Concerned about a new legal instrument

Written together with Mexico (Patricia Espinosa)
and Austria (Michael Spindelegger)
Translated from Japanese

The adoption of the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) in 2008 was a significant landmark in the development of international humanitarian law. More than 100 states agreed to a total ban (and joined the convention).  The use of cluster munitions has been limited.  It seriously increased the political price that any users of cluster munitions would have to pay, irrespective of whether they were legally bound by the convention. 

These accomplishments are now challenged.

Countries that still possess cluster munitions have in the context of the CCW, worked on an alternative instrument on cluster munitions. The level of ambition in this instrument is far lower than in the CCM. The proposal comprises a ban of very old cluster munitions and some limited restrictions on newer ones, coupled with long deferral periods.

This is a flawed approach. The proposed restrictions would mean a legitimization of cluster munitions which are known to cause terrible humanitarian problems. Moreover, creating a second and weaker international norm on cluster munitions could have the effect of undermining both the stronger legal norm and the political stigma against cluster munitions.

There is a general recognition that the cluster munitions have an unacceptable humanitarian impact. On this basis it should be possible to continue dialogue among all parties concerned without establishing alternative standards.

Sincere intermediate steps by major military powers that bring added humanitarian value are to be welcomed. Any such steps should now be taken by these states nationally.  How may the commitment towards a total ban on cluster munitions be reconciled with allowing the continued use of these weapons? It can’t. It would be a serious step back for international humanitarian law.