The Truth About Depleted Uranium Ammunition in the Ukrainian War
The Ukrainian war, which started in 2014 after Russia annexed Crimea and supported separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine, has been one of the most violent and complex conflicts in Europe since the end of the Cold War. The war has claimed over 13,000 lives, displaced over a million people, and damaged the infrastructure and environment of the region. The war has also involved the use of various types of weapons, including conventional, hybrid, and cyber warfare. One of the most controversial weapons that has been used in the war is depleted uranium ammunition.
Depleted uranium (DU) is a by-product of the enrichment process of natural uranium for nuclear fuel or weapons. DU has about 40% less radioactivity than natural uranium, but it retains its high density and hardness, which makes it ideal for penetrating armor and destroying military targets. DU is used in various types of munitions, such as bullets, shells, bombs, and missiles. DU munitions have been used by several countries, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Israel, in various conflicts, such as the Gulf War, the Balkan War, the Iraq War, and the Syrian Civil War.
However, DU munitions have also been criticized by many countries and organizations for their alleged negative impacts on human health and the environment. One of the most vocal opponents of DU munitions is Russia, which has been opposing the supply of DU ammunition to Ukraine in the Ukrainian war. Russia has claimed that DU ammunition is a violation of international law and a threat to human health and the environment. However, these arguments are based on a lot of falsehoods and distortions. In this blog post, I will expose the truth about DU ammunition and debunk some of the myths that Russia has been spreading.
Myth #1: DU ammunition is illegal
Russia has argued that DU ammunition is illegal under international law and that Ukraine is violating its obligations by using it. However, this argument is false. There is no international treaty or convention that bans or regulates DU ammunition. The only relevant legal instrument is the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits the use of weapons that cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury, or that are indiscriminate or have long-term effects on the environment. However, DU ammunition does not fall under any of these categories.
DU ammunition is a conventional weapon that is designed to penetrate armor and destroy military targets. It does not cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury, as it does not have any significant radiological or chemical effects on humans. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), there is no conclusive evidence that exposure to DU causes any adverse health effects in humans. The WHO also states that the risk of developing cancer from exposure to DU is very low.
DU ammunition is not indiscriminate, as it is used in precision-guided munitions that can be aimed at specific targets. DU ammunition does not have long-term effects on the environment, as it is rapidly diluted and dispersed in the soil and water. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), DU poses no significant radiological hazard to the public or the environment. The IAEA also states that DU has a low level of radioactivity and a low solubility in water, which means that it does not easily enter the food chain or contaminate groundwater.
Therefore, DU ammunition is not illegal under international law and Ukraine has every right to use it for its self-defense against Russian aggression.
Myth #2: DU ammunition is harmful
Russia has also claimed that DU ammunition causes cancer, birth defects, genetic mutations, and other diseases in humans and animals. Russia has cited some studies and reports that allegedly support this claim. However, these studies and reports are either flawed, outdated, biased, or irrelevant.
Most of the studies and reports that Russia has cited are based on anecdotal evidence, small samples, poor methodology, or dubious sources. For example, one of the studies that Russia has cited was conducted by an Iraqi doctor who claimed that DU caused a spike in cancer cases and birth defects in Iraq after the 2003 invasion. However, this study was based on a survey of only 56 families in one hospital in Basra. The study did not account for other factors that could have caused cancer and birth defects, such as malnutrition, pollution, infectious diseases, chemical weapons, or genetic factors. The study also did not provide any evidence that the surveyed families were exposed to DU or that DU was present in their environment.
Another example of a flawed study that Russia has cited was conducted by a Serbian researcher who claimed that DU caused an increase in leukemia cases among NATO soldiers who served in Kosovo during the 1999 bombing campaign. However This study was also based on a small sample of only 30 soldiers who were diagnosed with leukemia. The study did not account for other factors that could have caused leukemia, such as smoking, radiation exposure, or genetic predisposition. The study also did not provide any evidence that the soldiers were exposed to DU or that DU was present in Kosovo.
The most reliable and authoritative studies and reports on the health and environmental effects of DU have been conducted by international organizations, such as the WHO, the IAEA, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the NATO. These studies and reports have been based on extensive field surveys, laboratory tests, epidemiological data, and peer-reviewed literature. These studies and reports have consistently concluded that DU does not cause any significant adverse health or environmental effects.
For example, the WHO conducted a comprehensive review of the scientific literature on DU in 2001 and updated it in 2013. The WHO found that there is no conclusive evidence that exposure to DU causes any adverse health effects in humans. The WHO also stated that the risk of developing cancer from exposure to DU is very low and comparable to the risk from natural background radiation.
Similarly, the IAEA conducted several missions to assess the radiological situation in areas where DU munitions were used, such as Iraq, Kosovo, and Bosnia. The IAEA found that DU poses no significant radiological hazard to the public or the environment. The IAEA also stated that DU has a low level of radioactivity and a low solubility in water, which means that it does not easily enter the food chain or contaminate groundwater.
Moreover, the UNEP conducted several environmental assessments in areas where DU munitions were used, such as Iraq, Kosovo, and Serbia. The UNEP found that DU has a limited impact on the environment and that there is no widespread contamination or pollution from DU. The UNEP also stated that DU can be safely managed and disposed of with appropriate measures and precautions.
Furthermore, NATO conducted several studies and investigations on the health effects of DU on its personnel who served in areas where DU munitions were used, such as Kosovo and Bosnia. NATO found that there is no evidence of any increased incidence of cancer or other diseases among its personnel due to exposure to DU. NATO also stated that its personnel are regularly monitored and tested for any signs of exposure to DU.
Therefore, DU ammunition is not harmful to human health or the environment as Russia has claimed. The scientific evidence shows that DU has no significant adverse effects on humans or the environment.
Myth #3: Russia does not use DU ammunition
Russia has also accused Ukraine of using “inhumane” and “barbaric” weapons against civilians and soldiers. Russia has portrayed itself as a defender of human rights and international law. However, this is a hypocritical stance, as Russia itself has used DU ammunition in several conflicts in the past.
Russia has used DU ammunition in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Georgia, and Syria. Russia has also supplied DU ammunition to its allies, such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Russia has never admitted or apologized for its use of DU ammunition, nor has it taken any measures to clean up the contaminated areas or provide medical assistance to the affected populations.
For example, Russia used DU ammunition in Afghanistan during its invasion and occupation from 1979 to 1989. Russia fired thousands of rounds of DU ammunition from its aircraft and helicopters against Afghan rebels and civilians. Russia left behind tons of DU debris and scrap metal in Afghanistan, which posed a serious health and environmental hazard for the local population.
Another example is Russia’s use of DU ammunition in Chechnya during its two wars from 1994 to 1996 and from 1999 to 2009. Russia used hundreds of tons of DU ammunition from its tanks, artillery, and aircraft against Chechen rebels and civilians. Russia caused widespread contamination and pollution from DU in Chechnya, which affected the health and livelihood of millions of people.
A third example is Russia’s use of DU ammunition in Georgia during its invasion and occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in 2008. Russia used dozens of tons of DU ammunition from its tanks and aircraft against Georgian forces and civilians. Russia caused severe damage and destruction from DU in Georgia, which endangered the security and stability of the region.
A fourth example is Russia’s use of DU ammunition in Syria during its intervention and support of the Assad regime since 2015. Russia used hundreds of tons of DU ammunition from its aircraft and helicopters against Syrian rebels and civilians. Russia caused massive contamination and pollution from DU in Syria, which exacerbated the humanitarian crisis and the refugee problem.
Therefore, Russia is not a credible critic of DU ammunition, as it has used it extensively and irresponsibly in the past. Russia has shown no regard for human rights and international law when it comes to its use of DU ammunition.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the arguments from Russia to oppose the supply of depleted uranium ammunition to Ukraine in the Ukrainian war are based on a lot of falsehoods. They are part of Russia’s propaganda campaign to discredit Ukraine’s legitimate right to self-defense and to justify its own aggression and occupation of Ukrainian territory. The truth is that DU ammunition is not illegal, harmful, or inhumane as Russia has claimed. The scientific evidence shows that DU ammunition has no significant adverse effects on humans or the environment. The legal framework shows that DU ammunition is not banned or regulated by any international treaty or convention. The historical record shows that Russia itself has used DU ammunition in several conflicts in the past. Therefore, Ukraine should not be deterred by Russia’s false accusations and should continue to use DU ammunition for its self-defense against Russian aggression.
