Ukraine Attacks Donetsk University With Banned Cluster Shells- Time For Russia To Teach A Lesson And Stop This Cat And Mouse Fight

Ukraine Attacks Donetsk University With Banned Cluster Shells- Time For Russia To Teach A Lesson And Stop This Cat And Mouse Fight

Ukraine Started Playing Dirty

The Joint Center of Control and Coordination (JCCC) for the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) reported that four rounds of 155mm cluster bombs were fired into the city’s center on Saturday night, starting fires in three areas. According to reports, the cluster munitions detonated in the air.  After the shelling, the Donetsk University of Economics and Trade was on fire, according to a Telegram post by the city’s mayor, Aleksey Kulemzin. Additionally, apartment buildings reported having fires.

The shelling came after a Ukrainian bombardment on Monday left at least three persons dead and ten more injured. According to the JCCC, another civilian was killed by the bombardment in a nearby town. Over one hundred nations have banned cluster munitions due to their destructive effects on populations. Cluster shells are often designed to explode in midair, releasing tens or even hundreds of submunitions capable of saturating a vast area with explosives. They have a high failure rate, posing threats to populations from unexploded munitions for decades after a combat has ended.

Since 2014, when the area broke apart from Kiev following a Western-backed revolt in the Ukrainian capital, Donetsk as well as other Donbass cities have been subjected to ongoing Ukrainian attacks that have cost numerous civilian lives. The military of Ukraine built up strong defensive positions all around the city over time. Following the start of Moscow’s military offensive against Kiev in February 2022, the attacks became more intense, killing numerous civilians and seriously damaging infrastructure.

After referendums during which the local people strongly supported the move, the Donetsk People’s Republic, in conjunction with the People’s Republic of Lugansk, Zaporozhye as well as Kherson Regions, formed an entity of Russia last October. Following Kyiv‘s attack on a Russian tanker, Russian and Ukrainian troops intensified their attacks, resulting in devastating air raids that destroyed a blood transfusion center, a university, as well as an aviation complex in Ukraine.

The attacks occurred late on Saturday, while senior government representatives from 40 nations, including China, India, as well as the United States, were in Saudi Arabia to discuss ways to put an end to the conflict in Ukraine.

Source of Cluster Munitions with Ukraine

Ukraine received stockpiles of American cluster munitions last month, after which it swore to only use them to disperse hostile military encampments. They have, however, been employed to specifically target civilians in the very heart of the city. The deployment of US cluster munitions by Ukraine against Russian forces there has been confirmed by the White House.

After Ukraine cautioned that it would run out of munitions during its summer counteroffensive, which ended up being slower and more expensive than many had planned, the US made the decision to deliver cluster bombs.

Although its allies, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, as well as Spain, condemned their use, President Joe Biden described the decision as “very difficult”. Human rights organizations criticized Biden’s choice, citing the Cluster Munition Monitor report that a minimum of 149 civilians died or suffered injuries caused by these kinds of weapons in 2021. 

The bulk of the artillery rounds provided by USA to Ukraine have a “dud rate” of less than 2.35%, which refers to the amount of bomblets that do not instantly detonate but may still pose a threat for various years. When employed against troops in trenches and entrenched positions, the weapons are thought to be effective because they make enormous regions extremely hazardous to move around in until they have been cleared. Before being put out early on Sunday, the fire reportedly expanded to an area of around 1,800 square meters (19,400 square feet), according to Kostrubitsky as well as emergency services.

General Oleksandr Syrskyi of Ukraine, who oversees operations in the east of the nation, told the media last week that his troops required the weaponry in order to deal maximum damage to the enemy infantry. Russian President Vladimir Putin had reacted to the US plan to provide the weapons by saying that his nation had similar stockpiles and would use them if they were employed against them.

Who is to be blamed?

Speaking to Der Spiegel, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy admitted that he never intended to uphold the 2015 Minsk II peace agreements, which were signed by Russia, Ukraine, as well as an organization with no international legal standing called the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe).

If Zelensky’s comment is to be appreciated from the proper angles, a quick reminder of the geopolitical history of the area is necessary, as well as the problems with the signing and subsequent execution of Minsk II. America has steadfastly worked to enlarge its area of control into the areas that the Soviet Union left unoccupied since the conclusion of the Cold War. These initiatives fall under four categories-

1. One is regime change, accomplished by well-organized ‘Colour Revolutions’ involving obedient local leaders, media outlets, non-governmental organizations, as well as at times, armed insurgencies.
2. Being a member in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
3. Three, the deployment of NMDs (Nuclear Missile Defense systems) in new member countries.
4. Four, seizing control of the routes used by Russian pipelines to transport natural gas as well as oil to Europe.

Eastern Europe, the Balkans, the Black Sea Region, as well as the Caucus Mountains have received a lot of attention from Americans. The intention has been to encircle Russia from the south, move NATO closer to the heart of the country, establish a NATO-controlled buffer zone, and severely limit Russian maritime shipping through the Baltic and Mediterranean Seas, as well as land access to Europe as well as Asia.

Furthermore, all of this occurred after American Secretary of State James Baker promised Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 that NATO would not advance even a single inch eastward.

In a similar vein when viewed against the aforementioned backdrop, Zelensky’s admission regarding the Minsk II agreement becoming a dead letter is no different than James Baker’s official commitment to Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 – neither was worth the paper on which it had been signed on.

It was simply a continuation of previous policy of failing to follow through on commitments. In society, breaking your word as well as betraying trust is referred to as fraud; in diplomacy, it constitutes a catastrophic blunder with serious consequences. As a result, even if Zelensky is not the most luminous bulb in the room, it is impossible to assume that he would have uttered such a profound comment unwittingly.

Furthermore, former French President Francois Hollande as well as former German Chancellor Angela Merkel had both sometime back acknowledged on their own that Minsk II was merely signed to buy time in order that the West could militarize Ukraine to the teeth; this means that they started actively getting ready for a proxy conflict with Russia as early as 2015.

What are the ramifications of Zelensky’s admission if neither Ukraine nor its Western allies ever intended to uphold the Minsk II agreements?

First, it demonstrates that NATO’s attempts to advance eastward, towards the Russian border, persisted up until February 2022, when Russian forces invaded Ukraine. Second, it verifies Russia’s long-standing concerns about NATO’s aggressive eastward expansion to its border, and it reduces the numerous summits as well as talks that different leaders have conducted on this subject to pointless distractions and cunning ruses.

The third and most crucial point is that it gives Russia the moral high ground and justifies its choice to attack the Donbass last year. Many years ago, they marked a boundary that was very clear to everyone around the globe. Additionally, they repeatedly claimed that the West was using Ukraine as a bargaining chip and that the Minsk II agreements were nothing more than a facade because the mistreatment of ethnic Russians in the Donbass never ever stopped. Zelensky’s comments reinforce these reservations.

The overwhelming sanctimonious moralizing that has thus far dominated Western mainstream political as well as media narratives—that Ukraine is waging a righteous war to defend lofty democratic ideals—is entirely refuted by them, which brings us to our fourth point. If there existed no morality in a deal that the Russians entered in good faith, where remains the morality which lies in their continued pursuit of the conflict?

Fifth, it further deflates the spirit of the Ukrainian war machine, as the only sounds that are going to be heard as a consequence the next time the prevailing narrative claims that this is a noble Ukrainian struggle to protect democratic ideals will be weary, hollow laughter. Sixth, it disproves any justifications for Ukraine to continue this fight and should finally put an end to the claims of those who support stronger military and financial assistance for Kiev’s war activities.

Therefore, it is safe to assume that Zelenskyy should be the one to face war crime charges for endangering Ukraine. He is the one who, despite being aware of the risk of inciting a conflict with Russia, chose to cozy up to the US as well as NATO. Zelenski could have stopped the war entirely if he had agreed to Russia’s demand that they should not be joining NATO. Russia, unlike the United States, does not continue to attack countries unless someone continues to stick their nose in Russian matters.

When it became evident that there would be no outside assistance, Zelenskyy ought to have agreed to the Russian demand that NATO not be joined. It might have been an easy way to save lives and stop the collapse of the country. To him, the door was open. No one would have been to blame. Zelenskyy committed a war crime, and he did so despite being fully aware of the consequences. He has incited the populace to arm themselves in opposition to the Russians.

There cannot be any justification for inciting conflict and destruction within one’s own country for the sake of furthering the interests of the United States. In this battle, the US has nothing to lose. Instead, it is the only country that benefits from rising fuel prices. Who dies or in what numbers in which country does not matter to the US.

Need for Russian Retaliation and a lesson for Ukraine

Cluster bombs detonate a huge number of smaller explosives which can kill in an indiscriminate manner over a big region. Submunitions can also stay unexploded for years, killing and injuring populations long after conflicts have ended. On state-run TV Moscow, Mr Putin said concerning their usage-

I want to note that in the Russian Federation there is a sufficient stockpile of different kinds of cluster bombs.

We have not used them yet. But of course, if they are used against us, we reserve the right to take reciprocal action.

Despite having the greatest arsenal of nuclear warheads and a wide range of military tools, Russia has demonstrated a prudent and accountable management style when it comes to its strategic assets. Russia has shown its commitment to international peace and stability by following a policy of restraint, actively taking part in weapons control agreements, exhibiting transparency, as well as giving diplomatic solutions a priority.

It is important to stress that using cluster bombs is considered to be against international law, especially when done in places where there are civilian populations. Russia and the rest of the world must address these transgressions and take the necessary steps to protect innocent civilians from further suffering. Therefore, it is now necessary for Russia to take action in retaliation, teach Ukraine a lesson, and use all measures necessary to put an end to this war for good once and for all.

Morality in war?

In the Bhagavad Gita, Lord Krishna offers Arjuna spiritual insight and direction as he wrestles with his moral quandary of participating in the war. Arjuna struggles with the moral ramifications of fighting his own friends, professors, and family while also fulfilling his obligation as a warrior (Kshatriya). Krishna counsels Arjuna to carry out his duties as a warrior and to engage in battle out of a sense of duty (dharma), unattached to the results of his deeds.

The Gita exhorts people to carry out their obligations without becoming caught up in the outcomes. Krishna counsels Arjuna to fight for justice and righteousness in a battle without letting his emotions or his desire for triumph get in the way. Putin now owes it to the people of Russia to fight for them in accordance with this concept and rules of war.