Janne Mäkitalo, a military professor at the National Defense College, considers the current discussion on chemical weapons as part of the information warfare.
The United States and Russia have plunged into a war of words over the use of chemical and biological weapons in the war in Ukraine.
According to Russia, the United States has laboratories specializing in the development of biological weapons in Ukraine.
The United States considers the allegations nonsense and believes that Russia will use them as an excuse to carry out its own chemical attack in Ukraine.
We asked about it at a military professor at the National Defense College From Janne Mäkitalo.
Can chemical weapons be used in the war in Ukraine?
– Russia has repeatedly accused the West of crimes it commits itself, Foreign Ministry spokesman Ned Price said.
Press Secretary to the President of the United States Jen Psakin Russia also used a similar propaganda tool in Syria, where the regime it supported eventually used chemical and biological weapons itself.
According to Russia, Ukraine is developing a “dirty bomb”, which, after exploding, will spread radioactive material.
The allegations are harsh, but is the risk of using chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine real?
– I find it very unlikely. I very much wonder where such rhetoric has come from both Western and Russian statements, Mäkitalo says.
According to him, neither party has provided any evidence that chemical or biological weapons have been used or are even being prepared for use.
The use of chemical and biological weapons is prohibited under international law. They must also not be used when targeting mere military targets.
The ban is absolute and unequivocal.
– The treaty banning chemical weapons signed by Russia and Ukraine in the 1990s prohibits the development, production, storage and use of chemical warfare agents, Mäkitalo reminds.
According to Mäkitalo, the use of chemical weapons would be a significant damage to the reputation of both parties.
– If these weapons were used, it would prove that the prohibition agreement has been violated for 25 years, Mäkitalo estimates.
According to him, it would lead to an even stronger isolation of Russia from the international community. In addition, Mäkitalo points out that the destructive power of Russia’s traditional weapons is so enormous that it does not have to resort to chemical weapons.
For Ukraine, the use of these banned weapons, in turn, would mean a loss of image in a situation where it is leading an information war.
– To the Western public, Ukraine appears to be a country that is right in everything it does. This would ruin their reputation, he believes.
What are chemical weapons and where have they been used?
Chemical and biological weapons are not the same thing.
According to Mäkitalo, there is international talk of CBRN weapons, which include chemical, biological, radiation and nuclear weapons.
– Of these, only chemical and biological weapons are prohibited. The storage and manufacture of nuclear weapons is allowed, although efforts are being made to limit the number of countries that own them, he says.
According to Mäkitalo, the initiative to ban nuclear and radiological weapons has met with opposition not only from nuclear-weapon states but also from other states.
Why could chemical and biological weapons be used in theory? What do they achieve in warfare?
– They are such cruel weapons that they are used in retaliation, Mäkitalo says.
In addition, they can wreak havoc, for example, 20 kilometers away, without the loss of their own forces.
Mäkitalo demonstrated the destructive power of gas weapons in an accident in Bhopal, India in 1984, where it is estimated that up to tens of thousands of people died in a short time when toxic methyl isocyanate was released into the air from an insecticide plant.
Such extensive destruction can affect the enemy’s fighting morale.
According to Mäkitalo, the last time chemical weapons were used in the Syrian war.
According to the OPWC, the weapons were used by Syrian government forces.
– Before that, Iraq used mustard gas in connection with the 1989 Kurdish genocide, and before that, Iraq also used these weapons against Iran, Mäkitalo says.
Also in World War I, both alliances used chemical weapons.
Is there any evidence of allegations of U.S. weapons laboratories in Ukraine?
According to Mäkitalo, this is about influencing information. No evidence has been provided for these allegations.
– The aim is to arouse fear and shift the focus of the media from doing it to what others are saying, he estimates.
Mäkitalo reminds that international agreements allow states to store, for example, anthrax bacteria in safe laboratory conditions.
– This is because states can maintain the ability to test and diagnose these substances. That way, they have the capacity to take action if someone uses such tools, he says.
The agreements define very precisely what type of bacterial stock and how much countries are allowed to keep.
According to Mäkitalo, there are such top-safe storage places in several countries, including Finland.
According to him, Russia’s claims that the United States supports Ukraine in the production of biological weapons may be related to such a laboratory allowed by the agreement.
Has Russia used chemical weapons in the past?
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union had a biological weapons program that many considered the largest in the world.
– Russia still carries out similar research activities and maintains similar performance, but on a smaller scale, Mäkitalo says.
According to him, the evidence suggests that the Russian intelligence service used these substances in assassinations and their attempts.
For example, a former KGB officer who jumped into Britain Alexander Litvinenko was murdered by a substance called Polonium, which caused dangerous radiation.
Russia is also accused of using a chemical weapon Sergei Skripalia against Britain in 2018 as well as an opposition activist Alexei Navalny against Siberia in 2020.
But there are no confirmed examples of Russia using these weapons in war.
What would be the consequences if they were used?
In Ukraine, the use of chemical weapons is likely to lead to significant destruction.
According to Mäkitalo, the immediate consequences would be personal losses and losses related to the pollution of the areas.
Mäkitalo reiterates that he does not consider this likely at all.
– This is guaranteed to have international consequences, he says.
Mäkitalo recalls that so far the mere suspicion of acquiring a nuclear weapon has led the West to impose harsh sanctions on Iran.