Putin said Russia hit Ukraine with new medium-range ballistic missile

Sarah Rainsford
Eastern Europe Correspondent in Warsaw

The decision to send anti-personnel mines to Ukraine will be welcomed by Ukrainian soldiers but is highly controversial elsewhere. It’s also a major shift in policy for Joe Biden himself, who previously called Donald Trump “reckless” for lifting longstanding U.S. restrictions on mine use while in the White House.

The problem is that these weapons, buried underground or dispersed on the surface, pose a danger of indiscriminate killing and maiming of civilians. Critics—and there are many—describe them as inhumane.

Another important issue is the extraordinary length of time required to clear mined lands after the war ends.

image source, Reuters

For this reason, more than 160 countries have banned their use, including Ukraine, which was busy destroying their stocks before this large-scale invasion. But right now, Kiev believes it needs all the help it can get against a larger, advancing Russian army.

The US says the anti-personnel mines it will supply are “non-persistent”, meaning they will lose their effectiveness after a few days and will no longer explode. Human rights and anti-mine groups say that wasn’t always the case. The US also says Ukraine has agreed to use them away from densely populated areas, but it’s unclear how that might be regulated.

Russian forces, meanwhile, have been using mines extensively in Ukraine from the very beginning: another important advantage on the battlefield.

But there are signs of danger everywhere in Ukraine: from former soldiers with severed limbs and life-altering injuries to liberated villages with warning signs plastered on painted gates. All mines must be cleared so that civilians can return to their homes.