Propaganda Or Prediction? Russia Accuses Ukraine Of Planning Radiological Attack

Russia’s Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov is asserting—loudly—that Ukraine is planning to deploy some sort of “dirty bomb”, a radiological weapon designed to spread nuclear radiation without using a nuclear detonation, perhaps involving a provocation at a nuclear power plant.

Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov

“Today we are facing the threat of a radiation catastrophe. Kyiv is hatching plans to carry out sabotage using a “dirty bomb”. The detonation of such a device will have a scale comparable to the operation of a low-yield nuclear weapon. The shock wave will spray radioactive substances in a perimeter of up to several thousand square meters. The contaminated territories will turn into an exclusion zone for 30-50 years," the Russian diplomat writes.

According to him, "the task of creating a dirty bomb was entrusted to two Ukrainian organizations." "The work is at the final stage. Kyiv has the necessary production base and scientific and technical potential, reserves of uranium-235 and plutonium-239, which are the main component of a nuclear charge," Antonov notes.

"An even more dangerous scenario, which is being worked out by Kyiv, is the implementation of a provocation at nuclear power plants located in the territory controlled by Ukraine. This could lead to an accident comparable to the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters, from which the world has not yet recovered," the ambassador emphasizes.

This report in TASS, however, does not provide any supporting material to confirm Anatov charges. This is perhaps unsurprising, as that sort of evidence would almost certainly entail revealing Russian intelligence capabilities in Ukraine, and that is something the Kremlin undoubtedly wishes to keep secret.

However, the lack of firm evidence makes the claim difficult to assess. It would be naive to believe Ukraine’s government under Volodymir Zelensky would be incapable of such an attack. It would be equally naive not to consider the possibility such charges are Putin’s way of building up some cover for a similar attack by Russia.

Certainly the use of a radiological “dirty bomb” on Ukrainian territory would be of more military benefit to Russia than to Ukraine—rendering any large swath of Ukrainian territory would only hinder Ukrainian logistics, which is one area where Ukraine has so far demonstrated clear superiority over Russia.

As a “false flag” attack, however, the detonation of a dirty bomb could have ample diplomatic and policy benefits for Ukraine. If Ukraine can play the victim of such a strike by making such an attack appear to be of Russian origin, they would undoubtedly succeed in turning most of the world against Russia.

By the same token, Russia detonating a “dirty bomb” in Ukraine while blaming Ukraine would all but ensure Ukraine lost all international support, making Russia’s conquest inevitable.

However, mine own speculations are ultimately as lacking evidentiary support as Antonov’s accusations against Ukraine.

Russian warning or Russian “false flag”? Russian propaganda or Russian predection?

Distressingly, we will not likely find the answer to those questions until it is too late.