Flooding South Lebanon - Human Rights Watch

not justified by any reason of military necessity.” 335 It stated, “There is also ample
evidence that cluster bombs were used in an indiscriminate manner and that many
towns and villages were littered with the bomblets as well as large tracts of
agricultural land.” 336 It continued, “When all is considered, the Commission finds
that these weapons were used deliberately to turn large areas of fertile agricultural
land into ‘no go’ areas for the civilian population.” 337 However, the report does not
explicitly cite the evidence leading to its conclusion of “deliberate” harm. It, too,
called for “urgent action to include cluster munitions in the list of weapons banned
under international law.” 338
US Investigation
Shortly after the end of the conflict, it was reported that the US State Department’s
Office of Defense Trade Controls was investigating Israeli use of cluster munitions in
Lebanon to determine whether Israel violated classified agreements with the United
States. These agreements, dating back to the 1970s, govern when and how Israel can
use US-supplied cluster munitions. 339 In January 2007, the State Department concluded
that Israel “may have” been in violation and submitted a report to Congress. 340
Israel’s use of cluster munitions, like other weapons, is subject to the 1952 Mutual
Defense Assistance Agreement with the United States. 341 After the United States first
exported cluster munitions to Israel in 1976, it entered into an additional agreement
335 United Nations General Assembly, “Implementation of General Assembly Resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006 Entitled
‘Human Rights Council,’ Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Lebanon pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution S-2/1,”
A/HRC/3/2, November 23, 2006, p. 60 [hereinafter “Report of the Commission of Inquiry,” November 23, 2006].
336 “Report of the Commission of Inquiry,” November 23, 2006, p. 59.
337 Ibid., p. 60.
338 Ibid., p. 77.
339 Cloud, “Inquiry Opened into Israeli Use of US Bombs,” New York Times.
340 David S. Cloud and Greg Myre, “Israel May Have Violated Arms Pact, U.S. Says,” New York Times, January 28, 2007,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/world/middleeast/28cluster.html?ex=1327640400&en=d2ba5ee2a96d6eed&ei=508
8&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss (accessed September 3, 2007).
341 A 2005 Congressional Research Service report notes this section of the 1952 agreement: “The Government of Israel
assures the United States Government that such equipment, materials, or services as may be acquired from the United
States…are required for and will be used solely to maintain its internal security, its legitimate self-defense, or to permit it to
participate in the defense of the area of which it is a part, or in United Nations collective security arrangements and measures,
and that it will not undertake any act of aggression against another state.” Richard F. Grimmett, “US Defense Articles and
Services Supplied to Foreign Recipients: Restrictions on Their Use,” CRS Report for Congress, Congressional Research Service,
March 14, 2005.
Flooding South Lebanon 102