Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1965149068-scaled

UK to send controversial ‘depleted uranium’ rounds to Ukraine

The weapons are exceptionally good at breaking through armor but carry risks of long-term harm to civilians.

Europe
google cta
google cta

The British government said Tuesday that it will send depleted uranium (DU) rounds to Ukraine in a move that is sure to draw fire from critics of the controversial weapon.

In a brief explanation of the decision, a senior UK defense official noted that the rounds are “highly effective in defeating modern tanks and armoured vehicles.” She did not address the growing body of evidence that the ammunition causes birth defects and cancers among civilians and soldiers alike.

Russian leaders quickly denounced the move as escalatory. “If all this happens, Russia will have to respond accordingly, given that the West collectively is already beginning to use weapons with a nuclear component,” warned Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Defense minister Sergei Shoigu echoed Putin’s threat, noting that “fewer and fewer” steps of escalation remain before a “nuclear collision.”

If the United Kingdom follows through on the announcement, it will become the first country to openly send the controversial shells to Ukraine. To date, Washington has refused to say whether it plans to provide Kyiv with DU ammunition, though the Pentagon has pledged at least one type of armored vehicle that is known to use such weapons.

DU is a remarkably hard substance, making it an effective material for rounds meant to break through the reinforced shells of armored vehicles and tanks. The United States used the weapons extensively in Iraq and reportedly deployed them in Syria during the fight against ISIS. Russia also claims to have DU rounds, though it remains unclear if the Kremlin has used them in Ukraine.

Despite their military prowess, research suggests that DU shells can cause long-term environmental damage as well as cancer and birth defects.

“Contamination from Depleted Uranium (DU) munitions and other military-related pollution is suspected of causing a sharp [rise] in congenital birth defects, cancer cases, and other illnesses throughout much of Iraq,” wrote journalist Dahr Jamail in an investigation for Al Jazeera. “Many prominent doctors and scientists contend that DU contamination is also connected to the recent emergence of diseases that were not previously seen in Iraq, such as new illnesses in the kidney, lungs, and liver, as well as total immune system collapse.”

Given these concerns, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) slammed Britain’s decision, arguing that it “will only increase the long-term suffering of the civilians caught up in this conflict.”

“CND has repeatedly called for the UK government to place an immediate moratorium on the use of depleted uranium weapons and to fund long-term studies into their health and environmental impacts,” said CND General Secretary Kate Hudson in a statement. “Sending them into yet another war zone will not help the people of Ukraine.”


Great Britain plans to send Ukraine a squadron of Challenger 2 tanks equipped with depleted uranium shells. (Shutterstock/ Martin Hibberd)
google cta
Europe
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Ilham Aliyev azerbaijan iran
Top photo credit: Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev visited Embassy of Islamic Republic of Iran, offered condolences over death of former President Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, in 2017. (Office of the President of Azerbaijan/public domain)

Neocons wanted an Azeri uprising against Iran. They didn't get it.

Middle East

With Iran resisting the U.S./Israeli onslaught for the second week, what was supposed to be a quick transition to a pro-U.S. regime following the decapitation strike that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is fast turning into a quagmire. While the U.S. and Israel continue to sow mayhem on Tehran from the skies, the previously unthinkable option of sending ground troops to Iran is gaining ground.

First, an apparent plan was being hatched to employ Kurdish fighters to take on Tehran. Then, when drones, allegedly flying from Iran although Tehran denied it, struck the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan — hitting an airport terminal and a village school, and wounding four civilians — the stage appeared set for the opening of a northern front against Iran. Here was an alleged act of aggression from Iranian territory against Israel's closest partner in the South Caucasus. It offered the pretext to goad Azerbaijan into joining the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.

keep readingShow less
Trump miami press conference iran
Top photo credit: Trump press conference on Iran, Miami, 3/9/26 (PBS screengrab)

Trump press conference reveals a man who wants out of war

QiOSK

Trump’s “all over the place” press conference at his Miami resort on Monday appears to have had two key objectives: a) Calm the markets by signalling the conflict may soon be over because it has been so "successful,” and b) Prepare the ground for Trump ending the war through a unilateral declaration of victory.

Though ending a war that never should have been started in the first place — rather than fighting it endlessly in the pursuit of an illusory victory as the U.S. did in Afghanistan — is the right move, it won’t be as easy as Trump appears to think.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.