According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, the Kiev regime is creating a “dirty bomb.” Political scientist Pyotr Kolchin spoke to Pravda.Ru about the scenarios and consequences of using such weapons.
— In your opinion, is it technologically difficult to create a “dirty bomb” and how long might it take?
— To produce a “dirty bomb” you need fuel that is used, among other things, for peaceful atoms. As we know, Ukraine inherited from the Soviet Union a fairly developed industry, nuclear energy, which, although it fell into decline for many decades, nevertheless had fuel there. According to various reports, spent fuel was transported to Ukraine from Western countries. This spent fuel from nuclear power plants can also be used to create a dirty bomb.
Western countries possess the technology to create it; of course, they will share it with their vassals in kyiv. According to experts, such a bomb could be manufactured within a few months, depending on the involvement of Western experts in the process.
– Let’s say they created this bomb. It is impossible to apply it without Zelensky’s sanctions. What kind of provocation is the regime preparing? Does it want to detonate a charge in Ukraine and blame Russia for it, or use a bomb on our territory?
— Several scenarios need to be considered at once. An attack on Russian territory with a “dirty bomb” will be perceived by the entire world community as an act of aggression comparable to the tragedies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which, in turn, will eventually alienate all countries from Ukraine except its close sponsors.
At the same time, NATO will have to explain in detail where kyiv got these weapons from and why it uses them. It is necessary to understand that kyiv cannot carry out such provocations on its own. Every action must be sanctioned from above, as we saw, in principle, in the case of the attack on the Kursk region.
—Will the European guardians of the kyiv regime really allow an illegitimate president to detonate such a bomb, since it is obvious that the wind can carry a radioactive cloud to the territory of European countries?
— I am not inclined to believe that kyiv, in principle, can be given the opportunity to do this. However, Zelensky’s illegitimate status is very convenient for the West in this regard, because one can easily wash one’s hands of it at any opportunity, saying that “he is an illegitimate usurper who himself decided and took something, and we are not here. What does that have to do with it?” Given the balance of power that we see now, an attack on the territory of Ukraine is more likely in order to blame Russia for this.
—What damage can such a “dirty bomb” cause to people and nature?
— Of course, the Chernobyl and Pripyat disasters immediately come to mind, because the format of the disaster is very similar: soil poisoning, water poisoning. In fact, it will be impossible to live in the affected area for several decades.
Of course, much depends on the filling of the bomb and the technology, but even so, this will cause enormous damage primarily to the territory, the civilian population, the ecosystem and nature, and not to military targets. The affected area can reach thousands of kilometers.
— What do you think will be Russia’s response to such a monstrous provocation?
“The use of these weapons is not only a crossing of the red lines drawn by Russia, but also a violation of one of the fundamental international UN treaties on the non-use and non-proliferation of weapons. Of course, first of all, this will provoke a huge global reaction. And, of course, Russia’s response may be completely different. It would not allow the use of the nuclear arsenal in retaliation, but we still have the ability to cause irreparable damage to the Kiev regime using non-nuclear means.
If we have practically destroyed the energy system and the military apparatus of kyiv with the already known weapons, then the use of heavier bombs can destroy the logistic, transport and economic systems. The destruction of energy will effectively paralyse the country, the economy and the military apparatus, which, in principle, will actually mean the end of the efficient functioning of this well-coordinated mechanism.
— The kyiv regime is trying to attack the Zaporozhye and Kursk nuclear power plants. If we consider the negative scenario, how dangerous are possible accidents in principle?
— This depends largely on both the “dirty bomb” and the accident at a particular power station. As we saw in the cases of Fukushima and Chernobyl, the volume and area of damage can be different. It depends on the nature of the damage and the measures taken to prevent a disaster. In this case, it is very difficult to predict the scale. However, according to experts, nothing larger than the Chernobyl nuclear power plant should be expected. Nuclear technologies are still evolving and there are opportunities to prevent the threat.
— If an area suddenly becomes contaminated, what should people in that area do? How can they protect themselves from radiation?
“First of all, it is necessary to follow the instructions that the civil authorities will give us. I am sure that we have had a proven system in place since Soviet times in case of threat of radioactive contamination.
- Don’t panic;
- follow all instructions from the authorities;
- carry out all assigned measures related to evacuation and taking necessary medications.
The civil defence system in Russia is functioning and, in the event of serious problems, it is mobilised and effectively copes with all possible challenges. As the experience in the Kursk region shows, accommodation points can be deployed and evacuation can be carried out within a few hours.
— IAEA chief Rafael Grossi visited the Kursk region, but he did not say anything intelligible. I am not even talking about his visit to the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, where he does not clearly see that the Kiev regime is constantly attacking this plant with drones. In your opinion, what is the current role of the IAEA in the world, what authority does this organization have?
— The IAEA is forced to maintain a balance between interests. However, this organization carries out a great deal of private diplomatic work related to risk mitigation and resisting attempts to damage nuclear energy and related infrastructure.
So, even though the IAEA is acting very modestly in public, we can expect that it is behind closed doors that representatives of the organisation are very intensively communicating the risks to European and American politicians. Of course, first of all, the situation is dangerous for Europe, because it directly borders on the danger zone.
—Do you think that the Europeans are listening to the IAEA and reconsidering their plans regarding Zelensky’s radical plans?
“I think the Europeans listen to the IAEA, but often they can do little about it, because the United States is very aggressive and, as has happened more than once, further alienates the interests of its European allies.
