Technically true, but just barely, and only because neither US nor Russia is not a signatory to the CCM.
But (as mentioned just now in a sibling post), in moral terms the issue is a bit more complicated, because the rest of NATO is a signatory to the CCM. So if we were to refactor the statement as "The US is supplying Kyiv with munitions that would be a war crime for its NATO partners to use" -- then it does have validity.
However the infinitely large issue remains: this war is utterly insane, and entirely lopsided, with no shred of excuse or justification, and needs to stop, now. Allegations of "hypocrisy" as such, while fine for the debate club, are tantamount to fiddling while Rome burns.
> in moral terms the issue is a bit more complicated, because the rest of NATO is a signatory to the CCM
This is not entirely true a large amount of NATO is a signatory to the CCM but there are a few members that aren't outside of the US, they are.
- Poland
- Finland
- Lativa
- Estonia
- Romania
- Turkey
- Greece
> So if we were to refactor the statement as "The US is supplying Kyiv with munitions that would be a war crime for its NATO partners to use" -- then it does have validity.
Outside of the 7 countries in NATO outside of the US that aren't a signatory to the CCM.
And outside the fact that war crimes are strongly defined and using a weapon that is banned by the CCM even if you have signed it doesn't make it a war crime.
This is entirely a moot anyway, Ukraine is already littered with UXO from both Russia and from it defending itself.
I cant imagine that the DCIPM that the US provided will make a real difference in the UXO compared to whats already been going on.
So the closer countries are to Russia - the less likely they are to indulge in the moral luxury of signing the CCM. And Greece and Türkiye have each opted out because, well, the other has, so they must also. Makes sense in a way.
