Sir, We write to urge the Government of the United Kingdom to give up its remaining stocks of cluster munitions and agree the strongest possible ban on the weapon in the treaty negotiations in Dublin, starting today. Such a treaty will establish a new benchmark for the responsible projection of force in the modern world.

Of course, the projection of force is the basis of all military activities, but each application must be related to a particular political purpose. If, by choosing to use inaccurate and unreliable weapon systems, such application causes the loss of civilian lives, provoking strong national and international reaction and opposition, it is very likely that such projection will inhibit the achievement of any political purpose.

If we are to be accepted as legitimate users of force then we must demonstrate our determination to employ that force only in the most responsible and accountable way. Our current standing in the world suggests that our leadership of moves to ensure an international ban on cluster munitions will not only be respected and recognised, but will also strengthen our ability to use force effectively in the modern world, in the future.

Cluster munitions were developed to combat a level of Cold War confrontation that never happened. However, in modern wars, conducted among the people, they have consistently caused civilian casualties both during and after attacks. As was realised during the Cold War, cluster munitions also pose a threat to our own forces, the US 3rd Infantry Division describing them as “battlefield losers”, after the 2003 conflict in Iraq, because they were often forced to advance through area contaminated with unexploded “duds”. Furthermore, they are a threat to the military and civilian clearance teams that must make the land safe in the wake of conflict, for reconstruction purposes.

Billions of submunitions are stockpiled internationally. To choose a course that seeks to exempt the UK’s remaining stocks from a ban risks creating loopholes that others will inevitable exploit. Most importantly it will not achieve the stigmatisation of cluster munitions, which must be our objective if we are to prevent the proliferation of these weapons. An important lesson of the anti-personnel mine ban treaty is that, even if some main stockpilers will not sign, clear, unequivocal statements of intent will strongly shape their practice. The need to prevent such weapons from falling into the wrong hands in the future must override short-term arguments used to retain specific weapons.

Therefore we should move away from the use of indiscriminate, area-effect weapons which pose a threat to civilians and our own troops alike and move towards the development of precision-guided munitions. To do this will be to equip our troops with the right weapons with which they will be able to fight and win future wars.

General Sir Hugh Beach

Field Marshal Lord Bramall

Major-General Patrick Cordingley

Lieutenant-General Sir Roderick Cordy-Simpson

Lieutenant-General Sir Jack Deverell

Major-General the Rev Morgan Llewellyn

General Lord Ramsbotham

General Sir Michael Rose

General Sir Rupert Smith

Explore Letters

• Feedback