the whole scene and the things quite on this scale with detail coverage. how was this allowed to happen? who's responsible and should safety standards be changed from around the world? ukrainian soldiers in this area said that they were going to try and exploit and push hauled towards loaded with wagner. played such a fundamental role you frame is to be supplied with plus the ball. this by the us. that's the spite of found by many countries and most made to amenities the united nation. so such weapons are against humanitarian law because the indiscriminate us . so what's behind the us decision? this is inside story. the are welcome to the program. i'm adrian for the golden rule. is a dirty business,

but the decision by the us to supply cluster bombs to ukraine has crossed the line that many of its nato allies wouldn't the you and says the weapons breach international humanitarian law. the us says it has no option but to send them to ukraine because it's running as of conventional munitions, both the cues rush out of using cluster bombs in the wall. so why is the us doing this now? we'll be discussing it without guests in just a moment, but 1st a report from laura. com. and these cost to bones are considered so dangerous living funds by moving 120 countries. but the us says that'd be included in the new military aid package to ukraine. need to join the convention funding. they use no, his russia one out so just how dangerous all day. the missile canisters contain hundreds of smaller homes spread out in the this means they indiscriminate and can have

a wide spread and devastating impact. the international committee of the red cross says as many as 40 percent of the bullets fail to designate and compose the threats to civilians. decades flights of human rights watch accuses ukraine and russia of killing civilians with cost to weapons. the problem with cluster munitions is does rate because these munitions dropped large numbers of water is our bubble that's depending on how the way and some of them don't go off with these prime ministers, just do not didn't. iraqi criticized president j binding, but did say the person does not support the use of the weapons. in general, the u. k. is signature e to a convention which prohibits the production or use of cluster munitions and discourages that use. the u. k. has itself been criticized for sending all the weapons, the can cause loss of environmental damage and serious illness. the people long off to the was it then did it much she confirmed with provide all the piercing rounds

the contain depleted uranium thus used by the us in a rock in the 1st cold full 32 years ago. they've left the legacy of kansas and illnesses among people that have been all the countries phones point a to the international. you can watch to a b, i a, a says a could be a risk. the people who handle fragments of depleted uranium on the 2019 study and the general environmental pollution link. they use a shelf in the water rocks to a sharp rise invest effects and come to the us says it must send cost to bones. now because ukraine is running out of conventional weapons, but even some health representative and biden's democratic policy have criticized the decision, saying the weapons will kill civilians and leave the us unable to multiply the high moral ground to the war by adopting tactics. it previously accused russia, as you say, nora holds a inside story. i'll just, sarah. well, let's take

a look at the legacy left by cluster bombs. the united nation says that in the last year, at finalize the account 2021. it recorded at least say, 360 casualties globally. much traffic is, are expected when the boy ukraine is included. in the 1st 6 months of the conflict, 215 civilians were killed on 474 injured by class to weapons. the cross commission melissa, used by the you and shows that most victims across the bones are civilians. in 2020, it says they made up all casualties of such weapons worldwide. that's you really call from casualties with children, but the age was no. a costa? well, when women and girls among the victims were people in countries where was ended some years ago, such as cambodia, los, and iraq, that's bringing, i'll guess them for today is discussion from washington dc. we're joined by william

taylor, executive vice president of the us institute of peace at a for us on behalf of the to ukraine from moscow. dimitri babich, editor at in allstate, internet media projects, and also joining us from washington, dc. sorry, a go, washington director of human rights watchable. welcome to you. we'll. let's start with you 1st that you are in favor of the transfer of these weapons to ukraine. as i understand it. why is that? when i'm in favor of ukrainians. a big being victorious over the russians. the russians have invaded their country. i'm in favor of the ukrainians, having the ability to stop the russian invasion. i'm in favor of united states supporting ukraine in us. attempt to stop the russian invasion and the rest of nato is joining in that effort. so i'm in favor of ukrainian victory. it turns out,

as you just reported, that the way that the ukrainians can move to victory goes through our tower. they need our tower. and it turns out again, as you reported that the artillery rounds, the stocks bows in your brain and isn't cottage dates are running out that they are running out. we are running out, your training is running out of the unit. terry, artillery weapons munition. that is not in cluster bottom. so the only thing we have left to provide the ukrainians to stop the russian invasion and to push the russians out of the country out of the brain. are these comfortable? no one likes this. no one is comfortable with this decision, but if the decision is to allow the russians to overrun ukraine, which they have said they want to do,

this is what the russians are after is to destroy the ukraine. wipe it off the map . adrian, this is what they've said. if that's the choice, then we have to provide these weapons. i just want to play when he met a clip of white house press secretary jen saki speaking in the, the early days of the war about customizations. here's what she said, no legal costs are bombs being used by the russian. if that's true, what is the next step of business ministration? is there a red line for how much will be tolerated against civilians in this this manner? that's the legal potentially it is, it would be, i don't have any confirmation of that. we have seen the reports. if, if that were true, it would potentially be a work crime. wondering if the potential use of cost to munitions in ukraine is by russia is a war crime. the insinuation here is the rules apply to others and not

to the us and its allies. rules apply to everyone, adrian, you're no doubt about that. all the rules apply to us the ukrainians to the russians and everyone. there's no doubt about that. the question is, how to stop this even legal, immoral invasion by the russians of ukraine. and if the only choice is to use these weapons that have been banned by some countries, but not others. if that's the only choice, then i think we have no, it's a moral choice. it's a moral choice to support the ukrainians in their defense against the russian regression demitra, babich and moscow. what do you make of what you've heard so far? well, let's get the fact straight 1st. there was a human rights what the report, i think back in the early 2015 maybe within the late 2014, that the ukrainian troops used to gloss to weapons and it was very well document

that then confirmed there were 200 sports people on the ground who interviewed the victims, who showed the places where the cost of blocks for used properties that were weighed 30 ports of the use of cost of evans by russia bought the 1st. i didn't see them. i mean, i didn't see them uh or in, in the international news reports. there was, uh, if they were, they were a lot of was documented. and also let me remind you that the in 20142015 these of our north drops and troops who participated in the war that started then at north in 2022 about these. well then we'll go in search of the so called pro russian a separate or just us uh, the key of government you pull down. let me again remind you that the government didn't give came out to bottle offense to a wireless cool in february of 2014. so you'll create as far as i

remember, denied using the last 2 weapons in ross and unites using glass to weapons. so we have these situations here when our ukraine definitely use glass to weapons rocks of probably allow the united states once you're going to use cost weapons on massive scale. that's terrible. i don't want to white wash the russian government. there is a big discussion going on in russia, whether it was bought that you know, to do, uh, get involved in an all out, all and all that will stop the building and the shading. oh, don't boss which continued for 8 years. okay. but certainly, if this is not the way to stop the wireless by party saying these are and don't think it weapons, it's like, i get to make sure i'm against using this using the term equal y. as in john says, be apartment, you utilize the jobs of the sides. i was going to be by using chemical weapons. you know? yeah, i just got to ask you to retrieve dimitry. i was going to ask you to us as cross on

it. if, if ukraine uses these weapons supplied by the u. s, does it cost on a red line for russia? is it, would it be then? do you think be justified in, in responding in kind? does it give russia to use a to, to, does it give russia an excuse to use weapons? the other weapons that what kinds of weapons sort of band for humanitarian reasons . uh uh, well you said that uh, and even though no one of the russian government set so far any to know on that subject, i think that will be a logical consequence. i don't think the result will be the ukrainian allow me pushing the russians out of their land. you know, let me remind you of the media. so people use their best and as their wives with russia in the last 8 years, same crime here in don't ask, in lieu, gone, these are russian people speaking russian and they will not become ukrainian in future. so if they are great in government returns to control over these started

just as going to be a huge human tragedy. what is going on now is also human tragedy by pressure will not give up those stairs. if you bring us used bosco weapons rocks, you may also use some very destructive weapons, not necessarily new ones, but some very destructive weapons in order to protect the people who are actually can see this is citizens. the people living in the, in the, in don't you have to know that the phone even in the buildings have. so next to great music, i see the reference citizens by all so every single used to protect them from cost . what i said. okay, so sir, i'm sorry to keep you waiting. i'll be with you in just a moment because i know you've got lots to say, but i just want to give william the rise of reply that with him. where is the threat to the people who are you crying from? from russia, it's not as life threatening to use it as, as the uses of cluster munitions. adrian, the read to the people of ukraine from russia is existential. literally, the russian government president pulls and it has said that there is no such thing

as ukraine. he wants to was ukraine off of a map. so yes, there is a direct threat to ukraine, ukrainian citizen as ukraine civilians. we agree about the need to protect civilians. everyone agrees about the need to protect civilians. it is it's ukrainian civilians that have been killed by russian indiscriminate attacks. ok, not just by a cluster bombs. so, so yes, there is an ex, essential threat to ukraine from russia in this invasion is recognized by the world . sorry, i go. what's the human rights watch this position on this? sure, thanks for having me. and let me just say, i deeply respect ambassador taylor and i agree with most of the things that he has said today, except that plus your munitions are going to make the difference in this conflict that has not been proven. it is very hard to see exactly the military utility

because the pentagon has not shared its data either on doug graves or the effectiveness of these weapons against the russian threat. and there are 2 big problems that i see. one is humanitarian. there is no way to make these weapons harmless, absolutely no way, and we have already documented ukrainians using cluster munitions. we just put out our findings earlier this week that civilians ukrainian civilians have already been killed by the ukrainians, using cost through munitions. again, there is no way to make these harmless and 2nd, there is a global norm being broken here. the majority of the nation of the world's nations have bad these weapons specifically because they are too dangerous for the battlefield. i am worried both about what is going to happen in ukraine and what is going to happen on this slippery slope for conflict in the future. so other, any circumstances that would justify the use of custody additions and you,

if you i don't, i don't believe so. they are in the shortly indiscriminate. and this argument that russia is using cluster munitions with a very high jun rate. you know, the argument that ukraine should use, cluster munitions as well as a race to the bottom. and i am very concerned about that, including for new cranium civilians. they continue to kill and pollute, often years after they've been deployed, regardless of which side prevails in this conflict, someone is going to have to deal with a long term human environmental impact, or leave large tracts of land unusable. i mean, who's, who's like, go to pay it to me, who is responsible for clearing up in the united states is the largest donor to uh, do you mind the efforts around the world? and because it used cluster munitions and anti personnel landlines in various places around the world. it's giving a lot of money already because of the exxon exploded ordinance. these does that are all over you. credit is $73000000000.00 to clean them up. that is without the u. s

. cluster munitions being set. so this is going to be a massive expensive cleanup effort. and president biden is going to have to address this when he goes to vienna and talks with the european nations about reconstruction, rebuilding and the money that it's going to take to clean these up. and both of the techno and i know you want to come in, the us dropped an estimated 260000000 trusted munitions in laos between 1964. 1973 . so far, fewer than 400000 a lot point 47 percent have been cleared and at least 11000 people have been killed according to which has these weapons pose a fault race, a threat to civilian this when they do their intended ministry targets? don't think there's a reason why so many nations refused to use them. hey, adrian again, no one wants to use these weapons. every one would like to have the regular, the unitary weapons unitary ammunition for they are tell. or there's no doubt i don't dispute or anything. the server just said or that you just said,

and you asked about the clean up. yes. if there will have to be played off. yes, the unexploded ordnance you will have to be cleaned up. it turns out, adrian is, you will know that the mining that the russians have done is extensive up and down the line. the estimates are 10000000 minds, not any personnel, much somebody for personal mind, but mostly anti tank minds. they are the about 10000000 up and down the line in ukraine, but the russians are planted. they'll all have to be dug up. they'll all have to be d d if you and you're exactly right. so the united states, as preparing so for and has already provided, is provided the d mining capabilities we will provide more. i'm sure the gradients are working on d mining capabilities. they're going to have to be cleaned up. all of those $10000000.00 andy tank mind up and down the line are going to have to be and at the same time that they're cleaning up the any tank. mine's indeed using them. they

will be cleaning up the, the costs of munitions, the dogs that are still there, by the way, the done rate of the russian mind, the russian, a cluster mind fussing munitions um is in the 30 to 40 percent range. whereas the rate, according to the defense department, is one to 3 percent so that they were still have to be cleaned up. no one likes these weapons, no one likes to sound munition. would it be better if we didn't have to use them? but to have the choice is allowing the russians to run over your brain and take it over. that's that, that's the danger disability is that the danger to do with your brain in civilian dimitry. rush us as the transfer of these plus the munitions to ukraine. smack some desperation of what does it tell us about the conflict itself. the fact that, as we heard from a best of the type of the ukraine is running out of the conventional ministry weapon raised munition. and which side,

if either is able to gain some sort of advantage militarily as well. i think the best i knew from here would be a compromise. unfortunately, it's the united states and the, the european union who don't want to compromise a single grade. they so she packed the negotiations, so that's what went on in east on will last year, even in march. and we were very close to a compromise with ukraine. it did not presuppose russia around, you know, william green or wife and ukraine. uh, off the map suddenly which i never said a foot and said that the if you wanted to make your brain secure, what actually if you want, if you're going to be the minute drive and do not support this is the exact quote. he didn't want to destroy your brain as a country. he probably means that he wants to destroy either your brain and reveal, even though he didn't go as far as saying that as for the future as for the

perspective so, well, let me tell you that of course it's a sign of the reason because the united states, why does this uh, pre keep it that sending us made costs the web store the congress. there was no waiver, all the, all these pretty patient by the congress. so if we believe the washington post, for example, president bar them is in fact uh, some call may be even uh, making an extensive use of his presidential powers. to me these shows that tonight the space has become and i go, what do you go, steve? just like the nazi of the communist, i know what you go states in the past. we know that in to 33 in states i do what would your goal was before the war? the main thing for the alternative or like georgia which is no rain. so there are not the states and that you were being union. you still have your brain, s a think that they don't care about the losses. they don't care about you bringing people, they want your brain to win as the see. so that's why the radio to bend the

rules to, i'm sorry, breach the loss, to send the most destructive weapons state. just want to see the side when, as for our share of cost, well, very, very unfriendly about these. but very on said about the need to put the land mines a certainly what didn't present would have been a plan that when he stopped at the so called me to get the reason you know the family last year. because sort of way the we will have to clean it up because there are, after all, mostly russian, people leaving an east and you great and, and if you read the united states press, it recognizes this back in the night, just the back of the, to 1000 only now they keep saying that your brain is such a separate country built in different from russia. it has a completely different identities. you know, we have a joint identity in many ways and we will have to clean the top our cells in future . that's very unfortunate because as you rightly said, gloss to weapons are very dangerous. they keep exposing,

they keep cheating people. years after they have been used on is huge. whatever level it's shorter inc, it's, it's up. so with the different police simplex human rights, which on these occasions, not the same, the cost of us do brain and for break even both rushing brain, but any use of cost of weapons. and this what i want to bring in therapy of human rights watch. uh, once again, as we said at the beginning of the program will, is a dirty business center. and those as be held in our report depleted uranium used by the us and the rock in iraq in 1st golf for 32 years ago has left the legacy of kansas and illnesses among people that didn't. other countries bombed by nato, ukraine's also been using british supplied weapons that contain depleted uranium. is human rights watch concerned that the people of the border region in ukraine and russia will suffer in the same way as people in iraq. and we don't have any research on depleted uranium at the moment so we can get into that

a little bit later. let me just make 2 quick comments about what's been said 1st president by and actually made this decision and signed a waiver completely within the rule of law within the united states. it's a shame that he did because congress thought that these weapons were far too dangerous to send anywhere and made a prohibition against transferring them to any weapon president by then within the law, signed a waiver. and it basically, just as we're going to prohibit these except when we really need them. and i think that that's really unfortunate. i also just want to go to this done rate because everyone is talking about what the pentagon has reported about the dod rate. we actually have human rights watch has done a bunch of research and has pentagon reports going back to the, to thousands. they actually have a 14 percent done rate on these very weapons. now perhaps there are variance that the pentagon is looking at, but they have not provided any data. so within our democracy, there is no transparency about where these numbers are coming from. and so to

repeat them that there was a 1.5 percent on rate, a $2.00. we're hearing these variations. every answer is different. where, where they tested on what kind of ground and what kind of circumstances we're not getting any of those answers. and i think that that is a real problem in this case. ok, i best of the time that we might just put a very quick forward from you if you, if you want to. i give him the do force in any rock about this use of depleted uranium. then most times of nature have signed up to this international panel trust to munitions now to the secretary general. i am still in the book said that the, the alliance didn't have a full position on the use on the baffle field. and that the decision on that you should be down to individual countries. i mean, what are we to make up that the best? no unity among other lines. so the use of width is that many members find a bar and, and a pledge not to use secure in general is exactly right. they know what they know as an, as an organization doesn't decide on weapons,

individual countries. individual members do, we've not heard any condemnation from nato members of this decision. why? because they recognize it's a hard decision. they recognize that, that they don't like these weapons. we don't like these weapons, the congress doesn't like these weapons. the defense department doesn't like these weapons, but they all recognize that the alternative that is no artillery rounds for the ukrainians. acceptable is unacceptable. morally, militarily, politically, it makes no, it makes no sense to have the premiums run out of weapons and not be able to defend themselves against the russians that are invading their country. so the nature of the nato members, they don't like it. we don't like it. however, they recognize and they, they buy their statements, they recognize that as an individual decision by the american sheriffs. exactly right. the president may use the waiver that's in the law. he doesn't like it,

he's present bite and said he doesn't like this of this decision. but again, if the or after this, if the alternative is to let the russians overrun the ukraine, is he's not gonna let that happen. okay, and we've got, we've got about a minute left. is there anything you want to say about that the use of depleted uranium? i know we're talking about cluster munitions, but the, the, the use of depleted uranium in that region of the world right now. i have nothing to add to what you, what sir, is that? okay, all right. now dmitri will leave the but the last with to you then very might of, i've got about a minute left on the program. so i need you to give me a fairly concise on so on, on what you've heard and from a, i'll washington guest in the last few moments. well, i would just say that it looks uh our opponents uh, that when you to use gloss to levels that when you do use depleted uranium, how come there for peace? how comes the defendant democracy by such means, the same goal was about the breaking down. if they destroyed uh monuments,

if they can, so uh for the days, if they destroy lead or even maybe they are the roku by us. maybe they all could buy these country where they change order traditions all of the rules. maybe not us, but they are that there's a that i'm afraid we're going to have to read it as always on inside story. even though what i'd, i'd love to give the rights of reply as to what do you mean, sarah, in in washington. i'm afraid time is against us when use waits for no one on that. and that's next. thank you all for being with us, william taylor, dimitri damage and silver diego. and thank you for watching. don't forget, you can see the program again at any time by going to the website out to 0 dot com for further discussion on this issue, join us at our facebook page. you'll find that at facebook dot com forward slash ha inside started at story and of course the conversation continues on twitter. i'll handle it a inside story for me, adrian. instead of going on the same here. and though, thanks for being with us,

we'll see you again, bye for the, the the philippine coast guard personnel. this has become a daily routine heading out to sea to contain the spread of industrial fuel. is leaking from a tank or the cap size, the february to 28. you can see that shiny stretch over there. it's about the kilometer and a half. that's the oil that's filling out from the tanker. at the end of that stretch, what squared the sunken tanker was found about 400 meters down at the bottom of the sea. the pep seeing at the worst of the light speed,

they don't know when the ship's container might blow wide open. the town where most of the oil had washed the shore, says coral reeves have been damaged if it intends to take legal action. in the next episode of fries mix, talk to into groupings. cruise on a voyage through the window. see, to highlight the importance of protecting this front giles, on the top to cover system against expanding list of man made threats. beneath the surface of this desolation is just tv with life. so the remote unsolved. take century on how to 0. on counting the cost rights in front of our businesses, can the nation spend its way out of the crisis with whom is called white gold? and the rice for it is eating off. plus the biz mining firm is giving bald swan a bigger share of this diamond riches counting the cost on i'll do sierra we

understand the differences and similarities of cultures across the world. so now my to, when you call home, we'll put you can use in car into fast that match a t in the, [000:00:00;00] the low i'm sammy say then this is the news live from dell coming up in the next 60 minutes to an easy as president and says black african languages increases humanely . those find that on the board with libya say they fear for their lives. the bbc