“President Joe Biden [last] Friday defended what he said was a ‘difficult decision’ to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine, a move the administration said was key to the fight and buttressed by Ukraine’s promise to use the controversial bombs carefully…
“The decision comes on the eve of the NATO summit in Lithuania, where Biden is likely to face questions from allies on why the U.S. would send a weapon into Ukraine that more than two-thirds of alliance members have banned because it has a track record for causing many civilian casualties.” AP News
The left generally opposes the decision, arguing that cluster munitions should never be used.
A libertarian's take
“The sheer number of weapons and war materials we've sent to [Ukraine] heightens the risk that a significant portion of that aid will be diverted to unsavory paramilitary groups and criminal organizations. A government watchdog report from last month found that U.S. military personnel were failing to adequately account for thousands of pieces of equipment…
“Earlier this year, Pentagon officials told Congress they've seen ‘no evidence’ that weapons sent to Ukraine are ending up in unintended hands. Perhaps that's true. As the war rages on, the Ukrainian government has a huge incentive to get weapons into the hands of frontline soldiers. It doesn't answer the question of what happens once the war in Ukraine ends, or at least winds down to something resembling the low-intensity conflict that persisted in the country's East prior to the Russian invasion. A government with long-running corruption issues sitting on a lot of U.S.-supplied weapons it doesn't need as much anymore is a recipe for many of those weapons falling into the wrong hands.”
Christian Britschgi, Reason