Statement to the Wellington Conference on Cluster Munitions: Intervention on Definitions (Sensor Fuzed Weapons)

Wellington, New Zealand  
February 19, 2008  
 
Thank you for the floor, Mr. Ambassador. And thanks to Colin King and to Thomas Frisch of Germany for their informative presentations on sensor fuzed weapons. But the truth of the matter is that too little is known about sensor fuze technology, sensor fuzed weapons and their effects. We do not know if they will function as advertised by manufacturers and militaries. Most cluster munitions have not.

Related Material Save Civilians: Ban Cluster Munitions by 2008 Special Focus Flooding South Lebanon Report, February 17, 2008 Statement to the Vienna Conference on Cluster Munitions: Intervention on Definitions Oral Statement, December 6, 2007 82 Countries Endorse Strong Ban on Cluster Munitions Press Release, February 22, 2008 More on Human Rights Watch's work on cluster munitions Thematic Page Cluster Munition Coalition Web Site Free Email Newsletter

Only one type of sensor fuzed weapon has been used, and in only one conflict (Iraq), and only in small numbers. And there is no public record of its impact or effectiveness in that conflict. Mr. Frisch spoke of the “difference on the ground,” but his assertions would be more accurately labeled the “difference in theory.”  
 
It is important to recognize that there are a variety of different types of sensor fuzed weapons, with varying degrees of reliability and accuracy, and therefore posing varying degrees of danger to civilians. They may have different numbers of submunitions, different types and numbers of targeting sensors, different self-destruct and/or self-neutralization and/or self-deactivation mechanisms designed to reduce or eliminate explosive remnants of war.  
 
Being “sensor fuzed” in and of itself is clearly not enough to warrant an exclusion from a future treaty’s prohibition on cluster munitions. One must consider all factors that affect the indiscriminate wide area effect and propensity to leave behind large amounts of unexploded ordnance.  
 
Initial research raises serious questions about the wide area effect of at least some weapons with sensor fuzed technology, and about the ability to distinguish between military targets and civilian objects. As Colin King noted, a “point target” that a sensor fuzed weapon homes in on could easily be a civilian vehicle or other civilian object. He also noted that, if a broad loophole is created, in the future states could develop sensor fuzed weapons with lower reliability and accuracy and far more submunitions than current models.  
 
The burden of proof must be on governments to demonstrate that sensor fuzed weapons do not cause unacceptable harm to civilians. There is still a compelling need for a thorough investigation into and analysis of the potential negative humanitarian impact of these weapons, and not just their potential beneficial effects.  
 
Thank you.
 

 

Suggest This Page to a Friend Your Email (required) Your Friend's Name Friend's Email (required) Email addresses are not stored. Your Message Enter Security Code (case sensitive) Please read the HRW Privacy Policy