I think if the target of the cluster bombs was a military base- where there is no reasonable expectation of civilians (and if civilians were present, then too bad for them- but that’s like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire) then Israel would have a right to use cluster bombs. But not in civilian areas where there is more than a reasonable expectation that civilians will find them days, weeks, months later and be killed.

The problem is there is no backing in law or history for that interpretation. On the contrary. Example: Destroying a hospital is a violation, but as soon as you take fire from that hospital you can turn it into a crater without regard to who might be in it. This is whole acceptable within the laws of war. Individual govt may have different policies, but that doesn’t matter. On the whole if the actions are to attack the enemy and/or to protect yourself not to injure or terrorize then it’s usually legal.

I think if the target of the cluster bombs was a military base- where there is no reasonable expectation of civilians (and if civilians were present, then too bad for them- but that’s like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire) then Israel would have a right to use cluster bombs. But not in civilian areas where there is more than a reasonable expectation that civilians will find them days, weeks, months later and be killed.

Likewise, if there is an active insurgency in a civilian area, I think the use of munitions that exploded right away, during the course of combat, would be acceptable too. The idea being that civilians would (hopefully) have left or at least taken shelter, therefore civilian casualties would be kept to a minimum. Unfortunately it’s war and civilians will always die for one reason or another.