the use of cluster bombs in sri lanka - fact or fiction

8/2/2019 The Use of Cluster Bombs in Sri Lanka - Fact or Fiction

1/18

THE USE OF CLUSTER BOMBS IN SRI LANKA

FACT OR FICTION

The recent revelation about the alleged discovery of sub-munitions in the Wanni East has re-opened thedebate about the use of Cluster Bombs in the Sri Lankan Conflict.

The story initial broke as follows on April 28, 2012 (Title: UN finds Cluster Bombs in Sri Lanka):

The Associated Press obtained a copy Thursday of an email written by a U.N. land mine expert that saidunexploded cluster bomblets were discovered in the Puthukudiyiruppu area of northern Sri Lanka, where aboy was killed last month and his sister injured as they tried to pry apart an explosive device they had foundto sell for scrap metal.

The email was written by Allan Poston, the technical adviser for the U.N. Development Programs mineaction group in Sri Lanka.

After reviewing additional photographs from the investigation teams, I have determined that there are cluster sub-munitions inthe area where the children were collecting scrap metal and in the house where the accident occurred. This is the first time thatthere has been confirmed unexploded sub-munitions found in Sri Lanka, the email said.

RAVI NESSMAN, Associated Press

Which was followed up with the following story on April 29 (Title: Witness: Man hit by Cluster Bomb in SriLanka War):

The medical worker said local U.N. staffers had told him in early February that they had found shrapnel from

cluster munitions around a hospital in Puthukudiyiruppu.

The facility was later moved to a makeshift hospital in the village of Putumattalan, where patients beganspeaking of being wounded by cluster munitions, which make an unmistakable sound, a loud explosionfollowed by a burst of tiny blasts, the worker said. But medical officials could not find evidence of themunitions because the wounds were so badly infected, the worker said.

Then, in late March or early April, a man came in with a wound in his lower leg. After the medical staffcleaned the wound, they discovered a small unexploded bomblet from cluster munitions wedged into it, the

worker said.

The staff amputated the mans leg below the knee, then took it, along with the bomb still inside and threw it

into an empty field because there was no safe way to dispose of it, the worker said.

A photograph provided to the AP showed a lateral gash in a mans leg just below the knee with a greenishmetal cylinder embedded in the tissue.

Technical experts shown the photo said they were unable to tell whether or not it was a bomblet.

RAVI NESSMAN, Associated Press

The only definite means of confirming the existence and subsequent use of these weapons in Sri Lankawill be to produce legitimate, authenticated images of unexploded sub-munitions or Bomb casings from an

exploded or unexploded Cluster Bomb.As of yet, no such imagery has surfaced from Sri Lanka.

This statement provides the backdrop for the following technical analysis piece.


2/18

Since the release of the Cluster Bomb story by the Associated Press, the days following this event saw themushrooming of a series of articles, many appearing online, exploring/debating this phenomenon. Onearticle in particular, appearing on the Groundviews website, titled: Cluster bombs in Sri Lanka: From denial todiscovery, attempted to corroborate the Ravi Nessman/Associated Press story using pictorial evidence fromthe online website, TamilNet.

There have been a number of reports in web media in particular on the use of cluster bombs. Coincidentally,in a report published on 21 March 2012 on Tamilnet.com, which is blocked in Sri Lanka, it is reported that acontainer allegedly deployed by the Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) to carry cluster bomblets has been recovered recently by the de-miners of the humanitarian de-mining agency Halo Trust near a house at Thiruvaiuyaaru, 3 km east of Kilinochchi town. APDF copy of the story, which also contains an image of the cluster bomb container, can be seen here.1

In January 2009, the same website carried images of cluster bombs allegedly dropped by the Sri LankanAirforce in Mullaitivu. A PDF copy of the story, along with images, can be seen here.2

SANJANA HATTOTUWA, Groundviews

This analysis piece will demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that none of the images shown on theTamilNet website, or any of the ancillary pieces of evidence used by the website as alleged proof showingthe use of Cluster Bombs by the SLAF, are in fact Cluster Bombs or effects caused by Cluster munitions.Furthermore, the use of such imagery by the Groundviews team as evidence to implicate the Sri Lankan

Armed Forces for using Cluster Bombs represents a serious transgression on the part of an organisationthat claims to represent media impartiality in Sri Lanka. The issue pertains to the misleading use ofpictorial evidence to misrepresent the truth about the use of Cluster Bombs by the Sri Lankan ArmedForces.

Timeline of TamilNet Cluster Bomb claims

On the 30th of November 2008, 3 days before 92 countries signed a treaty banning the use of ClusterMunitions in Oslo; the Pro-LTTE online news site, TamilNet.com, released the following article:

1See: http://groundviews.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/TamilNet-21.03.12-De-miners-locate-remains-of-cluster-bomb-in-Kilinochchi.pdf

2See: http://groundviews.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/TamilNet-18.01.09-SLAF-deploys-cluster-bombs-in-Mullaiththeevu.pdf


3/18

The article was accompanied with the following pictures (below), alleging to be the remains of the emptycasing from a Cluster Bomb, and was cited as being definite evidence that the SLAF routinely employCluster Bombs in its bombing raids.

Then again on the 24th of December 2008, the same news site published the following article with theattached picture as further evidence of the SLAFs use of Cluster Bombs:


4/18

On the 18th of January 2009, TamilNet released the following article with the attached pictures of an un-exploded bomb proclaiming it to be another Cluster Bomb that had been dropped by the SLAF:

Finally, on the 21st of March 2012, TamilNet released the following article with attached imagery claimingit was the casing from a Cluster Bomb dropped by the SLAF in 2009, discovered by a HALO Demingteam in the Wanni East in 2012:


5/18


6/18

Cluster Bombs

Cluster munitions are small and numerous, packaged in delivery systems which can drop thousands ofsub-munitions on an area in a very short amount of time. Since they are dropped from the air or firedfrom rockets and artillery projectiles, they are very difficult to track, map, or find. With dud rates rangingfrom an estimated 2% to 30%, they create large, unmapped minefields in areas where people live or willreturn to live. Many of the sub-munitions are buried underground, gradually coming to the surface overtime, or as a result of agricultural activity.

Cluster Bomb designs from around the world share certain design characteristics that are inherentlycommon to all such class of munitions.

1. The use of split casing:


7/18

2. The use of a central dispensing core:

Whether a Cluster Bomb has successfully worked or failed to work, if they have been used in anoperational theatre, there should be evidence of one or both distinctive design features split cases ordispensing cores in the field.

In the subsequent parts of the current analysis, the most widely available Cluster Bomb types will bedescribed with particular emphasis given to Russian Cluster Bombs, since Western designed ClusterBombs were never exported to Sri Lanka during the period 2005 2009 owing to embargos on the sale ofthese specific types of munitions.

Western Cluster Bombs


8/18

Virtually all Western Cluster Bomb designs share the following design characteristics:

Split Casing Munitions Dispensing Core Deployable Fins Tapered aft body section Clear markings designating mark and model

It should be noted that two other Non-Western Countries are worth mentioning in this category, Pakistanand China. Both countries have an indigenous weapons industry, and both countries make Cluster Bombs.

Pakistani Cluster Bombs are based on the American CB- series of Cluster Bombs, with the Chinesemunitions bearing a close resemblance to both the American CB- and Russian RBK- series of ClusterBombs. The image below is an example of a Pakistani Cluster Bomb.


9/18

Russian Cluster Bombs ()

Russia manufactures 4 types of Tactical Munition Dispensers The RBK-100, -180, -250, -500 (-100, -180, -250, -500). RBK or in Russian stands for Razovaya Bombovaya Kasseta, Single-use Bomb Cassette. The biggest casing in this range is the RBK-500 (-500). These dispensers,combined with their sub-munition payload are given the now universal designation Cluster Bomb.

The outer casing of the RBK Cluster Bomb is unique in its design, and has several distinguishablecharacteristics that set it apart from other unguided munitions manufactured by Russia. In particular, itsnose/fuse cone configuration and the tail unit are unique. Its design is very specific to the release of

cluster munitions and therefore cannot be used for any other type of explosive ordnance. Given below areexamples of the RBK-500 canister:


10/18

All Russian guided and unguided air dropped munitions are marked to describe the type of bomb and itsassociated explosive payload.

For Russian Cluster Bombs, the following table describes the different designations:

All Russian Cluster Bombs have the letters painted on the canister to identify it.

In RBK cluster bombs, a nose-mounted electromechanical time fuse is used to fire an ejection charge inthe nose cone. As a result of its firing mechanism which occurs in flight, the RBK canister does not come

with a retarding parachute as found on other types of unguided Russian bombs.


11/18

After the sub-munitions have been ejected from a cluster bomb, their dispersal is random, with the size ofthe impact pattern increasing with the bomb opening altitude. The forward motion of the bomb creates acigar-shaped impact pattern of sub-munitions on the ground, near which the empty bomb container maybe found.

Occasionally, the cluster bomb will fail to open. When this happens, the sub-munitions are generallyunarmed and well protected, so they will not normally detonate. However, access can be difficult if thesub-munitions are inside damaged or partially buried cluster bombs and the sub-munitions themselves maybe damaged and in an unpredictable condition.

Operational statistics from the field show that the dud rates on most Russian sub-munitions range fromaround 10% to 30%.

As a result, there are two characteristic features that should always be present in any area where a RussianCluster bomb has been used:

1. Unexploded Sub-Munitions.2. Dispenser Casing with markings identifying type and payload.


12/18

The alleged evidence pertaining to the use of Cluster

Bombs

Apart from the recovery of empty casings belonging to an air dropped unguided munition, there has beenno evidence presented to indicate the presence of any un-exploded sub-munitions in areas allegedly

attacked using Cluster Bombs. Given the statistical dud rates of Cluster Bomb sub-munitions, the veryreason this class of weapon is considered extremely dangerous, the lack of any sub-munitions in theaffected areas is a notable anomaly.

Nevertheless, the recovered casings were exhibited as belonging to Russian designed Cluster Bombs.

Recovered Casings from 2008 2009

Russian Cluster Bombs ()


13/18

To an impartial observer comparing the features highlighted:

1. The nose cone2. Tail Fin configuration3. Identifying markings

Upon careful scrutiny will quickly surmise that the two sets of figures are not of the same class of

weapon.

What are these Weapons?

Russian HE Fragmentation Bomb ()

The bomb casings exhibited as belonging to Russian Cluster Bombs do in fact belong to different categoryof Russian munition.

This range of bombs are called Low Drag Blast Fragmentation weapons. OFAB or inRussian stands for Oskolochno-Fugasnaya, Fragmentation/HE.

The markings on one of the bomb casings shown on TamilNet.com reads as -500, whichstands for OFAB-500ShRin English.

This weapon comes with a parachute which is attached to the rear section of the bomb as shown in theabove image.


14/18

Comparing the two sets of images clearly show that the weapon recovered is a Russian OFAB seriesLow Drag Blast Fragmentation munition, and not a Russian Cluster Bomb.


15/18

Russian Air-Fuel Explosive Bomb ()

This range of bombs are called Air-Fuel Explosive weapons. ODAB or in Russian standsfor Obemno-deto-niyushchaya, Area Detonation.

This weapon comes with a parachute which is attached to the rear section of the bomb as shown in the

above image.


16/18


17/18

Recovered Casing from 2012

The casing found in 2012 does not bear any resemblance to any documented Cluster Bomb available inthe Western hemisphere (North American, Europe and Israel included) or from any know Russian,Chinese or Pakistani weapons manufacturer for that matter.

Even more revealing is the conspicuous absence of several design features inherent to Cluster Bombs, notfound on this empty casing. The design of the aft portion of the Bomb and fin configuration, coupled

with the absence of split casing design features, immediately cast doubts about the identification of thisBomb as a Cluster Bomb.

If this Bomb was indeed a Cluster Bomb, and it had successfully worked, the casing would not have beenintact as one uniform shell as shown in the TamilNet pictures. If however the weapon had failed to work,and had landed intact, upon impact with the ground the Bomb superstructure would have failed acrosssections that are designed to carry the least load, along the split panels. Furthermore, in this scenario there

would have been evidence of unexploded sub-munitions. Examples of both points can be found in theimage below:


18/18

the use of cluster bombs in sri lanka - fact or fiction

Documents