According to reports by the Ukrainian government and human rights groups, Russian troops in Ukraine may have used thermobaric weapons and cluster bombs (or cluster bombs). If true, this represents an escalation of brutality that should alarm us all.
While cluster munitions are banned by international convention, thermobaric munitions, also known as air-fuel explosive devices or “vacuum bombs”, are not expressly banned for use against military targets. These devastating devices, which create an oxygen-consuming fireball followed by a deadly shockwave, are much more powerful than most other conventional weapons.
What is a thermobaric weapon?
Thermobaric weapons are usually deployed as rockets or bombs, and they work by releasing fuel and explosive charges. A variety of fuels can be used, including powdered toxic metals and organic materials containing an oxidizer.
The explosive charge disperses a large cloud of propellant, which then ignites on contact with the oxygen in the surrounding air. This creates a high-temperature fireball as well as a massive shockwave that literally sucks the air out of any living being in the vicinity.
Thermobaric bombs are destructive and effective in urban or open areas and can penetrate bunkers and other underground spaces, depriving their inhabitants of oxygen. There are very few things that can protect humans and other life forms from their explosive and incendiary effects.
A 1990 CIA report cited by Human Rights Watch described the effects of a thermobaric explosion in an enclosed space: “People near the point of ignition are dispersed. Those on the periphery are subject to many internal and therefore invisible injuries, including ruptured eardrums, crushed inner ear organs, severe concussions, ruptured lungs and internal organs, and even death. Blindness”.
horror story
Elementary versions of thermobaric weapons were developed by Germany during World War II. Western states, as well as the Soviet Union and, more recently, Russia have used them since the 1960s.
The Soviet Union is believed to have used thermobaric weapons against China during the Sino-Soviet conflict of 1969, and in Afghanistan during its takeover of the country in 1979. Moscow also used them in Chechnya and reportedly supplied them to separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine .
The United States used these weapons in Vietnam and in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Although thermobaric weapons have not yet been officially banned, there are several arguments against their development and use.
International humanitarian law determines what is permitted and what is not allowed in time of war. It has long been known that even wars have limits: some weapons are considered legal, others are not, precisely because they violate key principles of humanitarian law.
A new Human Rights Watch report makes it clear that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is illegal. It relies on the Geneva Conventions to determine the illegitimacy of Moscow’s actions, including its use or the possible use of specific weapons.
The Geneva Conventions prohibit the use of weapons in indiscriminate attacks where combatants and civilians cannot be distinguished. Thermobaric weapons can be targeted specifically at military installations and personnel, but their effect cannot be limited to one area. In all likelihood, many civilians would have been killed if such bombs had been used on the city. The use of explosive weapons in populated areas will lead to indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks. Air bombs, even if they are aimed at military targets, pose a serious threat to the civilian population due to their large radius of destruction.
unnecessary suffering
Efforts to ban these weapons have not yet resulted in a clear ban. The 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (commonly referred to as the “Inhumane Weapons Convention”) covers incendiary weapons, but states have managed to avoid an outright ban on thermobaric bombs.
In addition to affecting civilians, thermobaric bombs would cause unnecessary injury and unnecessary suffering. According to international humanitarian law, they should not be used.
There is a point where—even if war is considered legal or “just”—violence should not include overly cruel or inhuman weapons. If a weapon could prolong the agony of soldiers (or civilians) or cause unnecessary and unacceptable injury, its use is theoretically prohibited. Thermobaric weapons clearly meet this definition.
Cluster bombs and nuclear weapons
In today’s war, there’s more to worry about than thermobaric weapons. The Ukrainian government and human rights groups say Russia has also used cluster munitions. These are bombs or rockets that fire a set of small “bombs” over a large area.
Cluster munitions were banned by an international convention in 2008. Russia has not signed it (nor has the United States, China or India), but still largely complies with the provisions of the agreement.
However, perhaps the greatest concern is Moscow’s nuclear arsenal. President Vladimir Putin has strongly hinted that he is potentially ready to use them, putting Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert and warning that countries that intervene in an invasion will face “consequences you never knew existed.” Russia has about 6,000 nuclear weapons, and an escalation in the conflict could lead to their use, intentionally or unintentionally, in the fog of war.
Putin is not alone in such threats. The United States possesses approximately 5,500 nuclear weapons, and its nuclear policy promises nuclear devastation to its adversaries. Even the British and French are resorting to nuclear pressure, and former US President Donald Trump used similar language when threatening North Korea. But Putin’s statement goes beyond these threats.
It was these very real dangers that prompted 122 UN states to vote in favor of drafting a Nuclear Weapons Prohibition Treaty in 2017.
The war in Ukraine is another reminder that we must act to eliminate thermobaric, cluster and nuclear weapons under strict international control. The stakes are too high to allow these dangers to persist.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
