Concern over the US delivering cluster bombs to Ukraine is growing.
President Joe Biden described it as a "callous decision" when the US confirmed on Friday that it was deploying the contentious weaponry to Ukraine.
The United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Spain all responded by stating their opposition to the employment of weapons.
More than 100 nations have enacted bans on cluster bombs due to the threat they represent to populations.
They frequently disperse a large number of tiny bomblets that can kill anyone everywhere.
The munitions' failure rate, or "dud" rate, has also generated debate. Bomblets that have not yet detonated can remain on the ground for several years before they explode randomly.
Why is the US providing 'abhorrent' weaponry to Ukraine?
In an interview with CNN on Friday, Mr. Biden stated that he had discussed the choice with friends. The decision was a component of a military aid package costing $800 million (£626 million).
Since "the Ukrainians are running out of ammunition," the president stated it had taken him "a long to be convinced to do it," but he finally did it.
Human rights organizations swiftly criticized the decision, stating that cluster munitions represent "a tremendous threat to civilian lives, even long after the combat has finished."
According to US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, Russian cluster bombs used in the fighting failed much more frequently than the American cluster bombs that are being provided to Ukraine.
However, several of the US's Western allies on Saturday declined to support its choice.
UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak noted that his country was one of 123 nations that had ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which forbids the manufacture or use of the weapons and discourages their use when questioned about his opinion of the US decision.
"Harmed innocent people,"
According to remarks made by the prime minister of New Zealand, one of the nations that advocated for the adoption of the agreement, he went further than Mr. Sunak.
According to Chris Hipkins, the weapons are "indiscriminate, could possibly wreak enormous damage to innocent individuals, and they can also have a long-lasting effect." He claimed that New Zealand's opposition to the use of cluster bombs in Ukraine had been communicated to the White House.
According to Spain's Minister of Defense Margarita Robles, her nation has a "strong commitment" that certain weapons and munitions cannot be transferred to Ukraine.
"We recognize the need for Ukraine's lawful defence, but we reject using cluster bombs. Cluster bombs "should not be used," she said.
The explosives, which may go years without detonating, have the potential to have a negative effect on youngsters, according to the Canadian government.
In addition, Canada said that it was opposed to the use of cluster bombs and that it continued to adhere strictly to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. It issued a statement saying, "We take seriously our responsibilities under the convention to urge its universal acceptance."
While Moscow and Kyiv employed cluster bombs during the conflict, the US, Ukraine, and Russia have not ratified the agreement.
Germany, a treaty signatory, stated that while it would not give Ukraine such weapons, it understood the American stance.
Should not be done with cluster bombs, she emphasized.
The possible effects of the bombs, which can sometimes go years without detonating, on youngsters were of particular concern to the Canadian authorities.
Canada reaffirmed its opposition to the use of cluster bombs and continued to adhere strictly to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. In a statement, it stated, "We take seriously our responsibility under the convention to urge its universal acceptance."
Despite using cluster bombs in the conflict, Moscow and Kiev have not ratified the agreement, as have the US, Ukraine, and Russia.
According to Mr. Sullivan, a national security consultant for the US, less than 2.5% of US cluster bombs fail, compared to between 30 and 40% of Russian cluster bombs.
They would result in "more pain, today and for decades to come," according to the US Cluster Munition Coalition, which is a member of a worldwide civil society effort to eliminate the weapons.
An official from the UN human rights office also voiced criticism, saying that "the use of such munitions should stop immediately and not be utilized in any place."
Evidence of extensive cluster bombs deployment in Kharkiv
The action was characterized as an "act of desperation" and "proof of helplessness in the face of the failure of the much-publicized Ukrainian "counter-offensive"" by a spokesperson for Russia's defence ministry.
Maria Zakharova, a spokeswoman for the Russian foreign ministry, added that Ukraine's promises to deploy cluster munitions responsibly were "worthless."
Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, has repeatedly said that the US and its allies are waging a growing proxy war in Ukraine.
The eastern Donetsk and southern Zaporizhzhia regions are seeing continued progress in the counteroffensive against Ukraine, which started last month.
The campaign, according to Ukraine's military commander in chief Valery Zaluzhny, has been impeded by a lack of sufficient firepower. He voiced disappointment over the West's tardy delivery of promised weapons.
Volodymyr Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, congratulated Donald Trump for providing "a timely, broad and much-needed" military aid package.
America's NATO partners have been standing up one by one to disassociate themselves from its contentious decision to provide Ukraine with cluster bombs.
The 2008 pact that forbids their manufacturing and use—and discourages their use by others—has Britain as a signatory, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak made explicit.
In a statement, the Canadian government went even further, pledging to stop the harm that cluster munitions cause to people, especially children.
Spain argued against sending these weapons to Ukraine, while Germany disagreed with Spain but acknowledged the decision's justification.
Even Russia, which also used a lot of cluster munitions against Ukraine, denounced it, claiming it would leave lasting environmental damage.
However, Gen Sir Richard Shirreff, a former deputy Nato commander in Europe, justified the choice, stating that their placement should make it simpler for Ukraine to breach Russian defences.
He claimed that there wouldn't have been a need for additional armaments if the West had supplied them earlier with the present weapon.