Imagine a non-guided aerial weapon, meticulously designed to unleash its power upon release
from an aircraft.
The Mk 20, also called the CBU-100 Cluster Bomb, boasts a robust body, crafted from top-notch
aluminum, clocking in at just under 500 pounds.
But what sets this weapon apart is what happens next – once airborne, the container housing
247 HEAT submunitions, known as Mk 118, dramatically opens, causing them to rain down on a designated
target zone with devastating force.
Putin, are you scared yet?
Well, you should be, Ukraine just asked the US for a bunch of these babies and its request
has been generously granted.
This, however, has been the subject of some controversy.
But why?
How is Ukraine using this weapon and what could it mean for the war going forward?
Let’s find out.
On Friday, July 7th, 2023, the United States declared that it would be supplying Ukraine
with cluster bombs in a decision that President Joe Biden said had been a “very difficult”
one to make.
The move was controversial even among America’s closest allies.
The United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand – partners with the United States in the
Five Eyes intelligence alliance – all said they were opposed to the move.
Spain, a NATO ally, also declared its opposition.
The United Nations’ human rights office also opposed the measure and urged both sides
in the war to stop the use of cluster bombs without delay.
As mentioned, cluster bombs are dropped from a plane or delivered from an artillery shell,
rocket, or missile.
The weapon begins as a single container.
This container then breaks apart and releases many small bomblets indiscriminately over
a wide area.
Over 120 countries have banned the use of these weapons because of this indiscriminate
nature, fearing the risks that they pose to civilians.
The individual cluster bomblets that get released from the initial container also have a high
rate of failure.
Many of them are duds.
These duds can then linger on the ground for decades and accidentally go off when somebody
interacts trips them.
Cluster bombs therefore some of the same problems to civilians as landmines do.
For example, the United States dropped 260 million cluster munitions on Laos as part
of its operations in the Vietnam War.
Over 60 years later, large tracts of land in Laos remain uninhabited because of unexploded
cluster bomblets in the area.
The United States and Russia are not parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
This treaty, which went into effect on August 1st 2010, bans it’s the countries that adhere
to it from using, acquiring, developing, stockpiling, and transferring cluster munitions.
Countries involved in the Convention are even prohibited from assisting other countries
from interacting with cluster bombs in any way.
They cannot help them manufacture their own cluster weapons, for example.
Ukraine is not a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions either, and in April
2023 at the Munich Security Conference, it requested the United States to deliver these
weapons, which it has long desired.
However, this desire could harm its international image, which up until this point, was almost
unanimously positive.
Amnesty International and other human rights groups condemned the White House’s decision
to provide the Ukrainian military with cluster bombs, warning of the threat these weapons
would pose to civilians during and after the war.
United States National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan countered the controversy by declaring
that the cluster bombs the United States would be sending to Ukraine failed at far less frequent
rate than the versions that the Russians had already been using in the war.
The United States has a domestic law on the books that bans the production, use, or transfer
of cluster bombs which have a failure rate greater than 1%.
Sullivan said that American cluster munitions in question fail at less than 2.5%, compared
to Russian bombs that have dud rates between 30 and 40%.
Nevertheless, by admitting this, he also tacitly admitted that the Biden administration was
disregarding the law.
Russia’s defense and foreign ministry were publicly unfazed by the announcement.
They instead dismissed it as an act of desperation.
In accepting delivery of the cluster bombs, Ukraine promised that it would not use them
on Russian territory.
There were other conditions too, which we will get into in a moment.
For Ukraine, a feeling of necessity surrounds the use of cluster bombs.
At the beginning of July, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Valery Zaluzhny,
admitted that the counteroffensive in Donbas and Zaporizhzhia that began in June was not
making the progress that he had desired.
He blamed the slow pace of the operations on a lack of adequate firepower, especially
artillery and air support.
General Zaluzhny particularly complained about the lack of adequate fighter jets to provide
air support, saying that the Western planes he wanted were a generation more advanced
than the planes available to him.
Ukraine has long desired cluster bombs to more effectively target Russian defenses,
formations of tanks and armored vehicles, and troop formations.
Because cluster bombs focus their attack on a wide area, the Ukrainians would need less
of them to destroy Russian assets, in comparison to the more narrowly targeted weapons Ukraine
has been using.
Ammunition expenditures would decrease and accuracy would become less important.
Given Ukraine’s shortage of the artillery shells it desperately needs if its counteroffensive
is to make the headway it wants, the delivery of American cluster bombs is a welcome one
for Kyiv.
A British General, Sir Richard Shireff, NATO’s former Deputy Supreme Allied Commander in
Europe, mentioned that the decision had utility.
Arming the Ukrainians with cluster bombs, he said, would make it easier for them to
break through the Russian lines.
He blamed the West for failing to provide adequate firepower early enough, therefore
making the use of cluster bombs necessary now.
The cluster weapon in question is the Dual Purposed Improved Conventional Munition (DPICM).
This is an artillery shell that bursts apart and drops 88 separate bomblets over the target
area.
The cluster shell has a dud rate of about 3%, so its delivery would violate American
law.
In September 2022, General Zaluzhny wrote an article requesting that the United States
provide Ukraine with the DPICM, which is currently being phased out in the US armed forces in
favor of the C-DAEM cluster round, which has a dud rate of 1% or less, in line with American
standards first set by the Obama administration (note that this standard is different from
the law which forbids the transfer of cluster munitions with a failure rate greater than
1%).
The Ukrainian top general is now finally getting his wish.
Another weapon the Ukrainians badly want is the air-dropped Mark 20 Rockeye II cluster
bomb, also known as the CBU-100, which weighs about 500 pounds in total.
It is a gravity bomb that, once released from the air, bursts apart into 247 separate Mark
118 bomblets that rain down over the designated target area.
The target area’s range can be adjusted based on the altitude that the original container
is set to burst apart in.
The Mark 118 bomblets are steered by fins at the back and have electrical and mechanical
fuses that activate once they are released from the original CBU-100.
Once the bomblets’ noses hit a hard surface, the ordinance detonates.
Reportedly, the Ukrainians do not want to use the Mark 20 Rockeye II cluster bomb in
its traditional way, because Ukraine already has better cluster-type weapons in its arsenal
that can be delivered via HIMARS and other systems.
The coming DPICM artillery shells add to this capability.
Rather, the Ukrainians seem to want to dismantle the Mark 20 container and place the individual
Mark 118 bomblets on drones.
These bomblets are designed for maximum penetration against enemy armored assets.
The shape of the design allows for puncturing of up to 190 millimeters of armor.
The bomblets are also aerodynamically sound.
These factors make them ideal candidates for drone operations against Russian armored formations.
Ukraine has proven very effective in the practice of drone warfare.
In May, it launched dozens of drone attacks to weaken the Russian lines in preparation
for the counteroffensive it launched in Zaporizhzhia and around Bakhmut in June.
Additionally, Ukraine has carried out drone attacks far beyond the Russian lines.
Combining the drone capability with the wider area of effect in a cluster bomb is something
the Ukrainian military is very keen on trying, as it seeks any advantage it can find in the
counteroffensive.
The Mark 20’s manufacturer, a company called Textron Systems, reportedly stopped making
this weapon in 2016, following the United States’ decision to discontinue sales of
the bomb to Saudi Arabia.
However, the United States has large stockpiles of the Mark 20 containers and the Mark 118
bomblets, more than enough to provide them in large numbers to the Ukrainian military.
So far the United States has not yet agreed to deliver this weapon to Ukraine.
We will need to wait and see if that changes.
Although neither the United States nor Ukraine joined the Convention on Cluster Munitions,
the decision to use them has still created a lot of controversy among NATO members and
other like-minded countries.
The United States is by far its most important partner, but Ukraine still needs the support
of these other nations, which have signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
These countries provide Ukraine with military and financial aid, and all of this help is
needed.
Therefore, Ukraine will probably want to be careful in how it uses the cluster munitions
when they arrive on the battlefield.
So where would the Ukrainian military use these weapons and where would it be less likely
to use them?
Ukraine will probably want to use its new cluster artillery shells in the areas where
its counteroffensive has stalled.
This would be in Zaporizhzhia in the drive toward the city of Tokmak.
Perhaps anticipating this, Russian reports suggested that Ukrainian troops had already
struck areas near Tokmak, the probable initial objective for Ukraine on the Zaporozhzhia
front, with cluster munitions on July 11th, although the Institute for the Study of War
could not independently verify this.
As of July 15th, the front line in Zaporizhzhia extends from the Dnieper around Kamianske
to Novopil opposite Liubymivka.
All of these sectors could prove enticing targets for cluster bomb attacks, because
a breakthrough in Zaporozhzhia Oblast would put Ukraine in position to cut the Russian
land bridge to Crimea.
It is a highly strategic area.
Ukraine will want to affect that breakthrough any way that it can, and the Russian defenses
there are heavier than anywhere else on the front.
This is part of why Ukraine has made such slow progress in its counteroffensive so far.
If there is one area where we can probably bet to see the use of cluster bombs at the
front, it would be there, in Zaporizhzhia.
Ukrainian forces may also wish to use the cluster bombs in Bakhmut, which has seen the
heaviest fighting in the war and which is another axis of the Ukrainian counteroffensive.
Ukraine is currently pushing toward Minkivka in the north and toward Ozarianivka in the
south.
The Ukrainian units there hope to encircle Russian-occupied Bakhmut and cut the city
off from supply lines further to the east.
Finally, the Ukrainian military may seek to use its new cluster bombs to support special
operations across the Dnieper River opposite Kherson.
In deploying its new weapons, Ukraine could use them to disrupt Russian formations over
a wider area than its current artillery shells do.
Still, Ukraine would need to be careful that unexploded bomblets do not become de facto
landmines that impede the movement of its own forces.
On the other hand, the unexploded bomblets dropped on Russian lines could also protect
the gains that Ukraine makes in its attacks.
The area denial factor of these unexploded bomblets then works against the Russians,
making it harder for them to counterattack.
In this way, it is possible to view the tendency toward a high dud rate as a feature of cluster
bombs, rather than a bug.
Cluster bombs dropped on strategic pieces of real estate, like airports, approaches
to river crossings, tactically important high ground, and so on, act as improvised, rapidly-deliverable
landmines that slow down the operations of enemy forces.
Every piece of ground Ukraine retakes could be protected with the unexploded bomblets
of the cluster weapons it uses on the Russian lines.
Areas where Ukraine would more likely not want to deploy cluster bombs would be in sectors
with even marginal civilian populations.
Indeed, one of the terms of the deal that Ukraine made with the Biden administration
was an assurance that the American-made cluster bombs would not be used in areas near where
civilians are present.
This could mean that the artillery batteries equipped with the cluster rounds are less
likely to fire near occupied villages but in the zones between them.
All wars are first and foremost political, and large numbers of civilian casualties that
come as a result of Ukrainian-deployed cluster bombs would risk undermining the global support
that Ukraine has managed to build since Russia’s invasion.
One of the many reasons why Russia has been condemned for its conduct in the conflict
is through its own use of cluster bombs.
In early March 2022, human rights groups accused Russia of using cluster bombs in civilian
areas.
One such attack wound up hitting a school in Kharkiv, the second biggest city in Ukraine.
The attack killed three civilians, including a child.
Although Russia has not ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions, the attack was still
considered a war crime.
The move was similar to some of Russia’s accused tactics in the Syrian Civil War, where
cluster bombs were also used, including against civilian targets.
In July 2022, Amnesty International came out with a more detailed report, accusing Russia
of killing hundreds of civilians in the Kharkhiv area through indiscriminate shelling and the
use of cluster bombs.
The weapons in question were the 9N210/9N235 cluster bombs and “scatterable” mines
that eject from smaller rockets.
These mines explode at timed intervals once released.
Investigators from Amnesty International looked at 41 strike sites in Kharkhiv that resulted
in the deaths of 62 civilians and the wounding of 196 more.
They said that using these weapons is tantamount to deliberately targeting civilians.
This is a violation of international humanitarian law despite Russia’s not being a party to
the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
Russia’s use of cluster bombs in Ukraine goes much further than the strikes in Kharkhiv.
Regions all over Ukraine have been targeted with these weapons.
Russia has never denied using cluster bombs, and has been rather keen to point out NATO’s
use of its own cluster bombs in the Balkans in 1999.
Russia has been a fierce critic of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, saying that these munitions
are legitimate weapons which have “not been banned by international humanitarian law and
play a significant role in the defense interests of Russia.”
It is in incidents such as these that Ukraine’s desire for cluster bombs becomes more understandable.
If Russia has already used cluster bombs, Ukraine naturally would see no problem with
retaliating in a similar way.
Despite the history of Russian cluster bomb use, Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s Minister of
Defense, threatened escalation, saying that Russia would use “similar” weapons if
American cluster bombs wound up being used in the war.
Ukraine, for its part, had also used cluster bombs prior to the Biden administration’s
decision to deliver more of them to the conflict.
As early as 2014, Ukraine was using the Soviet-era cluster bombs it had inherited in the Donbas
region against pro-Russian separatist forces, although Ukraine denied that it was doing
so back then.
The new American-made cluster bombs should be a much better performing round than Ukraine’s
previous stockpiles.
General Zaluzhny had been very keen on getting his hands on the DPICM.
In his September 2022 interview, he stated that it is a much more effective round than
the high explosive artillery shells the United States had been delivering to Ukraine.
Unlike cluster ammunition, high explosive shells hit a single point and explode.
Although these impacts create shockwaves and thousands of high-speed shell fragments, the
area of effect is much smaller than a cluster bomb.
Although the United States has granted Ukraine DPICM artillery rounds, it has not yet granted
the Mark 20 Rockeye II or the Mark 118 bomblets that it drops.
We will need to see if that changes.
The Biden administration is probably hoping that it will not need to provide these weapons
and risk further alienating international allies and partners.
If the DPICM artillery rounds make enough of a difference in the counteroffensive, then
there is less of a need to send more cluster bombs to Ukraine and contaminate the country
with the duds.
That is an important consideration for Ukraine’s prospects both during and after the war.
Although examples of Russian cluster bomb use in the current conflict abound, the Ukrainians
will need to take heed of the example Russia has set.
The first delivery of American cluster bombs to Ukraine was confirmed by the Pentagon on
July 13th.
We must now wait to see how Ukraine exactly will use them on the battlefield, and where
it will do so.
The answers will come shortly.
Ukraine’s new cluster bombs should prove more effective than the Soviet-era munitions
it had been using, but more than any other weapon granted to Ukraine so far in the war,
this type of munition divides Western opinion.
Since securing Western support for the duration of its war with Russia remains the most important
item on the strategic agenda for Ukraine, it will need to be more careful with how it
uses cluster bombs than any other weapon in its arsenal.
If it uses them in a reckless or less than discriminate way, it will risk undermining
the Western support so vital for its war effort.
The negative response of so many NATO allies to the news of the Biden administration’s
decision will undoubtedly provoke caution in the Ukrainian high command about how these
weapons should be deployed.
But what do you think?
Is it a good idea to give Ukraine cluster bombs?
Where would the Ukrainians use them in their offensive operations and how?
Do you think they could change the course of the war?
Let us know in the comments and don’t forget to hit that luck button and subscribe for
more military analysis from military experts.