What is the "dirty bomb", the new pretext for escalating the war in Ukraine

"We have concrete information about Ukrainian institutions and scientific research centres that have the technologies that allow them to create a dirty bomb. [...] This is not a vain suspicion," Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu said this weekend.

Statements that have rattled much of the Western international community. This may no longer be a "pretext" for Moscow to launch a full-blown military escalation, warned the UK, France and the US. "They accuse others of what they themselves are planning," said Dmytro Kuleba, the Ukrainian foreign minister, who said on his Twitter account that "Russia's disinformation campaign about the dirty bomb could be aimed at creating a pretext for a false flag operation [a political or military action blamed on an opponent]".

In any case, the use of a dirty bomb in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict could mean an escalation of the fighting, raising the threat of either side using nuclear weapons. 

The term "dirty bomb" is a very broad concept that refers to more than one type of weapon. Dirty bomb is any combination of a conventional explosive - such as gunpowder, dynamite or TNT - with a radioactive element - whether from plutonium, radium, caesium, cobalt or selenium isotope sources, in the form of powder or radioactive pellets - to contaminate the air over a wide area with radioactive materials. Hence the term "dirty". 

This type of weapon, which is also known as a radiological dispersal device (RDD), is not considered to be a nuclear bomb in the strict sense, as it does not cause an atomic explosion. However, its effects are just as dangerous: because of the conventional explosion, radioactive materials are dispersed throughout the territory, contaminating it and making it dangerous for its inhabitants, as the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) warns on its website. 

The main consequence of the dirty bomb, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is "panic and social disruption", which are comparable to those caused by "an act of terrorism". But while the radioactive materials spread by the blast - quite possibly - do not create sufficient exposure to cause immediate serious illness (except for those in close proximity to the blast site, who may also be affected by the injuries characteristic of any detonation), they can be harmful to health if the radioactive particles are inhaled or consumed through contaminated foodstuffs. To protect themselves, the population would have to move away from the contaminated territory and protect themselves from external exposure. 

Therefore, the second most important effect of this type of weapon is the amount of financial resources and time required to disinfect the affected area, which may be greater or lesser depending on the volume of explosives, the amount of radioactive material and the atmospheric conditions, among other factors. 

Although - as in all military conflicts - the authorship of attacks against troops and civilians is always open to question, in this case, the use of a dirty bomb is unlikely to benefit either side. Whether it was used in a Russian false flag operation, or as a defensive weapon by Ukraine. 

If the Kremlin's theory were true and Kiev were considering using dirty bombs with radioactive material inside, the government of Volodymir Zelensky would then risk losing the support of its allies and could see any possibility of receiving new shipments of weapons and Western military aid vanish. Moreover, according to several analysts, such an attack would negatively affect the Ukrainian people's confidence in the authorities, as it could cause hundreds of injuries among its own citizens. 

Russia, on the other hand, sees this as a risk that would not be worth taking. "No one would be fooled by the attempt to use this accusation as a pretext for escalation. [We reject any pretext for escalation by Russia", London, Paris and Washington made clear in a joint statement. This makes it clear that, given the possibility of Moscow carrying out a false flag operation on Ukrainian soil, Kiev's allies would only strengthen their support for Zelensky's government with new arms, intelligence and sanctions deliveries to counter the Russian offensive. 

In any case, it is a strategy that is unlikely to take the conflict anywhere but a step closer to nuclear confrontation. 

To date, the dirty bomb has not been used in any real scenario in which civilians were exposed. In 1987, the Republic of Iraq tested the explosion of such a radioactive bomb weighing about a tonne, but discarded the idea of using it because the radiation levels it generated were too low. Earlier, the US had also considered using it during the Korean War between 1950 and 1953. And in 1995, Chechen rebels in Russia placed one of these explosives in Moscow's Izmailovsky Park, although they never detonated it. 

Today, only a few terrorist groups - mainly radical Islamists and US supremacists - consider using them, as exemplified by the statements of dozens of Al-Qaeda detainees in US prisons who claim to know about the existence of these dirty bombs.