- Putin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons, but the US government recently warned of a completely different horror scenario: Putin may prepare to use chemical weapons.
- At least that is what the well-known pattern in the Kremlin’s rhetoric suggests.
- Military expert Gustav Gressel also believes that chemical weapons are very popular in Putin’s cost-benefit analysis.
The whole world is concerned about the question of whether Putin will use nuclear weapons. Time and time again the head of the Kremlin shook his sabers, and NATO repeatedly emphasized its red lines. Nuclear weapons are not the only terrorist weapons in Putin’s repertoire.
The possible use of chemical weapons is currently of concern to the public worldwide. The United States has already warned against such a scenario. In early March, spokeswoman for US President Joe Biden, Jen Psaki, said Russia had repeatedly used chemical or biological weapons – and supported the Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad, whose regime “has used chemical weapons repeatedly.”
Russia and chemical weapons
Russia and Syria strongly deny this. However, independent bodies such as the United Nations (UN) have been able to prove that the Syrian ruler has repeatedly used chemical weapons such as chlorine gas and sarin against his own people.
The use of chemical weapons has been officially banned since 1997. Russia is also one of 191 countries that have pledged not to produce or use chemical weapons. However, the attack on former spy Sergei Skripal with the help of nervous agent Novichok called into question Russia’s involvement.
Warnings for Russia
In any case, the Kremlin now prefers to point the finger at others: apparently there is evidence of US military and biological activities in Ukraine. The goal of Pentagon-funded research is to develop “a mechanism for the covert spread of deadly pathogens,” Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said.
This is a clear warning signal not only to Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD). “Russian claims that Ukraine is developing biological and chemical weapons or that the United States wants to use such weapons in Ukraine, which is not true, appears to me as a hidden threat that Putin himself is considering using such weapons,” Scholz said in an interview. with time”.
Is Putin preparing an operation?
The US government shares this assessment and recognizes a “clear pattern,” according to Biden Psaki’s spokeswoman Twitter he wrote. “Now that Russia has made these false claims, we should all be vigilant that Russia may be using chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine or carrying out a false-flag operation,” she warned.
Military expert Gustav Gressel also fears that Moscow’s accusations may constitute propaganda preparation to blame Ukrainians for using chemical weapons as a false flag operation.
Putin’s cost-benefit calculation
“Of all weapons of mass destruction, the use of chemical weapons is the most likely,” says Gressel. Putin does not deal with the humanitarian aspects, but only with the military-political cost-benefit calculation.
“If Putin wants to destroy cities, he can also do it with thermobaric weapons,” recalls Gressel. In this way, Putin does not risk such an international ban as in the case of nuclear weapons. “On the other hand, the use of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state like Ukraine would attract many states that are now neutral or benevolent towards Russia – such as India and Brazil – on the enemy side,” Gressel said.
What speaks against nuclear weapons?
Moreover, when it comes to nuclear weapons, the question arises as to whom Putin should use them against. “If he wanted to bring Kyiv to its knees, he would have wiped out what he called” the birthplace of Eastern Christianity, “explains Gressel. This is hard to convey to the local population. Gressel adds: “The use of nuclear weapons against NATO would provoke nuclear retaliation – a game that Russia cannot win.”
The use of nuclear weapons should therefore not appear too attractive in cost-benefit calculations. From Gressel’s point of view, the use of biological weapons is also not particularly attractive to Putin. “Russia would not be able to protect its own soldiers and its own population very well against biological weapons,” says Putin. Your own invaders’ army can be easily breached.
Playing for time
“Putin already considers the corona virus to be the US biological weapons program, which also explains his enormous fear of it,” comments Gressel. The virus has already caused setbacks among the Russian armed forces. “Putin has already experienced how the virus affects his own armed forces and can reverse,” said the expert.
Chemical weapons are different. “Putin is currently stalling. Russia can only launch a major attack again if more forces are brought to Ukraine, Gressel said. The current forces in Ukraine are exhausted and overburdened – Putin needs time to reorganize.
Chemical weapons calculations
“If chemical weapons are used, Putin could try to blame the Ukrainians, thereby politically discrediting the country and undermining support in the West,” he warns. For example, he may have used propaganda and false reports to try to claim that Ukraine did not store the substance properly or that its own program was unleashed by a bomb strike.
“If such an incident slows Western weapons supplies, it makes military and political sense for Putin,” says Gressel. NATO has already deployed weapons of mass destruction detection teams and deployed them on the eastern border. “In the event of an incident, samples can be taken directly and the airflow can be monitored,” says Gressel. This means that a weekly evidential trial is not necessary and the false attribution can be resolved quickly.
use of phosphorus bombs
There are already reports of the use of phosphorus bombs in Ukraine. It is debatable whether phosphorus bombs are chemical weapons because of their toxic effects. Although the Geneva Convention does not prohibit the use of white phosphorus ammunition, it does prohibit attacks that cause disproportionate damage to civilians.
Bombs that contain a mixture of white phosphorus and rubber that ignites on contact with oxygen in the air can also be used for military tactical purposes. With the help of phosphorus bombs, the conflict zones are lit or darkened by smoke.
use against the civilian population
The films published, among others, by the British ITV station are said to show phosphorus bombs over the city of Irpin near Kiev. The President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, also said in a speech: “There were phosphorus bombs this morning. Russian phosphorus bombs. Adults have died again, and children have died again.
According to Human Rights Watch, when phosphorus bombs hit civilians, the consequences include horrific burns, respiratory damage, infection, shock, and organ failure. A fire from phosphorus bombs can only be smothered by agents such as sand. Those who survived the phosphorus bomb attack often suffer severe disabilities throughout their lives. Russia used it in air raids during the 2015 Syrian Civil War.
About the expert:
Gustav Gressel is an expert in security policy, military strategy and international relations. He completed officer training and studied political science at the University of Salzburg. Gressel focuses on Eastern Europe, Russia and the foreign policy of the great powers.
Sources used:
- Zeit.de: Olaf Scholz: “The situation is so bitter”: March 23, 2022
- Twitter: Jen Psaki’s profile
- France24 Deutsch: Zelenskiy says Russia uses phosphorus bombs in Ukraine: 03/24/2022
- Human Rights Watch: From Condemnation to Concrete Action: A Five-Year Review of Incendiary Weapons. November 2015.
Updated 3/23/2022 15:33
On February 24, by order of President Vladimir Putin, Russia launched a wide-ranging attack on Ukraine. The war has been going on for the fourth week now. Millions of people are fleeing, and more and more cities in Ukraine are embroiled in fighting.