, the nature of cluster munitions makes it difficult to avoid collateral damage in densely populated areas. Reports from international observers have indicated that cluster munitions have been used in several key battle zones, including areas near major cities, further amplifying concerns about the humanitarian impact of their use.
In addition to the immediate risks posed by cluster munitions, the long-term consequences of unexploded ordnance in Ukraine could be severe. The presence of these munitions on the battlefield could hinder post-conflict recovery efforts, as large areas of land may be rendered unsafe for civilian use until they are cleared of unexploded submunitions. This process is both time-consuming and costly, and the presence of unexploded ordnance could continue to pose a threat to civilians for decades after the conflict ends.
Despite these concerns, Ukraine’s use of cluster munitions has been supported by some of its international allies, who argue that the country has the right to defend itself using whatever means are necessary. The transfer of cluster munitions from countries like Turkiye and Israel, although controversial, is seen by some as a necessary measure to ensure that Ukraine can continue to resist Russian aggression. However, the international community remains divided on this issue, with many countries and organizations calling for an immediate cessation of the use of cluster munitions by all parties involved in the conflict.
The geopolitical implications of Ukraine’s use of cluster munitions are also significant. The involvement of countries like Turkiye and Israel in providing these weapons to Ukraine has strained diplomatic relations with other nations, particularly those that are signatories to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. These countries have called for greater accountability and transparency regarding the transfer and use of cluster munitions in the conflict, and some have even threatened to impose sanctions on countries that continue to supply these weapons to Ukraine.
At the same time, the use of cluster munitions by Ukraine has also sparked renewed debate about the effectiveness of international arms control treaties. Critics argue that the ongoing use of these weapons in the Russia-Ukraine war highlights the limitations of the Convention on Cluster Munitions and other similar treaties. While these agreements have been successful in reducing the global stockpiles of cluster munitions, they have not been able to prevent their use in conflicts involving non-signatory states. This has led some to call for a reevaluation of existing arms control treaties and the development of new mechanisms to address the use of cluster munitions in modern warfare.
In conclusion, the use of cluster munitions by Ukraine in its ongoing conflict with Russia remains a deeply contentious issue. The 2024 report from the Cluster Munition Coalition has shed new light on the involvement of countries like Turkiye, Israel, and possibly Poland in supplying these weapons to Ukraine, despite official denials from these governments. The use of cluster munitions in the conflict has raised serious concerns about the humanitarian impact of these weapons, particularly in urban areas, where the risk to civilian populations is greatest. Moreover, the long-term consequences of unexploded ordnance in Ukraine could have far-reaching implications for the country’s post-conflict recovery efforts.
As the war between Ukraine and Russia continues, the use of cluster munitions will likely remain a focal point of international attention. The debate over the legality and ethics of using these weapons in modern warfare will persist, as will calls for greater accountability and transparency in their use. Ultimately, the future of cluster munitions in this conflict will depend on the willingness of the international community to address the challenges posed by these weapons and to find a solution that balances the need for military effectiveness with the imperative to protect civilian lives.
Cluster Bomb Models Involved in Various Countries
| Country | Cluster Bomb Model | Delivery Method | Submunition Type | Notes |
| Israel | M971 120mm Mortar Projectile | Mortar | M87 DPICM Submunitions | Used by Ukrainian forces; Israeli-made or copied version photographed in 2022 |
| Israel | M85 DPICM Submunition | Artillery | Dual-purpose (Anti-tank/Anti-personnel) | Developed by IMI, licensed for production in various countries, used widely |
| Israel | M999 Advanced AntiPersonnel Munition | Artillery (155mm) | M99 DPICM Submunitions | Developed to deliver improved DPICM submunitions |
| Israel | ATAP-300/TAL-1/TAL-2 | Air-dropped | Various Submunitions | Produced by Rafael Corporation; exported to several countries |
| Israel | LAR-160 Rocket System | Rocket (160mm) | M85 DPICM Submunitions | Exported to Azerbaijan, Chile, and Venezuela |
| Russia | RBK-500 Cluster Bomb | Air-dropped | AO-2.5RT, PTAB-2.5KO Submunitions | Used extensively in Syria and Ukraine; contains anti-armor/anti-personnel bomblets |
| Russia | 9M55K Smerch Rocket | Rocket (300mm) | 9N210/9N235 Submunitions | Used by Russian MLRS systems |
| Russia | 9M27K Uragan Rocket | Rocket (220mm) | 9N210 Submunitions | Older-generation rocket system |
| Russia | KMGU-2 Dispenser | Aircraft-mounted | AO-2.5RT Submunitions | Dispensers releasing anti-personnel/anti-armor bomblets |
| Ukraine | M483A1 DPICM | Artillery (155mm) | M42/M46 DPICM Submunitions | NATO-supplied cluster munitions; used by Ukrainian forces |
| Ukraine | M971 120mm Mortar Projectile | Mortar | M87 DPICM Submunitions | Israeli-origin cluster bombs used in conflict with Russia |
| NATO | BLU-97/B | Air-dropped | Anti-personnel/Anti-vehicle Submunitions | US-made cluster bomb used by NATO forces |
| NATO | M26 Rocket | Rocket (227mm) | M77 DPICM Submunitions | US-made rocket system widely used by NATO members |
| NATO | CBU-87 Cluster Bomb | Air-dropped | BLU-97/B Submunitions | US-made cluster bomb used in Kosovo, Iraq, and Afghanistan by NATO forces |
| China | Type-90 Cluster Bomb | Air-dropped | DPICM Submunitions | Chinese-developed air-dropped cluster bomb |
| China | WS-1B MLRS Rocket | Rocket (302mm) | Anti-armor Submunitions | Multiple launch rocket system |
| China | Type-81 Artillery Shell | Artillery (122mm) | Submunition-based | Used for artillery bombardments |
| North Korea | KN-09 MLRS | Rocket (300mm) | Submunition-based | North Korean-developed rocket system capable of delivering cluster munitions |
| North Korea | PTAB Cluster Bomb | Air-dropped | Anti-armor Submunitions | Likely based on older Soviet designs |
| Iran | Oghab MLRS Rocket | Rocket (230mm) | Submunition-based | Iranian multiple launch rocket system |
| Iran | Fajr-3/Fajr-5 Rockets | Rocket (240mm/333mm) | Anti-personnel Submunitions | Iranian long-range rocket system delivering cluster munitions |
| Iran | Ra’ad 30 Cluster Bomb | Air-dropped | Anti-armor Submunitions | Iran-developed air-dropped cluster bomb system |
Russia’s Use of Cluster Munitions in the Ukraine Conflict
In the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, the use of cluster munitions by Russian forces has been a persistent and deeply troubling aspect of the conflict. These controversial weapons, known for their ability to disperse multiple bomblets over a wide area, have been employed by Russia in various combat zones throughout Ukraine, contributing to significant civilian casualties and long-term humanitarian challenges. The deployment of cluster munitions has further fueled international condemnation, with numerous governments, non-governmental organizations, and human rights groups calling for accountability and the cessation of their use in the conflict.
The Russia-Ukraine war, which began with Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and escalated into a full-scale invasion in 2022, has seen the widespread use of heavy artillery and aerial bombardments, including cluster munitions. These weapons are notorious for their indiscriminate nature, as they do not differentiate between military targets and civilian infrastructure, making their use in populated areas particularly dangerous. Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have documented multiple instances of Russia’s use of cluster munitions in cities, towns, and villages across Ukraine, contributing to widespread destruction and suffering.
Cluster munitions have been used by Russia since the early stages of its invasion of Ukraine. Reports of their deployment first surfaced in 2014, during the conflict in eastern Ukraine between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian forces. However, their use significantly escalated following the Russian invasion in February 2022, with evidence of cluster munition strikes emerging from numerous areas, including Kyiv, Kharkiv, Mariupol, and other major cities. These strikes often targeted densely populated civilian areas, exacerbating the already dire humanitarian situation.
One of the most devastating examples of Russia’s use of cluster munitions occurred in the early days of the invasion, when residential neighborhoods in Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, were bombarded with these weapons. The strikes resulted in the deaths of dozens of civilians and caused extensive damage to homes, schools, and hospitals. Images and videos from the aftermath of these attacks showed unexploded bomblets scattered across the city, posing an ongoing threat to residents long after the initial strikes had ended. This incident, along with similar attacks in other urban areas, drew widespread condemnation from the international community.
Russia’s use of cluster munitions has not been limited to urban areas. These weapons have also been deployed in rural regions and along frontlines where Ukrainian military forces are stationed. In these areas, cluster munitions have been used to target Ukrainian artillery positions, supply depots, and troop concentrations. While these strikes may have achieved some tactical military objectives, the long-term consequences of unexploded ordnance on agricultural land and infrastructure have been severe. Farmers and local residents in these regions face significant risks as unexploded bomblets continue to threaten their safety and livelihood.
The humanitarian impact of Russia’s use of cluster munitions in Ukraine has been profound. According to international observers, the widespread deployment of these weapons has contributed to a significant number of civilian casualties, including deaths and injuries caused by unexploded submunitions. These bomblets, which often fail to detonate on impact, can remain dangerous for years, posing a lethal threat to anyone who comes into contact with them. In many cases, children have been among the victims, as unexploded bomblets are small, metallic, and sometimes brightly colored, making them attractive to curious youngsters who may not realize the danger they pose.
In addition to the immediate threat to civilians, the long-term presence of unexploded cluster munitions complicates efforts to rebuild and recover from the conflict. In areas where cluster munitions have been used extensively, fields, forests, and residential neighborhoods have been rendered unsafe, requiring costly and time-consuming demining efforts. This process can take years, if not decades, to complete, depending on the scale of contamination and the availability of resources for clearance operations. As a result, the use of cluster munitions in Ukraine is likely to have a lasting impact on the country’s recovery, hindering economic development and prolonging the suffering of affected communities.
The international response to Russia’s use of cluster munitions in Ukraine has been overwhelmingly critical. Human rights organizations and governments around the world have condemned the use of these weapons as a violation of international humanitarian law, particularly the principles of distinction and proportionality, which require combatants to distinguish between military and civilian targets and to avoid causing excessive harm to civilians. The use of cluster munitions in civilian areas has been widely denounced as an egregious violation of these principles.
The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), adopted in 2008, prohibits the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of cluster munitions. However, Russia, like Ukraine, is not a signatory to the convention, allowing it to continue using these weapons without violating the treaty. This has been a significant point of frustration for international advocates of disarmament, who argue that the convention’s effectiveness is undermined by the refusal of key military powers, including Russia and the United States, to join. Nonetheless, the global consensus against the use of cluster munitions has grown stronger, with calls for accountability and an end to their use in the Ukraine conflict growing louder.
In response to Russia’s use of cluster munitions, several countries have imposed sanctions and taken diplomatic actions to pressure Moscow to cease their deployment. However, these measures have so far had little effect on Russia’s military strategy. The continued use of these weapons has underscored the limitations of international law in preventing the use of banned or restricted weaponry by non-signatory states during armed conflicts. The situation in Ukraine has become a stark reminder of the challenges faced by the global arms control regime in curbing the use of indiscriminate weapons in modern warfare.
Russia has consistently defended its use of cluster munitions, arguing that their deployment is necessary for achieving military objectives in Ukraine. Russian officials have claimed that the use of these weapons is in line with international law and that they are being used against legitimate military targets. However, independent investigations and reports from human rights organizations have documented numerous instances where cluster munitions were used in civilian areas, resulting in significant civilian casualties and damage to non-military infrastructure.
The use of cluster munitions by Russian forces has also sparked concerns about the potential for these weapons to exacerbate the already dire humanitarian situation in Ukraine. The ongoing conflict has displaced millions of people, destroyed critical infrastructure, and severely strained the country’s healthcare system. The deployment of cluster munitions in populated areas adds yet another layer of complexity to the humanitarian crisis, as civilians are forced to contend with not only the immediate dangers of war but also the long-term threat posed by unexploded ordnance.
In conclusion, Russia’s use of cluster munitions in the Ukraine conflict represents one of the most troubling aspects of the war. These weapons, which are notorious for their indiscriminate nature and long-lasting impact, have contributed to significant civilian casualties and humanitarian challenges. The international community has overwhelmingly condemned their use, but the lack of binding legal constraints on non-signatory states like Russia has allowed these weapons to continue to be deployed with impunity. As the conflict drags on, the legacy of cluster munitions in Ukraine will likely be felt for years to come, complicating efforts to rebuild the country and posing ongoing risks to the civilian population.
Israel’s Cluster Munition Ban Policy and Involvement in Global Dynamics
Israel, despite acknowledging the humanitarian concerns associated with cluster munitions, has consistently refrained from joining the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM). This non-signatory stance has placed Israel in a complex geopolitical position, particularly given its historical development, production, and export of cluster munitions, alongside the significant stockpiles it still possesses. While the country abstains from active production today following a policy shift by its defense manufacturers, its legacy as a key player in the global proliferation of cluster munitions continues to reverberate in both political and military spheres.
One of the primary reasons Israel has not acceded to the CCM is its view on the military utility of cluster munitions. The Israeli government has historically justified the use of these weapons as conforming to international humanitarian law and standard military practices, as evidenced by their deployment in past conflicts. The last confirmed use of cluster munitions by Israel occurred during the 2006 war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, where the extensive deployment of these munitions was met with significant international condemnation. Since then, Israel has faced pressure to change its policy on cluster munitions but has resisted calls to join the CCM, arguing that the treaty’s terms are overly broad and do not account for the realities faced by states engaged in military conflict.
Despite this, Israel has taken steps to curb its production of cluster munitions. In 2018, the acquisition of Israel’s last major manufacturer of cluster munitions, IMI Systems, by Elbit Systems Ltd., marked the end of domestic production. Elbit Systems, following international norms and under pressure from domestic and foreign sources, announced that it would no longer engage in the production or sale of cluster munitions, aligning its operations with the applicable international conventions, even though Israel itself had not signed the relevant treaties. This move was a significant shift in Israel’s defense production policies and reflected the growing influence of global disarmament movements, particularly regarding munitions that pose long-term risks to civilian populations.
However, Israel has not yet committed to never producing cluster munitions again. The country’s significant stockpile remains a concern, and Israel’s refusal to formally renounce the future production or use of these weapons continues to be a point of contention in international forums. Moreover, Israel’s hosting of U.S. stockpiles of cluster munitions adds another layer of complexity to its stance on the issue. These U.S.-manufactured munitions are reportedly stored in Israel as part of a broader defense arrangement, and their use could be authorized in the event of an emergency, further entrenching Israel’s association with cluster munitions, even if it is not actively producing or using them.
One of the most critical aspects of Israel’s relationship with cluster munitions is its historical use of these weapons in various military conflicts. Israel’s deployment of cluster munitions dates back to the 1973 Yom Kippur War, where these weapons were used against Egyptian air defense positions. This use continued in subsequent conflicts, including in Lebanon in 1978 and again in 1982 against Syrian forces and non-state armed groups (NSAGs). The extensive use of cluster munitions during these conflicts established Israel as one of the earliest and most prominent users of this controversial weaponry in modern warfare.
The 2006 war in Lebanon, however, remains the most significant instance of Israel’s use of cluster munitions. During this conflict, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) fired millions of submunitions into southern Lebanon, resulting in widespread civilian casualties and long-term hazards from unexploded ordnance. The humanitarian impact of this action was severe, leading to international outrage and contributing to the formation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions just two years later. Israel defended its actions during the war, citing the strategic necessity of targeting Hezbollah forces that were using civilian areas as cover. Nevertheless, the fallout from the 2006 conflict continues to shape Israel’s international standing on the issue of cluster munitions.
Despite not having used cluster munitions since 2006, Israel’s involvement in the global market for these weapons has remained a point of concern. Prior to the cessation of production by IMI Systems, Israel was a leading developer and exporter of cluster munitions, supplying these weapons to a variety of countries, including Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Chile. The 155mm M999 “Advanced AntiPersonnel Munition” and the M971 120mm mortar projectile, both of which deliver deadly submunitions, were among the key products developed by Israel’s defense industry. These munitions have been found in the possession of various armed forces around the world, including the Ukrainian Armed Forces, which were photographed with Israeli-made or copied M971 projectiles in 2022.
The presence of Israeli-made cluster munitions in Ukraine, particularly amid the ongoing conflict with Russia, has added a new dimension to the global discourse on arms transfers and their humanitarian consequences. While Israel has denied any direct involvement in supplying cluster munitions to Ukraine, the discovery of these weapons in the conflict zone suggests a more complex network of arms transfers, possibly involving third-party states or illicit channels. Israel’s historical licensing agreements for the production of M85 DPICM submunitions with countries like Germany, India, Romania, and Turkiye further complicate the situation, as these countries may have played a role in the proliferation of Israeli-designed cluster munitions.
This raises significant questions about Israel’s responsibility in preventing the misuse of its military technologies. While Israel may no longer be actively producing cluster munitions, its past exports and licensing agreements continue to influence the dynamics of conflicts far beyond its borders. The presence of Israeli-made munitions in Ukraine underscores the need for stronger international oversight and greater accountability for arms transfers, particularly when dealing with weapons that pose long-term risks to civilian populations.
In addition to its exports, Israel’s stockpiling of cluster munitions remains a critical issue. Although the size and composition of Israel’s current stockpile are not publicly known, it is widely believed to be substantial. Reports from 2018 indicated that the Israeli Air Force was preparing to destroy certain types of air-dropped cluster munitions, but it is unclear whether this process was ever completed or how much of the stockpile remains. Furthermore, Israel’s hosting of U.S. stockpiles adds another layer of complexity, as these munitions could be made available for Israeli use under certain circumstances, despite the country’s current stance on production and use.
The presence of U.S.-manufactured cluster munitions in Israel has been a subject of debate for years, particularly after the 2008 revelation that a significant portion of the U.S. stockpile in Israel consisted of munitions with a tested failure rate of over 1%, far exceeding the standard set by U.S. export regulations. Israeli officials reportedly warned their American counterparts that unless this prohibition on exporting cluster munitions with a high failure rate was lifted, Israel would need to revise its defensive doctrine and seek alternative weapons systems. This ongoing dialogue between the U.S. and Israel highlights the enduring importance of cluster munitions in Israel’s broader defense strategy, even as the country moves away from active production.
Israel’s abstention from voting on key United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolutions promoting the Convention on Cluster Munitions further illustrates its reluctance to fully embrace the international consensus against these weapons. In December 2022, Israel abstained from a vote urging non-signatory states to join the convention “as soon as possible,” continuing a pattern of abstention that dates back to 2015. However, Israel has voted in favor of UNGA resolutions condemning the use of cluster munitions in Syria, reflecting its selective engagement on the issue. This approach underscores Israel’s complex relationship with cluster munitions: while it recognizes the humanitarian concerns associated with their use, it remains unwilling to fully commit to the global movement for their elimination.
Israel’s participation in the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) further complicates its stance on cluster munitions. While Israel is a state party to the CCW, it has consistently opposed discussions on regulating cluster munitions within the framework of the convention. In 2011, Israel expressed regret that states were unable to adopt a draft CCW protocol on cluster munitions but has not pushed for further deliberations on the matter since then. This reluctance to engage in multilateral arms control efforts reflects Israel’s broader strategic calculus, which prioritizes military flexibility and operational effectiveness over full adherence to international disarmament norms.
Israel’s policy on cluster munitions remains a source of significant debate and controversy. While the country has moved away from active production and has taken steps to reduce its involvement in the global trade of these weapons, its refusal to join the Convention on Cluster Munitions and its continued stockpiling of munitions keep it at the center of international discussions on arms control. Israel’s historical use of cluster munitions, particularly during the 2006 Lebanon War, and its role in supplying these weapons to other countries, including those involved in ongoing conflicts like Ukraine, highlight the enduring impact of its defense policies on global security. As the international community continues to grapple with the humanitarian consequences of cluster munitions, Israel’s role as both a former producer and current stockpiler of these weapons will remain a focal point of discussion.
