Thursday, September 7, 2006
Behind the Headlines: Legal and operational aspects of the use of cluster bombs
Both international law and accepted practice do not prohibit the use of the family of weapons popularly as 'cluster bombs'. Consequently, the main issue in a discussion of Israel's use of such weaponry should the method of their use, rather than their legality.
A 2002 report by Human Rights Watch on explosive sub-munitions - the category of weapons to which cluster bombs belong - states that these weapons are stocked by 56 countries and have been used by at least nine (including the US, Britain, Russia, and Israel). There are 208 types of sub-munitions, which are manufactured by 33 countries. The US used cluster bombs during the Gulf War, as did NATO forces in Serbia and Kosovo...
etc...
I hate to criticize from afar, but this is another example of another Israeli PR (and possibly practical in that it's an open question whether it was even necessary to use the things) screw-up. It took them until the 5th to get this simple statement up. A little birdy told me about a week before that that this statement was coming ("they never drop them without checking with a special committee about whether it's legal. they have given unifil and the lebanese maps to where they have used them."). I didn't post about it because it just would have been silly for me to have done so..."Oh yeah, they check with a committee before they use them, and yeah, they've given the UN maps as to where they were used..." Lame. Begs the question. Should they have been used? Is it OK that they were used?
Any fool in Israel must have known there would be the usual shit-storm for using the things. Hell, even I remember the controversy from over 20 years ago when they were used against the PLO in Lebanon and the same process of controversy happened. So, if someone with the tactical and strategic planning knowledge decided the weapon should be used, why weren't the powers that be ready with their part of the formula to go on the offense right away and brazen it out when the questions arose on the very first day? "Yes, we used them. They are not illegal and we're not interested in any discussions on the question."
Instead, we supporters are sitting here twisting in the wind along with Israel's image for days (weeks?) while the questions stew. And by the way, if the situation on the ground didn't demand their use, then that's another story for which someone not on the PR side of things should answer. Some of us are here to make the case when there's a good case to make, which is often. But it's not always, and the longer it takes to get a definitive statement, the worse it looks.
But I believe the Geneva convention prohibits their use in civilian areas.
There's also a bit of a problem with unexploded bombs getting found by kids etc.
As for whether PR is to blame: well there's a limit to how much of a spin you can put on some things..