How dangerous is the “dirty bomb”? How does it relate to Chernobyl?

Russia and Ukraine accuse each other of planning to use the so-called “dirty bombs”. What are “dirty bombs” and who has them? And, most worryingly, is a “dirty bomb” as powerful as a nuclear bomb?

The so-called “dirty bomb” is part of Russia’s latest “blow” in a global propaganda battle. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu insists Ukraine wants to develop such a bomb, claiming Kyiv is planning a “provocation” aimed at discrediting Russia’s armed forces and leadership. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and many Western governments rejected the charge. In fact, Zelensky believes that Moscow itself intends to use dirty bombs.

But what is it? The “dirty bomb” combines conventional explosive materials such as dynamite with radioactive materials used in chemotherapy or food preservation.

“The dirty bomb is not a nuclear bomb”

A dirty bomb “is not a nuclear bomb,” explained Wolfgang Richter, a retired colonel and security expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, or SWP. “This means that we are not dealing with nuclear chain reactions, which cause huge explosions and, of course, a very strong and dangerous radiation, which makes a large area uninhabitable in the long term,” he added.

Nuclear weapons create deadly heat and pressure waves as well as extremely dangerous radiation, which is spread over vast areas by wind and rain. Dirty bombs don’t do that most of the time.

In fact, dirty bombs are more dangerous during their initial explosion, Richter explained. However, in the long run, the emitted radiation can prove dangerous or even fatal, depending on the dose. The size of the explosion and the strength of the radiation determine the extent of the area that can be contaminated or even temporarily rendered uninhabitable.

A terrorist weapon?

Dirty bombs are nothing new. Until now, many thought it was a weapon that could be developed mainly by terrorists.

In 2003, police seized illegal shipments of radioactive cesium and strontium in Tbilisi and Bangkok. Both substances could have been used to make “dirty trapped cars”.

In September 2016, on the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, American lawyer and journalist Stephen Brill published an article in The Atlantic questioning whether America had become safer since the 9/11 attacks in New York. He wrote that in 2013 and 2014, radioactive material was reported lost or stolen 325 times.
The true number, including cases that went undetected or covered up, could be even higher, and Brill accused politicians of
USA for not paying enough attention to this threat.

Psychological impact

According to Brill’s research, a dirty bomb detonated by terrorists in downtown Washington could contaminate 40 city blocks and require billions to be spent on decontamination.

However, even without evacuation, experts estimated that they would not die more than 50 people after one such attack, he wrote – “casualty rate that could probably be offset by an anti-smoking campaign in one or two office buildings in the (US) capital.”. But while the casualty and death toll may be limited, dirty bombs could trigger significant panic. That’s why policymakers must work to dispel that fear, Brill argued.

Dirty bomb and Chernobyl

However, a military-grade dirty bomb could be far more destructive than one made by terrorists. “You can imagine it’s like the radiation emitted during a nuclear plant accident,” Wolfgang Richter told DW. “Chernobyl would be an example.”

In 1986, one of the reactors at the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine exploded. A 30km exclusion zone has been in place around the accident site since then.

“Irrational use of dirty bomb”

However, Richter believes it is unlikely that Russia would use a dirty bomb. It would run counter to its major recruiting effort, he said. “Russia is focused on intensifying the war effort in a conventional way,” he noted.

Second, there is also the risk that wind could carry nuclear radiation from the detonation site and harm Russia’s own military forces. Finally, the use of a dirty bomb would contaminate areas of Ukraine that Russia now considers its own. “That’s why I find the use of such a bomb not only irresponsible, but absurd,” Richter said.
Richter sees the main risk of escalation stemming from all the dirty bomb talk and from all sides. “Ukraine hinted that it would make a pre-emptive strike to counter a nuclear attack from Russia,” he noted.

Deutsche Welle

Read the News today and get the latest news.
Follow Skai.gr on Google News and be the first to know all the news.