Follow us on social

google cta
New US cluster bombs pose ‘severe, foreseeable dangers’

New US cluster bombs pose ‘severe, foreseeable dangers’

Critics say Washington should walk away from a $210 million contract for Israeli-made weapons

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

A coalition of human rights organizations, anti-war groups, and Christian churches are urging the U.S. to cancel its $210 million purchase of next-generation cluster munitions from an Israeli state-owned company, citing the “severe, foreseeable dangers” these weapons pose to civilians.

In an open letter shared exclusively with RS, the organizations write that cluster munitions “disperse submunitions across broad areas, making it exceedingly difficult to confine their impact to lawful military targets.” By expanding its cluster munitions stockpiles, the U.S. is putting itself “dramatically out of step with civilian protection practices,” the groups argue.

“These weapons’ humanitarian impacts vastly outweigh any possible tactical benefit that they provide,” said Ursala Knudsen-Latta of the Friends Committee on National Legislation, which signed the letter. “Unfortunately, it is really sowing seeds of terror for generations to come anywhere they are used.”

The purchase, first reported by the Intercept earlier this month, represents the latest step in the unraveling of an international consensus against the use or stockpiling of cluster munitions. Years of advocacy, fueled by research showing the long-term dangers of unexploded bomblets left behind after conflict, culminated in the widespread adoption of an anti-cluster munitions treaty in 2010.

The U.S. military stopped using cluster munitions in its own operations back in 2009, and American companies haven’t produced the weapons in years. But Washington never opted to join the treaty or destroy its existing stockpile. (Notably, Russia and China also refused to sign the convention.)

This choice proved consequential. When Russia invaded Ukraine and used cluster munitions of its own, the Biden administration decided to arm Kyiv with the controversial weapons, arguing that they would be “useful especially against dug-in Russian positions.” The move appeared to violate U.S. law, which prohibits the transfer of bombs with a “dud rate” above 1%. But Congress failed to block the initiative, and Ukraine began fielding the weapons in 2023.

In the intervening years, an increasing number of states have expressed interest in using the weapons, including Lithuania, which withdrew from the anti-cluster munitions treaty in 2025. “We're deeply concerned that the U.S. continuing to participate in the use of these weapons will only encourage more allies to do the same,” Knudsen-Latta told RS.

Signatories to the open letter include Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International USA, the United Methodist Church, the Arms Control Association, the Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC), the Center for International Policy, and the Quincy Institute, which publishes RS.


The Defense Department did not respond to a request for comment about how it intends to use its new cluster munitions.

The purchase appears to be part of a broader expansion in the use or stockpiling of cluster munitions by the U.S. military. Late last year, Army Contracting Command solicited bids for new contracts to make the next-generation XM1208 cluster munition, with the stated goal of establishing capacity for producing the weapons within the United States. The new cluster munitions will give U.S. soldiers a capability to “effectively engage imprecisely located enemies within an area,” the notice said, adding that contractors must be able to manufacture at least 30,000 XM1208 rounds per year.

The 155mm artillery shells, produced for now by the Israeli state-owned company Tomer, are made up of nine “bomblets,” each of which contains 1,200 shards of tungsten. Military contractors say the weapons are less dangerous than their predecessors because they include failsafes that keep the dud rate below 1% in testing conditions.

But weapons analysts are skeptical of these safety claims. “What you often see is that in different practice scenarios, the dud rate can vary pretty wildly depending on how and where cluster munitions are used,” John Ramming Chappell of CIVIC said, adding that contractors often test the munitions in computer simulations or under ideal conditions.

In practice, the failure rate is often much higher. The U.S. historically sought to keep dud rates to a maximum of 2%, but when Israel used a previous generation of American cluster munitions in Lebanon in 2006, roughly 40% of bomblets failed to explode on impact, leaving behind thousands of hidden explosives, according to the United Nations. (There is some evidence that Israel has used the XM1208 in its latest war with Hezbollah, but the practical dud rate of the munition has not been revealed.)

Ramming Chappell hopes that Congress will seek to step in and stop the Defense Department’s increasing embrace of cluster munitions. A bipartisan group of 178 House members voted against transferring cluster munitions to Ukraine in 2023, and there’s reason to believe these lawmakers would also scrutinize American use of the weapons.

“I would expect that we'd see potential questions from Congress about why the United States is moving forward with this transfer and what it intends to do with the cluster munitions it's purchasing,” Ramming Chappell said.


Top image credit: A US soldier carries a 155mm cluster munition
google cta
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
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
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

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.