The ‘Other’ Existential Nuclear Threat
Another Commentary Coming from
An American in Ukraine
by Dr. E. C. Olson, Mission Director
The ‘other’ existential nuclear threat to Ukraine, Europe and the world may be an even greater one than the threat that Russia would use nuclear weapons.
The ‘other’ existential nuclear threat to Ukraine, Europe and the world may be an even greater one than the threat that Russia would use nuclear weapons.
Since the beginning of the Russian invasion, Ukrainians and the West have persistently worried about pushing Russia too far too fast, and they retaliate by elevating the war with a nuclear weapons attack – however, an even greater existential nuclear threat is already being played-out as Russia continues to launch artillery, missile and rocket attacks around the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.
The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is the largest of Ukraine’s four functioning nuclear power plants, featuring six nuclear reactors representing 46% of the reactors in operation. Due to persistent Russian shelling in and around the power plant, the head of the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog called the Zaporizhzhia situation as being “alarming” and “grave”.
What is the greatest concern?
As recent as August 12th, CNN’s reporting on this growing calamity quoted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi warning that parts of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant had been knocked out due to recent attacks, risking an “unacceptable” potential radiation leak.
“IAEA experts believe that there is no immediate threat to nuclear safety,” but “that could change at any moment,” Grossi said.
The Zaporizhzhia facility — the largest nuclear plant in Europe — occupies an extensive site on the Dnipro River near the Russian-occupied city of Enerhodar. It has continued operating at reduced capacity since Russian forces captured it early in March, with Ukrainian technicians remaining at work.
Russia and Ukraine have so far been unwilling to agree to an IAEA inspection of the plant and have accused each other of shelling the facility — action the IAEA has said breaches “indispensable nuclear safety and security pillars.”
Grossi, warned this week that the situation was becoming more perilous day by day at the Zaporizhzhia plant.
“Every principle of nuclear safety has been violated” at the plant, he said. “What is at stake is extremely serious.”
Before the Russian invasion, the six reactors at the Zaporizhzhia plant and the seven additional reactors at three other Ukrainian nuclear power plants supplied Ukraine with more than 50% of its national power generation. That said, it must be noted that following the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, Ukraine began a concerted effort to shift toward safer, renewable power sources, especially wind power.
How did this situation evolve?
Russian forces began an assault in the immediate vicinity of the power plant last Saturday, August 6th, and kept up rocket and artillery shelling around the power plant since then. The Russians are claiming that they are not intentionally targeting the power plant but instead the residential areas of Nikopol, a city across the Dnieper River from the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station.
EDITORIAL COMMENT: As further evidence of Russia’s nonchalant attitude toward committing War Crimes (and evidently the West’s nonchalant attitude toward prosecuting War Crimes), in denying that they were targeting the power plant, the Russian military officials were openly admitting to targeting instead, residential areas of Nikopol.
The nuclear plant has been under Russian control since Moscow’s troops seized it early in the war, but they have allowed a skeleton team of Ukrainians to continue to operate the plant at reduced levels, but a direct hit on any of the six reactors could dramatically elevate this incident to an international crisis.
Experts at the U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War said Russia is shelling the area intentionally, “putting Ukraine in a difficult position.”
The Ukrainian company operating the nuclear power station said Saturday that Russian troops are using the plant’s basement to hide from Ukrainian shelling and have barred its Ukrainian staff from going there.
“Ukrainian personnel do not yet have access to these premises, so in the event of new shelling, people have no shelter and are in danger,” Enerhoatom, a Ukrainian state enterprise, said on its Telegram channel.
Enerhoatom said Friday that Russian rockets had damaged the plant’s facilities, including a nitrogen-oxygen unit and a high-voltage power line. Local Russian-appointed officials acknowledged the damage but blamed it on the Ukrainians.
How potentially dangerous is this situation?
In an August 12th report, while both sides continue to place the blame on the other side, international nuclear power experts claim that any bombing that would breach the nuclear reactors’ protective barriers could bring about a disaster not unlike the Fukushima incident.
Even in an attempt to downplay this danger, Russian officials admitted that the Fukushima scenario is most applicable.
“The situation would be extremely unpleasant — just like it was in Fukushima. In Fukushima, nobody died, but everyone had to be resettled, and the Japanese had to take all kinds of thorough safety measures,” said Russian radiochemist Boris Zhuikov.
“If a working reactor were destroyed and Iodine-131 were released, the evacuation would need to take place in a matter of days. If Cesium-137 were released, they would probably have a month,” said Zhuikov.
The expert also highlighted the dangers of shelling, stating if a shell hits the plant in the wrong spot, it would leave the entire territory uninhabitable. “It won’t matter who fired the first shot,” Zhuikov said. He added the only solution is to demilitarize the entire area.
What are the implications for Ukrainians?
Obviously any major nuclear power plant disaster would create seismic increases in the pressure on the Ukrainian people and the humanitarian aid that they would need, as hundreds of thousands more Ukrainians would become “internally displaced” by this evacuation. While evacuating to safer regions up to a hundred miles away would provide immediate relief to those begin evacuated, it would create immediate danger of exhausting capacities at other Ukrainian refugee facilities and depleting already-lessened humanitarian aid reserves nationwide.
What are the implications for our Mission?
As for our Mission, any nuclear power plant disaster would fall under our Mission’s established rule of not returning to Ukraine while a nuclear radiation threat still exists. We had originally instituted this rule out of a concern that if the war escalated and Russia piled losses on top of losses on the conventional battlefield, Russia’s Vladimir Putin might desperately resort to using a nuclear weapon.
The fact that this threat now comes in a different form does not negate or lessen adherence to this rule; the uncontrolled spread of nuclear radiation would present a clear and present danger to our Mission Team, and one that immediately cease our in-person aid deliveries (we would likely continue to send aid through couriers and delivery services, but they too may be disrupted if such an event occurred).
We will continue to monitor this situation closely, so please keep checking back here at our website for that reporting.