Uzbekistan

Cluster Munition Ban Policy

Last updated: 16 June 2016

Summary: Non-signatory Uzbekistan has never commented on its position on accession to the convention or participated in a meeting of the convention. It abstained from voting on the first UN General Assembly resolution on the convention in December 2015. Uzbekistan is not known to have used, produced, or exported cluster munitions, but inherited a stockpile of the weapons from the Soviet Union.

Policy

The Republic of Uzbekistan has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Uzbekistan did not participate in the Oslo Process that created the convention. It has never attended a meeting on cluster munitions or made a public statement on cluster munitions.

Uzbekistan abstained from the first UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution on the Convention on Cluster Munitions on 7 December 2015, which urged states outside the convention to “join as soon as possible.”[1] Uzbekistan did not explain the reasons for its abstention on the non-binding resolution that 140 voted for, including many non-signatories.

Uzbekistan voted against UNGA Resolution 70/234, which “deplores and condemns” the continued use of cluster munitions in Syria, on 23 December 2015.[2]

Uzbekistan is not party to the Mine Ban Treaty. It is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

Uzbekistan is not known to have produced or exported cluster munitions.

It inherited a stockpile of cluster munitions from the Soviet Union. According to Jane’s Information Group, KMG-U dispensers are in service with the state’s air force.[3] Uzbekistan also possesses Grad 122mm and Uragan 220mm surface-to-surface rockets, but it is not known if these include versions with submunition payloads.[4]



[1]Implementations of the Convention on Cluster Munitions,” UNGA Resolution 70/54, 7 December 2015.

[2]Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic,” UNGA Resolution 70/234, 23 December 2015.

[3] Robert Hewson, ed., Jane’s Air-Launched Weapons, Issue 44 (Surrey, UK: Jane’s Information Group Limited, 2004), p. 848.

[4] International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 2011 (London: Routledge, 2011), p. 280.