By Julian Roepcke
It would be the ultimate terror attack on Ukraine.
Over the weekend, Russia’s war minister Sergei Shoigu, 67, warned the defense ministers of Britain, France and Turkey that Ukraine was planning to use a “dirty bomb” on its own people to blame Russia.
A statement that was “clearly false” was said in a statement by the foreign ministers of the US, France and Great Britain early Monday morning. “The world would see through any attempt to use this claim as a pretext for escalation.”
After all, behind Russia’s lies that the enemy would not use conventional weapons against itself, there is often bitter seriousness. The Kremlin “warned” against the “use of chemical weapons by Islamists” before the allied dictator Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons in Syria against the Syrian civilian population.
Even now, experts fear that Russia itself could plan to use a “dirty bomb” and are therefore propagating an alleged corresponding Ukrainian plan.
What is a “dirty bomb”?
▶︎ It is a conventional explosive device, but it is laced with radioactive materials, which are released on detonation and spread in all directions. The health effects for those affected depend on how much and how highly enriched radioactive material is used.
▶︎ If, for example, only a “symbolic” proportion of nuclear substances were attached to the explosive device, this would be detectable with Geiger counters, but would not immediately lead to the death of the victims. Instead, the surrounding residential buildings would have to be evacuated and those affected, such as police officers and firefighters, would have to reckon with long-term effects such as cancer and other radiation-related illnesses. Not immediately, but for many years to come.
▶︎ On the other hand, if the dirty bomb were to be mixed with highly radioactive substances, this could have the effect of a small atomic bomb in a very small radius. This means that people around the point of entry would die immediately or within hours as a result of the released radiation. Within days and weeks there would be more deaths and many injured if the area was not evacuated extensively.
A dirty bomb designed for maximum damage has the potential to kill thousands of people in a matter of days and render entire cities uninhabitable for years.
Where does the material for such a bomb come from?
▶︎ In order to equip a “dirty bomb” with the necessary radioactive material, Russia would have almost infinite resources. Whether freshly mined uranium, nuclear waste from nuclear power plants or military plutonium – the Kremlin could “use” practically the whole country to upgrade its conventional missiles with nuclear weapons.
▶︎ The only problem: depending on the degree of radiation of the chosen material, experts with protective devices would have to prepare the bomb so as not to endanger themselves.
How would the mission go?
▶︎ Traditionally, the intentional use of “dirty bombs” tends to be attributed to non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations, who want to kill as many people as possible with their means. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the US authorities warned of dirty bombs in suitcases, cars or vending machines.
▶︎ Russia could also choose such an approach so as not to be suspected of being behind the attack itself. The problem: Russian agents would have to bring the bomb to Ukraine themselves, which is likely to be difficult given the frontline situation at all points of contact between Ukrainians and Russians.
︎ Therefore, observers tend to assume that the Kremlin could put the radioactively enriched bomb in a ballistic missile, an artillery shell or a drone and then transport it to the target area.
▶︎ While this would further reduce the deniability of the attack, even in Syria, Russia’s propaganda after Assad’s chemical warfare airstrikes had simply claimed that the respective rebels had somehow dropped Assad’s bombs on themselves – even though they had no planes.
How likely is such a deployment?
▶︎ Using a highly radioactive dirty bomb would be tantamount to using a tactical nuclear bomb. It would force the West to step up its punitive measures against Russia and provide Ukraine with significantly more weapons than before.
It is questionable whether Russia is willing to take this risk, since it would be the starting signal for an unprecedented escalation on the battlefield and the certain defeat of Russia, should conventional weapons be retained.
▶︎ At the same time, dictator Putin has chosen “defense” minister Shoigu, one of his top henchmen, to warn the West against such an operation. It is therefore quite possible that Russia is actually considering such a barbaric act of terrorism in order to continue to terrorize the population after the destruction of a good half of the power plants in Ukraine and to force them to flee towards Europe.