Friday, July 07, 2023

CLUSTER BOMBS KILL KIDS

US to send cluster munitions banned by over 100 nations to Ukraine after months of debate


The US will send cluster munitions to Ukraine as part of a new military aid package, following months of debate within the Biden administration about whether to provide Kyiv with the controversial weapons banned by over 100 countries including key US allies.
"I'm not going to stand up here and say it is easy," Sullivan told reporters. "It's a difficult decision. It's a decision we deferred. It's a decision that required a real hard look at the potential harm to civilians. And when we put all of that together, there was a unanimous recommendation from the national security team, and President Biden ultimately decided, in consultation with allies and partners and in consultation with members of Congress, to move forward on this strategy."
President Joe Biden approved the transfer of the munitions this week, officials told CNN. CNN first reported last week that the administration was strongly considering the move, as Ukrainian forces have struggled to make major gains in their counteroffensive against Russia.
Joe Biden has celebrated the passage of a deal that would avert a global financial crisis.
Joe Biden has celebrated the passage of a deal that would avert a global financial crisis. (AP)
Throughout the conflict the US has, in the face of intense lobbying, gradually agreed to Kyiv's requests for more aggressive weaponry including Patriot Missile systems and modern tanks, but the decision to send cluster munitions marks a watershed moment with the Biden administration agreeing to send a weapon that most countries have agreed should have no place in modern warfare.
Biden said in an interview with CNN's Fareed Zakaria Friday that it was a "difficult decision" to provide Ukraine with cluster munitions for the first time, but that he was ultimately convinced to send the controversial weapons because Kyiv needs ammunition in its counteroffensive against Russia.
"It was a very difficult decision on my part. And by the way, I discussed this with our allies, I discussed this with our friends up on the Hill," Biden said, adding, "The Ukrainians are running out of ammunition."
The munitions will be compatible with the US-provided 155 mm howitzers, a key piece of artillery that has allowed Ukraine to win back territory over the last year, according to the Pentagon. In a statement announcing a new round of aid to Ukraine, the Defense Department said the US will be providing "155mm artillery rounds, including DPICM," or Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions – the type of cluster munition the US currently has in its stockpiles.
Dr. Colin Kahl, the under secretary of defence for policy, told reporters on Friday that Ukraine gave "assurances in writing" that they would not use the cluster munitions in urban areas "that are populated by civilians, and that there would be a careful accounting of where they use these weapons."
A resident walks past an apartment building heavily damaged in Russian attacks in Irpin, Ukraine.
A resident walks past an apartment building heavily damaged in Russian attacks in Irpin, Ukraine. (AP)

Risk to civilians

Cluster munitions scatter "bomblets" across large areas that can fail to explode on impact and can pose a long-term risk to anyone who encounters them, similar to landmines. Over 100 countries, including the UK, France, and Germany, have outlawed the munitions under the Convention on Cluster Munitions, but the US and Ukraine are not signatories to the ban.
German defence minister Boris Pistorias said on Friday that providing the munitions to Ukraine is "not an option" for Berlin because it is a signatory to the convention. But he declined to weigh in on the US' decision to do so. "Those countries that have not signed the convention - China, Russia, Ukraine and the US - it is not up to me to comment on their actions."
Human rights advocates have condemned the move. Human Rights Watch said in a report on Thursday that "transferring these weapons would inevitably cause long-term suffering for civilians and undermine the international opprobrium of their use."
Ukrainian servicemen prepare ammunition for self-propelled howitzer "Bohdana" before firing towards Russian positions near Bakhmut, Ukraine, Friday, July 7, 2023.
Ukrainian servicemen prepare ammunition for self-propelled howitzer "Bohdana" before firing towards Russian positions near Bakhmut, Ukraine, Friday, July 7, 2023. (AP)
Biden will overrule statutory restrictions imposed by Congress on exporting munitions with a greater than 1 per cent "dud" rate – the munitions the US is set to provide may have a dud rate of up to 2.35 per cent, Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder said on Thursday. Biden will invoke section 614 of the Foreign Assistance Act to waive those restrictions, a defence official said, which allows the president to provide foreign aid regardless of export restrictions if it is in the national security interest of the United States.
Kahl reiterated on Friday that the Pentagon would not be providing munitions with a dud rate over 2.35 per cent, a rate which was "demonstrated through five comprehensive tests conducted by the Department of Defence between 1998 and 2020."
A higher dud rate means more of the small bomblets scattered by cluster munitions fail to explode on impact, posing a risk to civilians who may encounter them later. Ryder said the Russians have been using cluster munitions with a dud rate of as high as 40 per cent.
Ukrainian officials have been pushing the US to provide the munitions since last year, arguing that they would provide more ammunition for Western-provided artillery and rocket systems, and help narrow Russia's numerical superiority in artillery.

Biden reluctant at first

Biden was reluctant at first, officials told CNN, given how many countries worldwide have banned the munitions.
But changing battlefield conditions inside Ukraine over the last three weeks prompted US officials to give them renewed and serious consideration, and the Pentagon recommended to Biden that the munitions be provided to Ukraine at least on a temporary basis until non-cluster ammunition is able to be resupplied, officials said.
It is not clear whether the heavy amount of artillery ammunition the Ukrainians have been expending day-to-day would be sustainable without the cluster munitions if the counteroffensive drags on, officials and military analysts said. Biden ultimately agreed with their assessment.
Vehicles destroyed by Russian attacks are piled up in a lot as a driving instructor, foreground, talks to his student driver in Irpin, Ukraine.
Vehicles destroyed by Russian attacks are piled up in a lot as a driving instructor, foreground, talks to his student driver in Irpin, Ukraine. (AP)
Russia's Ambassador to Belarus Boris Gryzlov said the US decision was "a move of desperation."
"As part of the continued assistance to the Kiev regime, Washington is considering the possibility of sending cluster munitions to Ukraine. There has been talk about it since spring," Gryzlov told Russian state news agency TASS on Friday.
"Now, the 'hawks' in the West have realized that the much-advertised counter-offensive of the Ukrainian armed forces did not go according to plan, so they are trying at all costs to give at least some impetus to it. In fact, it is a move of desperation," Gryzlov said.

US to give Ukraine widely banned cluster munitions despite fears

Banned by many countries, cluster munitions leave unexploded bombs that pose a risk to civilians for decades to come.


US to send cluster bombs to Ukraine despite humanitarian concerns


By Ali Harb
Published On 7 Jul 2023

Washington, DC – The United States has authorised the transfer of cluster munitions to Ukraine against the objections of rights advocates who have been calling for a ban on the weapons, which they say endanger civilians.

The administration of President Joe Biden confirmed the move on Friday, arguing that US-made cluster bombs are safer than the ones Russia is already using in the conflict. The transfer comes as Ukraine pushes on with a counteroffensive against Russian troops in the east of the country.

“We recognise that cluster munitions create a risk of civilian harm from unexploded ordnance,” US national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters.

“This is why we’ve 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.”

Sullivan added that cluster munitions would serve as a “bridge” to supplement conventional artillery as the US ramps up production of regular bombs and shells for Ukraine.

Biden later told CNN that it was a “very difficult decision” on his part, adding that the “Ukrainians are running out of ammunition”.

The weapons are part of a tranche of US military assistance to Ukraine that also includes armoured vehicles and anti-armour weapons, the Pentagon announced.

Rights advocates slammed the Biden administration’s decision, highlighting their threat to Ukrainian civilians.

Sarah Yager, the Washington director at Human Rights Watch, called the US move “devastating”.

“They are absolutely awful for civilians.” Yager told Al Jazeera in a television interview. “I think when legislators and policymakers here in the United States see the photos coming back of children with missing limbs, parents injured, killed by our own American cluster munitions, there’s going to be a real awakening to the humanitarian disaster that this is.”

Why the US sending cluster bombs to Ukraine is significant


UN opposition


Each cluster bomb can contain hundreds of smaller explosives that spread across a targeted area, but not all of these bomblets detonate on impact. The unexploded bombs, known as duds, can remain embedded in the ground for years, posing a serious danger to civilians, most notably children.

While cluster munitions are not banned internationally, more than 120 countries – including most NATO members – have signed on to a convention prohibiting their use. The US, Ukraine and Russia are not party to that agreement.

On Friday, Farhan Haq, a spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, reiterated the UN chief’s support for the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

“He wants countries to abide by the terms of that convention, and so as a result, of course, he does not want there to be continued use of cluster munitions on the battlefield,” Haq said.

Germany, a NATO member and top Ukraine ally, has also voiced opposition to sending cluster munitions to Ukraine.

But NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg suggested that the alliance does not take a position on the issue, leaving it to the individual states to make their own policies.

“Cluster munition is already in use in the war on both sides. The difference is that Russia uses the cluster munitions in a war of aggression to occupy, to control, to invade Ukraine while Ukraine is using it to defend itself against aggression,” Stoltenberg told Al Jazeera’s diplomatic editor James Bays in an interview.

But Yager dismissed the argument that Russia’s use of the weapons justifies further deployment of cluster munitions by Ukraine. “The fact that Russia is using them is just another reason why they should not be used,” she said.

With the US providing military support, Ukraine has been making only modest gains in a much-anticipated counteroffensive launched last month.

Last year, US envoy to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield slammed Russia for using “exceptionally lethal” weapons in Ukraine, including cluster munitions.

On Friday, Sullivan said Washington has “written assurances” from Kyiv that it would use the cluster munitions in a careful way to minimise civilian harm.

How cluster munitions work

Patrick Fruchet, a landmine clearance expert, said explosive remnants of war – bombs that “fail to go bang” when launched – are a major source of risk in conflict areas.

Fruchet said the main concern with cluster munitions is their failure rate and their “twitchy” qualities, which makes the unexploded devices vulnerable to detonation when handled.

“You see a lot of children coming upon novel-looking devices and being attracted to them because they’re unusual, … and there’s a tendency to pick them up,” he said.

The Pentagon said on Thursday that the cluster bombs it is considering providing to Ukraine have a dud rate lower than 2.35 percent.

But Fruchet said the dud estimate on the explosives are unreliable, citing his experience with the UN Mine Action Service in Afghanistan, where he dealt with cluster bombs with a supposed failure rate of 5 percent.

“The teams on the ground, we saw failure rates of up to 40 percent based on going out and clearing the space – knowing how many cluster munitions would have been in one clamshell and then basically counting how many we had to clear,” he said.



Unlike landmines, cluster bombs are not designed to be triggered by the proximity of people or vehicles; they are meant to explode when dropped. But once left unexploded, the bomblets “function in practice very similarly to landmines” – they go off if they are disturbed, Fruchet told Al Jazeera.

The duds can still detonate decades after they are dropped. “There’s no reason to believe that they ever really become inert, that they ever become harmless,” Fruchet said. “These things are made to an industrial standard. They’re often stored for a long time.”

For example in south Lebanon, cluster munitions fired by Israel during the 2006 war continue to endanger civilians today.

On Friday, Amnesty International slammed the US decision and called on Washington to reconsider its policy.

“The USA’s plan to transfer cluster munitions to Ukraine is a retrograde step, which undermines the considerable advances made by the international community in its attempts to protect civilians from such dangers both during and after armed conflicts,” the group said in a statement.

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA

The US will provide cluster munitions to Ukraine as part of a new military aid package: AP sources
ANTI-CLUSTER BOMB TREATY NOT SIGNED BY US, UKRAINE, RUSSIA

The Canadian Press
Thu, July 6, 2023 



WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration has decided to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine and is expected to announce on Friday that the Pentagon will send thousands as part of the latest military aid package for the war effort against Russia, according to people familiar with the decision.

The decision comes despite widespread concerns that the controversial bombs can cause civilian casualties. The Pentagon will provide munitions that have a reduced “dud rate,” meaning there will be far fewer unexploded rounds that can result in unintended civilian deaths.

U.S. officials said Thursday that the cluster munitions would be part of about $800 million in new military assistance to Ukraine.

Long sought by Ukraine, cluster bombs are weapons that open in the air, releasing submunitions, or “bomblets,” that are dispersed over a large area and are intended to wreak destruction on multiple targets at once.

The officials and others familiar with the decision were not authorized to publicly discuss the move before the official announcement and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Ukrainian officials have asked for the weapons to aid their campaign to push through lines of Russian troops and make gains in the ongoing counteroffensive. Russian forces are already using cluster munitions on the battlefield, U.S. officials have said.

According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, some cluster munitions leave behind “bomblets’’ that have a high rate of failure to explode — up to 40% in some cases. U.S. officials said Thursday that the rate of unexploded ordnance for the munitions that will be going to Ukraine is less than 3% and therefore will mean fewer threats left behind to civilians.

Cluster bombs can be fired by artillery that the U.S. has provided to Ukraine, and the Pentagon has a large stockpile of them.

The last large-scale American use of cluster bombs was during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, according to the Pentagon. But U.S. forces considered them a key weapon during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, according to Human Rights Watch. In the first three years of that conflict, it is estimated the U.S.-led coalition dropped more than 1,500 cluster bombs in Afghanistan.

Proponents of banning cluster bombs say they kill indiscriminately and endanger civilians long after their use. Groups have raised alarms about Russia’s use of the munitions in Ukraine.

A convention banning the use of cluster bombs has been joined by more than 120 countries who agreed not to use, produce, transfer or stockpile the weapons and to clear them after they’ve been used.

The United States, Russia and Ukraine are among the countries that have not signed on.

It is not clear how America’s NATO allies would view the U.S. providing cluster bombs to Ukraine and whether the issue might prove divisive for their largely united support of Kyiv. More than two-thirds of the 30 countries in the alliance are signatories of the 2010 convention on cluster munitions.

Laura Cooper, a deputy assistant secretary of defense focusing on Russia and Ukraine, recently testified to Congress that the Pentagon has assessed that such munitions would help Kyiv press through Russia’s dug-in positions.

____ AP Diplomatic Writer Matthew Lee contributed to this report.

Nomaan Merchant, Lolita C. Baldor And Ellen Knickmeyer, The Associated Press


US plans to send controversial cluster munitions to Ukraine- reports

Madeline Halpert - BBC News, New York
Fri, July 7, 2023 

President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the U.S. economy at a factory that makes solar energy microinverters South Carolina on July 6, 2023

The US is planning to send Ukraine a cluster munitions package to help in its counteroffensive against Russia, US media reports.

Ukraine has been asking for the weapons for months amid an ammunition shortage.

Cluster munitions - which are banned by more than 100 countries - are a class of weapons that contain multiple explosive bomblets called submunitions.

The Biden administration is expected to announce the package on Friday, the BBC's US partner CBS News reports.

US officials had reportedly been hesitant to supply Ukraine with cluster munitions as they can kill indiscriminately over a wide area, threatening civilians. The US has a stockpile of these cluster bombs, which were first developed during World War II.

The munitions are controversial because of their high failure rates, meaning unexploded bomblets can linger on the ground for years and possibly detonate later on.

US law prohibits the transfer of cluster munitions with bomblet failure rates higher than 1% - meaning more than 1% of the bomblets in the weapon do not explode - but President Joe Biden is able to bypass this rule.

Defence Department officials told reporters on Thursday the Biden administration was considering sending cluster munitions with a failure rate lower than 2.35%.

The Pentagon noted that Russia has already been using cluster bombs in Ukraine with even higher failure rates. A United Nations investigation found Ukraine has likely used them as well, though the country has denied doing so.

Evidence of widespread use of cluster munitions in Kharkiv

Officials are planning to send artillery shells to Ukraine, with each containing 88 separate bomblets, according to US media reports. They would be fired from Howitzer artillery weapons already deployed by the Ukrainian army.

The aid package also includes Bradley and Stryker fighting vehicles, air defence missiles and anti-mine equipment, officials told reporters.

Human rights groups have urged Russia and Ukraine not to use cluster munitions and have asked the US not to supply them.

In a statement on Friday, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights once again called on the countries not to use cluster bombs, arguing they were dangerous.

"Cluster munitions scatter small bomblets over a wide area, many of which fail to explode immediately," said office spokesperson Marta Hurtado. "They can kill and maim years later. That's why use should stop immediately."

Some US lawmakers have also asked the Biden administration not to send the weapons, arguing their humanitarian costs outweigh their benefits in the battlefield.

Defence Department official Laura Cooper told Congress last month that military analysts had found that cluster bombs would be "useful, especially against dug-in Russian positions".

The Biden administration's new weapons package is worth $800 million (£626.5m), CBS News reported.

What are cluster munitions, the weapons the US is sending to Ukraine?

Victoria Bisset and Eve Sampson
Jul 08 2023

Following months of debate within his administration, US President Joe Biden has approved the provision to Ukraine of long-sought cluster munitions, bypassing legal restrictions.

The munitions are banned in much of the world. Here is what to know about them and why they are so controversial.

What exactly are cluster munitions?

Dating back to the 1940s, cluster munitions disperse submunitions over wide areas. The munitions are launched using the same artillery the United States and other Western nations have sent to Ukraine since the start of the war, including howitzers.

The US has a stockpile of cluster munitions, but is last known to have used the weapons in battle in Iraq in 2003, according to the Associated Press. The US is not providing Ukraine with cluster bombs intended to be dropped from planes.

On Thursday, Human Rights Watch published new evidence suggesting that Ukrainian forces have already injured civilians by use of cluster munitions, which Russian forces have used far more extensively, also causing civilian deaths


CARL COURT/GETTY IMAGES
Young boys play around a spent cluster munition in Dubove, Ukraine.

Why is America sending them to Ukraine?

Facing diminishing Western stocks of artillery rounds and deeply entrenched Russian forces, the Ukrainian counteroffensive, intended to return the country to pre-invasion borders, has progressed slower than Western officials had hoped.

Amid Ukrainian frustration over Western expectations in the absence of overriding artillery superiority and fighter jets yet to arrive, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was pushing the American government for cluster munitions, claiming they are the most effective way for Ukrainian forces to push quickly though expansive Russian trenches and deadly minefields.

Why are cluster munitions controversial?

Over 120 nations have joined a convention pledging not to use the weapons because of their indiscriminate nature.

Not only do they fall over a very wide area, which leads to potential civilian casualties during conflicts, but many submunitions fail to explode on impact. This means they can continue to kill or maim people long after a war has ended.

The International Committee of the Red Cross said in 2010 that between 10 and 40% of ordnance released by cluster munitions used in recent conflicts failed to explode immediately, presenting a major threat to civilians. The Convention on Cluster Munitions prevents the use, development, stockpiling or transfer of the munitions. But Russia, Ukraine and the US are not signatories to the agreement.

For the past seven years, the US Congress has stipulated that cluster munitions with a failure rate of more than 1% cannot be produced, transferred or used.

But the munitions in question, the M864 artillery shell, dates back to 1987 and may have a “dud” rate of 6%, according to the last public assessment by the Pentagon from over two decades ago. The Pentagon said it has more recent assessments of 2.35% or below, but that would still be above the limit set by Congress.


SCOTT OLSON/GETTY IMAGES
Residents take pictures of the remains of a missile that dropped cluster bombs in Sloviansk, Ukraine.

In its new report, Human Rights Watch accused Moscow and Kyiv of using the weapons since the February 2022 invasion, leading to deaths and serious injuries among civilians.

In one incident in the early days of the war, Ukrainian authorities and witnesses alleged Russian used the munitions in an attack on a train station that killed 50 people.

Mary Wareham, acting arms director of Human Rights Watch, said the weapons “are killing civilians now and will continue to do so for many years”.

What other nations use cluster munitions?

Evidence suggests Russia has used cluster munitions to a greater extent than Ukraine since invading the country last year.

Human rights organisations documented and heavily criticised the US over its extensive use of cluster bombs during the initial years of the Afghanistan invasion.

Israel fired millions of cluster munitions into Lebanon in 2006, during a short conflict against Hezbollah, which also fired cluster munitions into Israel. The United Nations estimated that of the 4 million submunitions fired by Israel, up to 1 million remained unexploded at the end of the conflict, killing Lebanese civilians.

The munitions have been used by both Russian and Syrian forces in Syria, destroying cities like Aleppo and killing civilians amid the civil war there.

Human Rights Watch documented Saudi Arabia using cluster munitions made by the US against Houthi rebels in Yemen, a move the group said leaves civilians in an already deadly region in added danger due to unexploded ordnance.



https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/weapons/cluster-munitions

The 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions prohibits the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions and requires States to ensure that they ...

https://treaties.unoda.org/t/cluster_munitions

Convention on Cluster Munitions. Status of the treaty; Text of the treaty. Adopted in Dublin: 30 May 2008. Opened for signature in Oslo: 3 December 2008.

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/en-gb/cluster-bombs/what-is-a-cluster-bomb.aspx

The cluster bomb ban was achieved because people from around the world took action. It will only be joined and enforced by all countries if individuals and ...

https://www.clusterconvention.org

The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) was born out of a collective determination to address the humanitarian consequences and unacceptable harm to civilians ...

https://www.clusterconvention.org/files/publications/A-Guide-to-Cluster-Munitions.pdf

91 items ... Anti–Personnel Mine Ban. Convention. BAC battle area clearance. CBU cluster bomb unit. CCP circular error probable. CCW. Convention on Certain.


New hazards of war enclose Belarusian town with turbulent past

Guy Faulconbridge
Fri, July 7, 2023 

A tent camp at a disused military base near the Belarusian village of Tsel


By Guy Faulconbridge

OSIPOVICHI, Belarus (Reuters) - A Belarusian town with a turbulent past may hold some haunting new secrets: an empty camp that mutinous Russian mercenaries have yet to use and perhaps even a storage facility for tactical nuclear weapons Russia says it has deployed in Belarus.

In a former military camp surrounded by fir and birch forest just north of Osipovichi, more than 300 large tents have been put up by the Belarusian army but Wagner mercenaries have yet to say if they want to use it.

Belarus invited foreign journalists to visit the empty camp beside the village of Tsel as part of an attempt to deflate reports that the camp had been prepared specially for Wagner as part of a deal to end its June 24 mutiny in Russia.

The camp, empty besides mosquitoes, raises questions about the fate of the deal President Vladimir Putin struck to defuse the biggest challenge to the Russian state since the failed 1991 hardline coup attempt against Mikhail Gorbachev.

President Alexander Lukashenko has offered Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin the use of camps including the one at Tsel, though he said on Thursday that Prigozhin and his fighters were still in Russia. It is unclear why.

No one from Wagner has yet visited the camp, said General-Major Leonid Kasinsky, an aide to the Belarusian defence ministry for ideological work.

"You journalists should not try to make a sensation out of nothing," Kasinsky told foreign reporters at the camp, about 90 km (56 miles) south of the capital Minsk and around 230 km (140 miles) north of the Ukrainian border.

"This is a summer camp created as part of a training exercise," said Kasinsky. "No one from Wagner has yet come here to inspect the camp."

Osipovichi has long swayed to the tides of European history. It was once part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and then the Russian empire, it hosted Bolshevik revolutionaries and was occupied by Nazi Germany before the Red Army took it back in World War Two.

NUCLEAR WEAPONS?


Amid today's Ukraine war, the biggest land war in Europe since 1945, the town is again being enclosed by the tentacles of distant tumult.

Just east of the town, nestled behind forest, lies a secret installation that the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency believes was visited by a senior Russian officer as a potential upgrade to nuclear weapons storage, according to the Federation of American Scientists.

Its top nuclear researcher, Hans Kristensen, said in a research note that it had yet to find visual evidenceconclusively indicating the presence of an active nuclear weapons facility on the territory of Belarus.

Asked about the research which indicated the installation might be used for nuclear weapons, Kasinsky said: "Perhaps the CIA thinks that; I don't know what that's based on.

"No one is ever going to tell you where the tactical nuclear weapons are stationed - you should understand that," Kasinsky said. He repeatedly refused to confirm or deny whether the nuclear weapons were outside Osipovichi.

To the west of Osipovichi is a training base where nuclear-capable Iskander short-range missile launchers that Russia transferred to Belarus in 2022 have been spotted. Iskanders are one of the delivery vehicles for the nuclear warheads which Minsk and Moscow now say are in Belarus.

To the south of town is a Belarusian military base.

In the town, a large statue of Vladimir Lenin strides forward into the Communist future that is no more, graced now on the main square by several pharmacies, a cafe called "Youth", a supermarket, a bank and a smattering of foreign cars.

"Why the hell do we need Wagner here?" I don't see anything good from having them here," said Ilya Petrov, a 50-year-old resident. "We don't need such comrades just as we don't need any war either. We are a peaceful people, a peaceful country - but it seems some want to make us totally unpeaceful."

Another resident who asked that his name not to be used due to the sensitivity of speaking about politics in Belarus voiced concerns about the convicts who were recruited to Wagner with promises of pardons after fighting in Ukraine.

Lukashenko said on Thursday that Russia had already deployed tactical nuclear weapons on his territory, and derided the West's spies for missing the transport of the warheads, which he said had not gone by land.

"You should not try to make some sort of horror story out of the tactical nuclear weapons," said Kasinsky.

"We don't want to fight with anyone but... if anyone in the West is hoping that in the case of aggression against us then only the wives and children of Belarusians will weep, then they are deeply mistaken."

(Reporting by Guy Faulconbridge; editing by Mark Heinrich)
‘Grim milestone’ as Ukraine war reaches 500-day mark


07 July 2023


The UN deplored the horrendous civilian cost of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which reached the 500-day mark on Friday.

The war began on 24 February 2022, and the UN’s Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMUOpens in new window) has confirmed that more than 9,000 civilians, including over 500 children, have been killed since then, though the real number could be much higher.

“Today we mark another grim milestone in the war that continues to exact a horrific toll on Ukraine’s civilians,” said Opens in new windowNoel Calhoun, deputy head of the Mission.
Recent deadly attacks

The HRMMU reported that overall monthly casualties decreased earlier this year when compared to 2022, but the average number rose again in May and June, with the last two weeks among some of the deadliest since fighting began.

Recent attacks include the missile strike on a busy shopping area in the eastern city of Kramatorsk on the evening of 27 June, which killed 13 people.

Among the victims was award-winning writer and human rights defender Viktoriia Amelina, who succumbed to her injuries earlier this week.

Just days after the attack, 10 civilians were killed in another missile strike in Lviv, located in western Ukraine.

Thousands of casualties


The information about civilian deaths is contained in the latest report on civilian casualties in UkraineOpens in new window, published by the UN Human Rights Office, OHCHROpens in new window, which covers the period from the start of the war through 30 June 2023.

Overall, 25,170 civilian casualties were recorded, with 9,177 killed and 15,993 injured.

Of this number, and whose sex was known, 61 per cent were men and 39 per cent were women. Boys comprised more than 57 per cent of casualties among children whose sex was known, and girls 42.8 per cent.

OHCHR also received information regarding 22 civilian casualties in Russian-occupied Crimea and the city of Sevastopol. They included five men and one woman who were killed, and 16 people who were injured – two children and 14 adults, whose sex is yet unknown.
Nuclear power plant update

Meanwhile, experts deployed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEAOpens in new window) at the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) in southern Ukraine have not observed any visible indications of mines or explosives there, Director-General Rafael Mariano Grossi said Opens in new windowon Wednesday.

Europe’s largest nuclear plant has been in Russian hands since the early days of the war, and both sides have accused the other of shelling the facility.

The IAEA had previously indicated that it was aware of reports that mines and other explosives have been placed in and around the plant, which is located on the frontline of the conflict.

“Following our requests, our experts have gained some additional access at the site. So far, they have not seen any mines or explosives, but they still need more access, including to the rooftops of reactor units 3 and 4 and parts of the turbine halls,” Mr. Grossi said, expressing hope that access will be granted soon.

The experts have inspected parts of the plant in recent days and weeks, and continued to conduct regular walkdowns across the site.

On Wednesday, they were “also able to check a wider section of the perimeter of the ZNPP’s large cooling pond than previously”, the IAEA said.
DEFENSE
Could Ukraine’s Nuclear Weapons Have Deterred Russian Invasion?


July 8, 2023
By Khushbakht Shahid

0 Comments


After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Ukraine inherited the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world. It, however, decided to give up its nuclear weapons, and instead opted to sign the NPT and subsequently gained security and economic assurances from the major powers. The United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom, under the Budapest Memorandum, assured Ukraine that its territorial integrity and sovereignty will not be harmed. Russia is currently in clear violation of this memorandum, and the dilemma is that assurances, unlike guarantees, are not legally binding and do not oblige the major powers to intervene militarily on Ukraine’s behalf. Now one prevailing idea is that this invasion could have been prevented if Ukraine never gave up its Soviet nuclear weapons because then, nuclear deterrence, which entails the threat of mutual destruction, would prevent the attack.

The statement by Pavlo Rizanenko, a member of the Ukrainian Parliament, while talking to USA Today, reflected this assumption. According to him, “Now there’s a strong sentiment in Ukraine that we made a big mistake,” He added, “In the near future, no matter how the situation is resolved in Crimea, we need a stronger Ukraine…If you have nuclear weapons, people don’t invade you.” Statements like these manifest the opinion that giving up nuclear weapons was a mistake on Ukraine’s part, and that, had these weapons not been given up, the Russian invasion would not have happened. But the important question here is how effective of a deterrent would these nuclear weapons serve against Russia, had they not been given up, and whether they would be credible enough to prevent the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

There is a widespread assumption that the deterrence associated with nuclear weapons automatically provides a guarantee against an attack. Historical examples do not support this claim. There have been instances where nuclear deterrence has prevented crises from being escalated to full-fledged wars, but conflicts and limited wars have still happened. Taking Kargil War as an example, two nuclear powers, India and Pakistan, engaged in a war with each other. Both had nuclear weapons, but these could not prevent them from fighting directly with each other. Also, apart from deterrence, the culmination of Kargil War had other factors, such as diplomacy, involved. Though nuclear deterrence might have prevented the war from posing an existential threat to either country, deterrence may fail when a state’s vital interests are threatened, and there is no guarantee that a state will not use nuclear weapons to secure them.

Therefore, there is no reason to suggest that had Ukraine not given up its nuclear weapons, the Russian invasion would not have happened. Nuclear deterrence would have limited effectiveness here. Nuclear weapons can prevent escalation, but they cannot provide a guarantee against an attack, especially when vital state interests are threatened. Deterrence works on the principle of rationality, but rationality may vary from state to state. One can never predict the decisions a state might consider rational when its vital interests are under threat.

Seeing the situation under the theoretical lens of international relations, realism suggests that states cannot be sure of the intentions of other states, and perceive them in the worst light. States are very sensitive to the security environment around them, and in the anarchic international system, self-help is the only way to protect themselves. Even if Ukraine did not have any malign intentions towards Russia at the moment, this might not always be the case. The threat of having a major adversarial bloc, in the form of NATO, just near its borders, and perceiving NATO’s enlargement to the East and Ukraine’s ambitions of joining NATO as a threat to its vital interests, Russia could still have invaded Ukraine, whether or not it had nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons either way do not provide a guarantee against an attack. Thus, the decision to invade Ukraine might have seemed rational to Russia, when it needed to protect its borders.

Also, the possession of nuclear weapons by Ukraine could have made the situation worse, rather than stable. Consider Ukraine had nukes, and the conflict started, there is no reason to suggest that in the fog of war, one state would not launch its nuclear weapons.

This idea asserts that nuclear weapons, while not always effective in preventing an attack, are still effective in preventing the escalation of the crisis, but it is important to take historical context into focus here. Would the idea of Ukraine not giving up Soviet nuclear weapons be possible for it politically and technically at that time?

It is important to acknowledge first that the nuclear weapons Ukraine possessed were never really their own. The launch codes and command and control over the weapons remained with Moscow. Without effective control over the weapons, the Soviet nuclear weapons in Ukraine would lack credibility and could have never served as an effective or even a practical deterrent against future foreign aggression, and given the economic and financial instability of the country, and the lack of appropriate infrastructures then, it seems rather unlikely that Ukraine could have managed to gain independent control over the weapons or maintained them. Thus, the effectiveness of the deterrent is highly doubtful when even the practicality of the weapons is questionable.

Moreover, Ukraine had more to gain than to lose, by giving up its nuclear weapons. The newly independent state was undergoing a political and financial crisis. Giving up nuclear weapons allowed it to sign international treaties, gain economic and security benefits, and improve its relations with the international community. Politically too, US and Russia would not have wanted a state attempting to seize control over nuclear weapons. In short, Ukraine had to give up its nuclear weapons to ensure the political and economic stability of the country. It thus opted to use these weapons as a bargaining chip to gain benefits for itself.

Therefore, though the idea of possession of nuclear weapons seems very attractive, Ukraine at the time of its independence, was not capable of maintaining these nuclear weapons, and therefore the practicality of those weapons would be a matter of concern, let alone their use as a deterrent. Moreover, the belief that these weapons could have prevented the Russia-Ukraine war had Ukraine still somehow managed to gain control over them and maintained them, is not entirely refutable, however, it is important to note that while nuclear deterrence might have prevented the escalation, there is no guarantee that it would have prevented the Russian invasion, as many historical pieces of evidence prove otherwise. However, as the nuclear weapons on Ukrainian territory were never operationally its own, it could have used the opportunity to bargain in a better way, to get strong security guarantees from major powers. Then it could have got the space to choose whatever bloc it wanted to align with.


Khushbakht Shahid
Student of the Department of Strategic Studies at the National Defence University, Islamabad
‘Kiev inflating regional conflict into World War III’, Russian envoy warns US

ByPrapti Upadhayay
Jul 07, 2023 

Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov denies involvement in false-flag provocation at Ukraine's nuclear plant, warns of grave consequences.

Russia's ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, has vehemently dismissed media reports suggesting Moscow's involvement in a false-flag provocation at Ukraine's largest nuclear power plant. In an exclusive interview with Newsweek, Ambassador Antonov alleged that Ukraine was using this narrative to draw NATO into a devastating conflict, cautioning against the grave repercussions that such a situation could entail

.
Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region.(Reuters)

"We call on the curators of the Kiev regime to exercise responsibility and exert influence on their 'wards' in order to avoid a large-scale catastrophe," Antonov told Newsweek. He further emphasized that the failures of the Ukrainian counter offensive were driving them to create a pretext for NATO deployment, potentially inflating a regional conflict into World War III.

Antonov's comments come in the midst of a fierce exchange of accusations between Russian and Ukrainian officials regarding a planned attack at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant (ZNPP). Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky publicly addressed the issue, asserting that objects resembling explosives were detected on the plant's roof, possibly indicating a simulated attack.

While the United States Department of State acknowledged President Zelensky's claims, a spokesperson expressed concern over Russia's military occupation of the plant. The spokesperson warned that such actions not only compromised nuclear safety but also endangered the lives of Ukrainian staff operating the facility. They urged Russia to withdraw its personnel and return control to Ukrainian authorities to prevent a potential nuclear catastrophe.

Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre voiced her concerns over the dangerous situation at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, emphasizing that it should remain a zone free of fighting. However, Jean-Pierre refrained from commenting on a resolution proposed by senators Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal, which would treat any nuclear provocation in Ukraine as a trigger for NATO's Article 5 collective defense clause.

Amidst these allegations and denials, Ambassador Antonov staunchly denied Russia's involvement and labeled such claims as "absurd." He emphasized the presence of Russian and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) personnel at the ZNPP and stressed the protection of the plant's nuclear reactors. However, he acknowledged the vulnerability of other infrastructure facilities such as cooling systems and storage sites for nuclear waste, warning of the potential dangers of any projectile impact.

Also Read | Explosives? Mysterious objects spotted in Russia-occupied Ukraine nuclear plant

Furthermore, Antonov raised suspicions about the timing of the dueling narratives surrounding the Zaporizhzhia situation, connecting them to the upcoming NATO summit in Lithuania. He alleged that Ukraine's authorities sought to exploit a terrorist attack to tarnish Russia's image, divert attention from their own failed counteroffensive, and draw NATO directly into the conflict.

As tensions escalate and the accusations fly between Russia and Ukraine, the world watches anxiously, aware of the dire consequences that any miscalculation or intentional provocation could unleash. The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant stands as a symbol of the dangerous game being played, with the international community holding its breath, hoping for a peaceful resolution that can avert a catastrophe of nuclear proportions.

Russia: Avoid large-scale disaster; European citizens are not ready to march to hell

Western ruling elites should understand that because of a failure on the battlefield, Kyiv wants to create reasons for NATO to deploy its contingent in Ukraine.

SOURCE: RT.RS 

This was stated by the Russian Ambassador to the USA, Anatoly Antonov, adding that the regional conflict would then turn into the third world war.

"Journalists continue to pretend that they do not notice the obvious, since the beginning of the Special Military Operation, all accusations of the Zelensky regime against us turned out to be diversionary operations of Kyiv itself," Antonov told "Newsweek".

However, the stakes are much higher now, the diplomat stressed, adding that Europe's nuclear security is at risk.

According to Antonov, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's statements that Russia planted explosives in the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant are absurd, because it makes no sense that Russia intends to damage the facility it has controlled since March last year. The Kyiv regime uses criminal intentions to divert attention from the "unsuccessful counter-offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, in which the West invested huge resources", and therefore falsely accuses Russia on the eve of the NATO summit in Vilnius.

"The Western ruling elites should understand that, due to the failure on the battlefield, Kyiv wants to create reasons for NATO to deploy its contingent in Ukraine, and the regional conflict would turn into the third world war," the Russian diplomat is sure.

Russia calls on the mentors of the Kyiv regime to take responsibility and influence Ukraine, in order to avoid a large-scale disaster, he emphasized and added that American and European citizens are not ready to march into the hell into which Zelensky's government is dragging the whole planet.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), whose members are based at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, confirmed that it did not find any traces of mines or explosives, as Kyiv initially claimed - not even on the roofs of the reactor buildings. The IAEA observation mission was deployed at the nuclear plant as early as September 2022. Before that, the station and the territory around it was repeatedly targeted by Ukrainian artillery, which Kyiv admitted at one point.

Just before the arrival of the IAEA mission, the Ukrainian military attempted to seize the facility, but were repulsed by the Russian military. Russia provided the UN with evidence of the Ukrainian attacks, but they refused to assign blame to anyone there.

Statements by the Pentagon that Russian armed forces are allegedly disrupting American efforts in the fight against terrorism in the Syrian Arab Republic have nothing to do with common sense, said the Russian ambassador in Washington, TASS reports.

Attacks on the highly professional actions of the Russian army in Syria, according to him, sometimes cross the line of decency. "They deliberately divert attention from the fact that the Americans are violating the safety rules of flying over the Syrian sky every day," said the Russian diplomat and reminded that US soldiers, unlike Russian ones, are in the Arab Republic contrary to the norms of international law. They, under the pretext of fighting terrorism, are actually occupying certain countries, Antonov explained.

The policy of the USA towards Syria has a destructive character; it does not only disrupt the stabilization of the situation and the restoration of the territorial integrity of Syria, but also negatively affects the situation in the entire Middle East, he emphasized.