The war unleashed by Vladimir Putin in Ukraine has raised the specter of a nuclear catastrophe. On the very day of the launch of its offensive, February 24, the Russian army took control of the former Chernobyl power plant, the site of the most terrible nuclear accident in history, in 1986. “No immediate danger” nevertheless, according to Karine Herviou, Deputy Director General of the Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN). A few days later, the nuclear power plant in Zaporizhia, the largest in Europe, was attacked, which started a fire which raised fears of the worst. A laboratory and a training building were hit on the night of March 3 to 4 by Russian artillery, according to the Ukrainian side. However, no radioactive leak was detected, and the six reactors suffered no damage.
The statements of the Russian autocratic president are not likely to allay concerns either. The master of the Kremlin ordered, on February 27, to put the deterrent forces of the Russian army on special combat alert. In launching the invasion of Ukraine, he also warned those “who would try to interfere” with Russian troops “that Russia’s response will be immediate and will lead to consequences (…) never before known”. A thinly veiled allusion to nuclear weapons. For the first time, an armed conflict involving an atomic power is taking place in a country equipped with nuclear power plants to produce electricity. The fear of an accident grows. Is France ready to face it?
1In the event of an accident at a Ukrainian nuclear power plant
This is the first scenario. In this scenario, the reactors of a Ukrainian nuclear power plant are hit during the fighting, causing a major nuclear accident. In this situation, in France, it is the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) which will advise the public authorities. An interministerial crisis center (CIC) will be created. It will be managed by the Prime Minister, in association with the President of the Republic. The organization of this French response is provided for in the National Response Plan to a major nuclear or radiological accident, developed after the Fukushima disaster (Japan) in 2011.
“If the nuclear accident occurs abroad, we have time to see it coming.”
Christophe Quintin, chief inspector at ASNat franceinfo
“We will follow the cloud [radioactif] containing the particles with the calculations made by the IRSN. Depending on that, decisions will be made.” by public authorities, adds the chief inspector at the Nuclear Safety Authority.
“It is the State which is responsible for crisis management, but there is a strong dependence of public authorities on experts”, explains Valérie Arnhold, policy and risk management expert at EMLYon Business School and associate researcher at Sciences Po Paris. The distribution of iodine tablets, which are supposed to prevent the thyroid from absorbing the radioactive iodine released into the environment, will thus be done following the recommendations of the ASN, which is based on reference values established in the Code of public health (article D.1333-84). It should intervene as soon as the forecasts of exposure of the thyroid exceed 50 millisieverts (mSv), which corresponds to the tool for measuring radiation on living matter. Fifty mSv represents 15 times the dose received per year by the French population.
This distribution would be organized by the Orsec iodine plans, drawn up by the prefects, which allow emergency distribution to the entire population. While France announced on March 6 that it had sent “various medical products” to support Ukraine, including stable iodine, the question of the state of the national stock arises. The Directorate General of Health assures us: there is nothing to worry about on that side.
“If the situation required it, the State stocks would allow a distribution of tablets to the whole of the population.”
The General Directorate of Healthat franceinfo
In France, the sheltering and evacuation of the population, although anticipated in the national plan, have little chance of being applied. A sheltering is triggered when the population’s exposure forecast exceeds 10 mSv for the whole body. For theevacuation, it is from 50 mSv. In case of’nuclear accident abroad, “we will never have a level of radioactivity such that it is necessary to shelter the population in France”, ensures the chief inspector at the ASN.
In the event of a nuclear accident occurring abroad, ASN would also be responsible for formulating recommendations relating to food consumption. During the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, for example, it would have been necessary to restrict the consumption of milk in certain areas of France. All of these measures will have to be applied in cooperation with other countries, to avoid reproducing the cacophony at work during Chernobyl. “In the event of an incident in a war zone like in Ukraine, the mechanisms of international cooperation are defeated”however, believes researcher Valérie Arnhold.
2In the event of a nuclear bombardment
Second scenario, the most dramatic: a nuclear attack. The consequences for France would be much heavier than during a civilian nuclear accident, believes Jean-Marie Collin, expert and spokesperson for Ican France (International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons). “It’s different, both in the detonation and in the psychological impact on the populations.” The location of the detonation would be one of the variables that would define the level of severity for France, he adds. “A series of disasters could follow one another with nearby Seveso-type companies, an impossibility of treating the populations…”
In health terms too, the repercussions of a nuclear bombardment in Europe would be different. “The temperature reached by the bomb will cause the particles to rise to 10,000 meters above sea level, it will then take several days, even several weeks, for them to fall. The impacted area will be larger than during a nuclear accident, but in a more less focused”explains Roland Desbordes, spokesperson for Criirad, an independent association created in 1986 after the Chernobyl disaster to control the radioactivity present in the environment.
Another bad news in the scenario of an attack of this type: France does not have the capacity to intercept nuclear missiles. “The coupling of thermonuclear explosives to intercontinental ballistic missiles, which took place in the early 1960s, produced a near impossibility of intercepting the missile once it was launched. The hypersonic missiles possessed today by the Russia continue this dynamic”, explains Benoît Pelopidas, professor at Sciences Po, founder of the first independent university research program on nuclear issues in France. Same story for the allies of France, who would not be able to stop the attack either.
“The grossly insufficient performance of US ballistic missile defense systems in testing precludes the possibility of interception protection in the face of a massive attack.”
Benoît Pelopidas, professor at Sciences Poat franceinfo
Unable to stop a nuclear offensive, would France still be ready to face it? The question is much more complex than for a nuclear accident.
“The French state is supposed to respond with its nuclear missiles. We then enter a system that is unthinkable, so there is nothing planned for the populations”, advances Jean-Marie Collin, expert and spokesperson for Ican France. An unthinkable that stems from the national nuclear deterrence strategy. “In France, the political and military elites have bet on nuclear deterrence, which is a bet on vulnerability. In summary, according to this logic, it is no longer necessary to protect populationsadds Benoît Pelopidas, author of the book Rethinking nuclear choices (Sciences Po Press, 2022). This is why nuclear deterrence is a bet on the absence of an unwanted nuclear explosion.”
It is for this same reason that in the event of a threat of nuclear bombardment, France would not be able to place its population in anti-atomic shelters. France only has a few hundred, for a population of 67.4 million. In comparison, Switzerland (with a population of 8.5 million) has built 360,000 shelters, which ensures approximately 9 million places protected for the population, i.e. a coverage rate of more than 100%, according to figures from the Federal Office for Civil Protection (OFPP). The country had massively built bunkers during the Cold War. But in the event of a global nuclear conflict, the very relevance of this equipment should be put into perspective. Fallout shelters would only prove profitable if the number of weapons launched remains relatively low.
“In the face of anything other than a very small number of explosions, these shelters have been shown to be an illusion of protection.”
Benoît Pelopidas, professor at Sciences Poat franceinfo
“As early as the 1950s, an SNPC report [Service national de Protection civile] established that fifteen thermonuclear bombs would be enough to destroy France”details Benoit Pelopidas.
Finally, France should be directly targeted to make the fallout shelter useful. In the event of an attack from another country in Europe, having a shelter would not be of much help against the nuclear cloud. More generally, en the event of a nuclear crisis on the continent, after an accident at a power plant or due to the explosion of missiles, certain consequences remain difficult to anticipate, despite the national crisis management policy. “No preparation protects against the possibility of very significant health effects and environmental consequences in the event of a nuclear accident”recalls Valérie Arnhold.