Great danger to Ukrainians comes from Russian attacks, and media and network commentators across the United States and Canada note the same. Reports on the front lines and in distant regions alike reference incidents like a missile strike in Lviv that caused casualties, as well as the broader pattern of activity in occupied territories.
Save lives by supporting countermeasures
The central belief is that faster and more effective responses reduce casualties among civilians and soldiers who don their first uniform after widespread drafting or voluntary enlistment. Ukraine is seeking ways to shorten the timeline from threat detection to action, aiming to minimize both civilian and combatant losses.
Military analyst Oleksi Melnik of the Razumkov Center has pointed out that Ukraine urgently needs long-range missiles such as ATACMS to extend its reach and deter aggressors. He emphasizes that while cluster munitions carry long-term risks if duds remain, the immediate tactical advantages can outweigh those concerns in the context of a defense against a larger adversary.
According to Melnik, cluster munitions can function as a critical supplement when air superiority is still contested. They offer a way to compensate for limited sorties and to sustain pressure on well-defended positions, especially where timely artillery support is constrained by production limits. The goal is to maintain momentum in liberating occupied areas while managing resources effectively.
Ukraine is trying to strike at prepared Russian defenses and simultaneously bolster its own artillery capabilities to support counterattacks in the absence of fully modern airpower. In the face of slow increases in artillery production, stored cluster munitions are seen as a partial remedy to ammunition shortages and a way to sustain offensive tempo.
Disrupting Russia’s military tactics
Former soldier and analyst Yevgen Dikyi views cluster munitions as particularly useful against armored vehicles. When Ukrainian troops breach the first line, Russia often sends reserves to reclaim lost positions, and wide-area effects from clustered projectiles can complicate those efforts.
Channel 24 reported that a strike pattern using multiple projectiles, which fracture into a swarm of smaller bomblets, can cover a larger area and simplify targeting against moving threats. The argument is that dispersed munitions provide broader coverage and reduce the need for perfect precision in fast-moving combat.
Analyst Mikola Bielieskov has been vocal in defending the potential handover of cluster munitions to Ukraine, arguing that opposing that aid could undermine Ukraine’s ability to pursue its strategic aims under the UN Charter principles. He contends that weapon choices should be evaluated in the context of defense and regional stability, not just rhetoric about risk.
Ukraine’s decision to procure cluster munitions was framed as a response to evolving battlefield demands in early December. Advocates describe them as a necessary tool to maintain deterrence and defend sovereignty, while critics warn of civil harm and the complex legal and humanitarian implications. The debate centers on balancing military necessity with civilian protection, and the responsibilities of both Kyiv and its partners in shaping defense policy.
Officials have underscored that the use of cluster munitions is constrained strategically. The Ukrainian defense leadership has stated that such weapons would be employed to break through defenses and reclaim territory, not for attacks on urban centers or beyond Russian borders. The conversation continues as the conflict unfolds and as international perspectives on cluster munitions evolve, highlighting the tension between urgent security needs and humanitarian considerations.