Radiological weapon

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A radiological weapon , also dirty bomb (English bomb dirty or radiological dispersion device ) called a is weapon of mass destruction , which is the new understanding of a conventional explosive device, the radioactive material in its explosion distributed in the environment.

term

However, such a weapon is not a nuclear weapon , since no nuclear fission or nuclear fusion takes place during the explosion . An unconventional explosive and incendiary device (USBV or USBV-A for "atomic") is also used when the manufacturer is suspected not to be in the military industry but, for example, in the laboratories of underground organizations . Nonetheless, radiological weapons fall under the German War Weapons Control Act , which classifies a device as a war weapon if it contains radioactive isotopes and is designed for mass destruction, damage or poisoning.

The term radiological weapon was also used earlier for nuclear weapons that were aimed at the highest possible level of radioactive contamination ; these were also called dirty bombs .

Dirty bombs are still called explosive devices that contain biological or chemical substances (USBV-B or -C). The demarcation to other B-weapons and C-weapons is, however, imprecise, since the distinction between the effect due to nuclear fission and the effect due to contamination is no longer applicable.

Active ingredients

Due to their radioactivity and distribution, the following radioisotopes are conceivable for USBV-A:

Americium 241, Californium 252, Cesium 137, Cobalt 60, Iridium 192, Plutonium 238, Strontium 90.

These substances are used for a variety of scientific and medical applications. They are easier to obtain, more widespread, are subject to lower safety regulations and are therefore much easier to obtain than fissile material for nuclear weapons. The same applies to the bacteria or chemical poisons suitable for the construction of B and C USBV, including warfare agents . In the opinion of security experts, the construction and use of IEDs, be it A, B or C variants, cannot be prevented with certainty.

Mode of action

If a radiological weapon is used, the following effects are basically possible:

However, the explosive device would be designed to atomize the radiating substance and to distribute it over a wide area and not to achieve maximum destruction by its pressure wave . In order to contaminate a large area, a large amount of the substance would again be necessary, since no harmful effects occur at low concentrations.

The risk to the population through radiation from such a weapon is generally low, since the radioactivity of the above-mentioned. Finely dispersed active ingredients cannot achieve the dose necessary for radiation damage. The decontamination of an area such as in a big city would be time consuming and expensive. As long as this continues, the area may not be accessible to civilians.

Another problem would be the potential for panic among the civilian population once they learned of the contamination. Experts also see the public perception as the cause of this , which could not precisely differentiate between atomic bombs and radiological weapons (see below ).

When assessing the possible damage to health , a distinction must be made between two effects:

  1. Radiation damage - This can arise from radiation doses that are generated by a chain reaction , regulated in the nuclear power plant or unregulated in nuclear weapons or in technical or medical applications in which the radiation effect is specifically concentrated (e.g. radiation therapy for cancer). Radioactive isotopes that radiate so strongly without a chain reaction that radiation damage can occur when they are distributed in contrast to a targeted concentration, are very rare and just as difficult to obtain in effective quantities as nuclear fuel . This includes polonium , for example , if it gets into the body; see the murder of Alexander Litvinenko .
  2. Cancer risk - this is in principle increased by radioactive substances. In terms of carcinogenicity , however, there are a number of substances that are more dangerous in terms of quantity than the above-mentioned isotopes and are easier to obtain, including environmental toxins such as benzene or dioxin .

Changing position of the BfS

In a document published on May 24, 2003, the German Federal Office for Radiation Protection analyzed the phenomenon of the radiological weapon and came to the conclusion:

  • "The Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) has no evidence that 'dirty bombs' pose a real threat in Germany."
  • “Conclusion: From a radiological point of view, 'dirty bombs' would not pose a health risk to large parts of the population even in the immediate vicinity of the release site. But they would probably lead to great concern in the population and - due to ignorance of the real dangers - to overreactions. "

The document http://www.bfs.de/ion/papiere/schmutzige_bombe.htmlwas revised several times up to 2006, but was removed from the website in spring 2007. However, it is still available in the original version. A new version, which no longer contains the above-mentioned conclusion, was published there later. Here, too, reference is made to the “psychosocial effects such as insecurity…, fear and… hysteria… in the population” as well as “in particular the association with nuclear weapons”.

In a more recent paper on the “range of tasks of the BfS”, the latter also sees its own responsibility “to support hazard prevention measures” e.g. B. in a terrorist attack with a so-called dirty bomb.

Political importance

Politicians like the former German Minister of the Interior, Wolfgang Schäuble, point to the potential risk when terrorists use USBV-A. However, no USBV-A has been used and no such has been found. The concept of the dirty bomb is therefore only discussed speculatively by security forces and the media.

Cases of procurement of radioactive material

In two cases, attempts by militant groups to obtain radioactive material that could possibly be used for IED have been registered:

  • A box of radioactive cesium was found in Moscow's Izmailovsky Park in November 1995. A Chechen group was reported as the originator, which had alerted a television station to the hiding place. The find did not pose a threat.
  • On May 30, 2003, security forces arrested four members of the militant Islamist Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh in Bangladesh . They were in possession of 225 grams of uranium oxide, which presumably came from Kazakhstan .

In the media

Preparations for possible attacks were made for the soccer World Cup in Germany in June / July 2006 by training units from the fire brigade, the Federal Armed Forces and the technical relief organization (THW) to be able to effectively rescue people in NBC situations.

The topic was in the media in early June 2006 after 250 police officers stormed a house in London on June 2 that was suspected of being a dirty chemical bomb (USBV-C). The information about this came from an informant to the British domestic intelligence service MI5 . Previously, newspapers had reported citing security groups that an attack might be imminent. In the house, however, no trace of a bomb was found - and the action was commented on as the "failure of Forest Gate" in the German media.

In autumn 2006, on the occasion of the arrest of terrorist suspect Dhiren Barot in England, reports were again made of possible radiological weapons in terrorist hands. The consequences of an attack were speculated in a sometimes dramatic tone: "Some experts believe ... that several square kilometers of an affected city would be uninhabitable for decades, and that, in addition to the immediate victims, many cancer deaths could be expected over the years."

In September 2007, the then Federal Minister of the Interior, Schäuble, again warned of the danger that “it is no longer a question of whether, but only when, there will be an attack with nuclear material.” This statement led to severe criticism from the coalition party SPD . Thereupon Schäuble specified that "although there are no concrete indications of attack plans with so-called dirty bombs, it is nevertheless the concern of all security experts". The Greens then demanded the resignation of the minister, because "the minister's task is to prevent the dangers posed by a dirty bomb". The FDP deputy Gisela Piltz held against Schäuble that he “does not fight fears, which is actually his job”, and “ Die Linke ” also criticized him clearly.

Literature / web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Federal Office for Radiation Protection: Radiation protection when using radioactive material ("dirty bomb") in conjunction with conventional explosives (as of May 24, 2003) ( Memento of February 2, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
  2. ↑ Federal Office for Radiation Protection: Abuse of radioactive material in connection with conventional explosives ("dirty bomb") (status from 07.09.2007) ( Memento from September 27, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
  3. ↑ Federal Office for Radiation Protection: range of tasks of the BfS ( Memento of February 4, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
  4. ↑ Michael Specter: Russians Assert Radioactive Box Found in Park Posed No Danger , New York Times, November 25, 1995
  5. ↑ Alex Perry, "A Very Dirty Plot," Time Asia, June 9, 2003
  6. ↑ Terrorist Raid in London: The Failure of Forest Gate
  7. ↑ BBC: Dirty Bomb - The Secret Weapon of Terror ( Memento from July 25, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
  8. ^ Yassin Musharbash, Spiegel Online, November 14, 2006
  9. ↑ [1] , Spiegel Online, September 20, 2007