Ukraine wants a nuclear incident: one of Russia's major fake narratives

In early October, Russia announced its withdrawal from the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Moscow explained this gesture comes in response to the fact that the United States, a signatory to the Treaty, has not yet ratified it (although it should be noted that the USA have not conducted nuclear tests in over thirty years). Moscow’s decision is clearly tied to the war in Ukraine and is meant to recall once again that Russia has a nuclear arsenal at its disposal. Ever since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, various Russian officials, most notably president Vladimir Putin, have reminded the international community about this arsenal, suggesting (some more explicitly than others) that Russia can always resort to these weapons. At the same time, one of the prominent fake news campaigns conducted by Russia accused Ukraine of planning to provoke a nuclear incident. The narratives moved from allegations that Ukraine was trying to obtain nuclear weapons, to claims that Ukraine was trying to set off a radiological bomb or cause a nuclear accident at one of the Ukrainian NPPs occupied by the Russian army. Veridica has monitored the evolution of these narratives about a nuclear threat, promoted in Kremlin-linked media and addressing the public in Ukraine, Romania, the Republic of Moldova and Bulgaria.

Narratives of Russian media: Ukraine, a nuclear threat against Russia

The Russian government media and high-ranking officials in Moscow have claimed from the early days of the full-scale invasion that Ukraine poses a nuclear threat to Russia’s security. In spring of 2022, pro-Kremlin media wrote that Russia attacked a number of Ukrainian settlements with a view to preventing Kyiv from manufacturing nuclear weapons. This is how the Russian media tried to justify the (failed) attack on the city of Kharkiv, the occupation of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant and the capturing of the decommissioned power plant in Chernobyl, which in 1986 was the stage of the biggest nuclear incident in world history. Narratives regarding nuclear weapons, in addition to theses about the threat of NATO “expansion” and Ukrainian “Nazism”, were also used to justify the war as a whole, not just specific operations. In February 2022, for instance, Russian president Vladimir Putin said that Russia cannot remain idle to the nuclear threat coming from Ukraine.

After the launch of the full-scale invasion, Russian media outlets also wrote about Kyiv’s plans to purchase nuclear weapons or to manufacture a radiological bomb.

In autumn of 2022, the Russian media was trying to convince domestic audiences that Ukraine might be manufacturing a “dirty bomb”, which disperses radioactive material. At the same time, Kyiv was accused of bombing the nuclear power plant in Zaporizhzhia in order to cause a nuclear disaster, under orders from the USA. In spring of 2023, the Russian media wrote that Ukraine was blocking the creation of a safety zone around the Zaporizhzhia NPP in order to cause a nuclear incident. Kyiv was equally accused of refusing to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), claiming it was led by terrorists.

On the other hand, Kyiv’s request of additional weapon deliveries from the West was regarded as one of the factors that could lead to a nuclear world war. In this context, Moscow’s decisions, including the partial mobilization of the Russian population, were depicted as necessary steps towards preventing a nuclear disaster and saving mankind from an imminent global catastrophe.

While condemning the alleged nuclear threat coming from Ukraine, Moscow at the same time threatened to use its own nuclear arsenal, using a variety of channels at its disposal (commentators, journalists, politicians or high-ranking officials). The purpose of these threats was to spread fear on the territory of Ukraine and undermine Western support for the Ukrainian armed forces. Putin and other officials in Moscow repeatedly referred to Russia’s nuclear arsenal, threatened to use these weapons if this was ever required to ensure the security of Russian territory. In December 2022, the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, said that Russia could launch a nuclear war should it lose the war in Ukraine. Medvedev warned NATO Defense Ministers to take this scenario under advisement when discussing the delivery of more weapons to Ukraine.

(Marin Gherman, Suceava/Chernivtsi)

Romania: support for Ukraine will lead to nuclear warfare

In mid-September 2023, in an address to the UN General Assembly, Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, was rhetorically asking: “Does it make any sense to reduce our nuclear arsenal when Russia is turning nuclear power plants into weapons?”, a reference to Russia’s occupation of the Zaporizhzhia NPP, which it “bombed and occupied and is now using it to blackmail others with radiation leaks”. Zelenskyy’s statements were later misquoted by the (pro)Russian propaganda and used to endorse the narrative stating that Ukraine is trying to obtain nuclear weapons and is working on developing a “dirty bomb” in order to blame Russia for its subsequent detonation.

The main thesis promoted in Romania – in both online publications as well as social media – was that, in the event the war in Ukraine further extends and Ukraine continues to receive support, Russia will respond by resorting to its nuclear arsenal. The purpose was therefore to spread fear and thus undermine support for Ukraine. As the war dragged on and supporters of Russia and opponents of Ukraine became increasingly vocal, Romania saw the advent of narratives according to which Ukraine can not only trigger a nuclear war by simply refusing to surrender, but it actively seeks to cause such an incident (at the Zaporizhzhia NPP) in order to involve NATO in the war effort.

Fear of radiation leaks generated mild degrees of panic in Romania and an increase in the demand for iodine pills. The situation was merely temporary. In response to a growing demand for the drug, the Health Ministry in Bucharest decided to purchase tens of millions of iodine tablets which it offered to the population free-of-charge. A year after its official launch, the campaign turned out to be a fiasco, as only 3% of these pills reached the population. The small percentage of people who purchased iodine tablets suggests the impact of the narratives about the nuclear threat generated by the war in Ukraine was not as significant as originally estimated. False narratives about this topic are part of a more elaborate disinformation campaign, which also includes themes about the persecution of Romanian ethnics in Ukraine, the Bystroye canal, “rich” and “ungrateful” refugees, “Zekenskyy the comedian”, etc. The aggregate impact of these narratives helped deteriorate perception on Ukraine and weakened support for the Ukrainian people from part of the Romanian population, even though Romania’s official policy to provide continuous support for Ukraine remained unchanged.

(Cezar Manu, Bucharest)

The Republic of Moldova: allegations that Ukraine is invoking the nuclear threat to obtain weapons and references to the traumatizing experience of Chernobyl

Narratives concerning the nuclear threat of the war reached audiences in the Republic of Moldova straight from the Russian media, which continues to be circulated in spite of official measures taken to reduce its presence, as well as via publications and articles addressing the Moldovan public. The focus was the fact that Ukraine would invoke the nuclear threat in order to obtain weapons and to generate pressure on Russia, which would eventually be forced by the international community to withdraw from certain regions of Ukraine lest it should cause a nuclear catastrophe.

Zelenskyy has frightened European societies with the possibility of a nuclear catastrophe, begging for more tanks and aircraft, the Russian media often wrote, commenting on the developments at the nuclear power plant in Zaporizhzhia. In a commentary translated for Moldovan audiences, Sputnik claimed Ukrainian mass-media and Western media outlets that support Kyiv have caused a mass-hysteria around the Zaprozhizhia NPP, and that the situation is identical to the moment Kyiv blew up the Kakhovka dam. Much like in the case of the explosion of the hydroelectric power plant, in the event a major incident occurs at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the Ukrainians could use the threat of radioactive contamination in order to call for the withdrawal of Russian troops, and demand the deployment of an international peacekeeping force in the region.

Sputnik writes that Ukraine is preparing acts of provocation at a decommissioned power plant, mentioning in this context the visit of the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, to the nuclear power plant in Rivne. The Ukrainian official inspected the systems protecting the reactors and the extent to which radiation has spread. Sputnik also claims that, after fueling the war in Ukraine, the West could now push Kyiv to the brink of a new nuclear disaster similar to Chernobyl.

The reference to Chernobyl is no accident, given this nuclear incident caused a trauma in the former USSR and continues to haunt collective mindsets. The Republic of Moldova makes no exception, all the more so as over 3,500 Moldovans were directly involved in efforts to liquidate the aftermath of the nuclear disaster.

(Mariana Vasilache, Chișinău)

Bulgaria: the nuclear threat influenced the refugee flow

In Bulgaria, the topics around potential nuclear danger or energy crisis have been, in a way, domesticated. Pro-Russian disinformation, both from Kremlin-friendly media sources or politicians leaning to Moscow’s version of events, has been building the narrative that involvement on Ukraine’s side will no doubt cause irreversible damage to Bulgaria’s economics. For example, this narrative was especially widespread when pro-EU PM Kiril Petkov’s 2021-2022 reformist cabinet was ousted and President Rumen Radev’s interim cabinet stepped in, initially warning for an impending crisis that would be solved only by a return to gas deliveries from Gazprom (Bulgaria cut ties with Russia’s gas giant in April 2022).

In 2023, increased military aid to Ukraine has been a point of criticisms from the pro-Moscow forces.

Pro-Russia’s left-wing leaders Bulgarian Socialist Party (traditionally aligned with Moscow as successors of the Communist party) and far-righters Revival have been critical to Bulgarian government’s decision from June to sell Ukraine Soviet-era reactors from the nuclear power plant in the town of Belene, planned since 1981 but under construction ever since. Both parties see this as destabilising Bulgaria’s energy resources and furtherly contributing to the war.

The expertise on the reactors and the exact details around the deal, which was cemented right after Zelensky’s visit in Sofia on July 12, are impending.

Threats from inside Ukraine have rarely made big circulation in Bulgaria’s media and social media spaces. However, the potential nuclear threat in Ukraine following Russia’s invasion influenced the refugee flow to Bulgaria. From the spring of 2022, through the summer and up until October, there have been several media reports that many of the Ukrainian refugees around the North Seaside in and around Varna have been hailing from the Zaporizhzhia region, escaping the potential hazard from the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant after the territory was occupied by Russia on March 3 last year.

(Svetoslav Todorov, Sofia)

FACT: Ukraine discarded its nuclear arsenal 30 years ago. Ukraine would also be the country hit the hardest by a nuclear blast. Russia has amplified the risk of a nuclear incident

There is no evidence Ukraine has ever tried to manufacture nuclear weapons. As a successor to the Soviet Union, Ukraine owned a nuclear arsenal, which it discarded in 1994 under the Budapest Memorandum, which provided this country with guarantees regarding its territorial integrity, including from Russia.

According to a report of the UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, Kyiv has no officially sanctioned program for the production of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. Moreover, Ukraine invited the International Agency for Atomic Energy to inspect the facilities that Russia claimed were developing dirty bombs, but the IAEA found no evidence that Ukraine was manufacturing such weapons with a view to using them against Russia.

At the same time, actions that deliberately pollute the environment (including the use of radioactive materials) are banned under the Ukrainian law and are considered acts of terrorism. As per Law no. 25/2003, Ukraine pledges to combat and prevent technological terrorism, which includes the use of any types of weapons of mass destruction. Ukrainian authorities comply with the provisions of the said legislation.

At the same time, Ukraine has never recognized Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula or other regions in eastern and southern Ukraine, which it regards as parts of its territory. For this reason, the use of radiological weapons seems illogical and goes against Ukraine’s military doctrine. Kyiv has no interest in bombing and attacking the Ukrainian population in the south, east or center by using radiological weapons or of any other kind, considering its goal is to liberate these territories.

Only Russia can use a nuclear bomb or a “dirty bomb” on the territory of Ukraine. Both Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, as well as the Russian Foreign Minister, in addition to various MPs and lawmakers, have blackmailed Ukraine and the West on a number of occasions, threatening to use nuclear weapons. The purpose of these statements was to thwart Western assistance to Kyiv and to spread fear and mistrust at the level of Ukrainian society.

Neither the Russian media, nor high-ranking officials have ever produced any item of evidence to prove that Ukraine was planning to manufacture or purchase nuclear weapons or to cause a nuclear disaster. The false narratives about Ukraine’s plans to enrich plutonium or uranium at Chernobyl or Zaporizhzhia were only a pretext to justify the invasion of Ukraine or to exonerate the Russian Federation in the context of war crimes committed against the civilian population in Bucha, Borodyanka, Izium, Hostomel, etc.

It is also worth noting the consequences of the Russian skirmishes in the radioactive area around Chernobyl in the first days of the large-scale invasion of Ukraine. Chernobyl was taken as part of the Russian attack from Belarus to Kyiv, and the heavy military equipment raised radioactive dust that caused a spike in radiation levels around the power plant.

At the same time, contrary to safety regulations and the recommendations of the IAEA, Russia deployed military equipment and a command center at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, captured in March 2022. The president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, repeatedly called on Russian forces to withdraw from the NPP premises, while the UN also demanded the swift demilitarization of the zone. In turn, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) condemned the forceful occupation of nuclear installations in Ukraine. According to IAEA, Russia’s actions significantly increase the risk of a nuclear accident or incident that would “endanger the population of Ukraine, neighboring countries and the international community”. Therefore, it is Russia, not Ukraine, that is considered by expert organizations in the field of nuclear energy as the main political actor that could cause a nuclear disaster on Ukraine’s territory.

The statements about Kyiv deliberately sabotaging its own civilian nuclear infrastructure are equally unfounded. The IAEA is yet to confirm a Ukrainian bombing or attack on the nuclear power plant that took place before or after Moscow’s accusations.

As one of the topics of war propaganda, the nuclear narrative has been used to justify the large-scale invasion, to encourage partial mobilization and other war efforts, as well as to bolster the Kremlin’s approval rating. At the same time, Russia’s nuclear threats were aimed at discouraging Kyiv’s defensive efforts and at stalling Western assistance to the Ukrainian resistance.