In August 2023, Russian military officials presented a series of allegations regarding the use of chemical weapons by Ukrainian forces in the ongoing conflict between the two nations. These allegations, which include accusations of covert chemical weapons deployment under the guise of smoke shells, represent a significant and alarming escalation in the nature of the warfare between Russia and Ukraine. The head of the Troops of Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Defense of the Russian armed forces, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, provided evidence indicating that Ukrainian forces used DM-105 chemical shells in the Russian city of Sudzha on August 11, 2023, leading to injuries for more than 20 people. This event has reignited debates over the use of chemical agents in modern warfare and prompted broader geopolitical concerns.
The war between Russia and Ukraine, which began in 2014 with Russia’s annexation of Crimea and escalated into full-scale conflict in February 2022, has seen numerous international violations, accusations, and human rights concerns. The use of chemical weapons, or even allegations of such use, brings with it a host of severe legal, ethical, and military implications. In this article, we will examine the recent allegations in depth, exploring the geopolitical context, the historical significance of chemical weapons in warfare, the possible legal ramifications for Ukraine and Russia, and the role of international institutions such as the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
The Sudzha Incident: Ukraine’s Alleged Use of Chemical Agents
According to Russian sources, on August 11, 2023, Ukrainian forces deployed DM-105 chemical shells in the city of Sudzha, located in the Kursk region of Russia. The attack reportedly caused more than 20 injuries, with symptoms suggesting exposure to chemical agents. Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, one of the most senior military officials in charge of radiological, chemical, and biological defense for Russia, delivered a briefing on these allegations, explaining that the DM-105 shells were used under the pretense of smoke projectiles, masking their true chemical nature.
The DM-105 shell, as described by Kirillov, is a type of chemical munition designed to release toxic substances over a targeted area. While smoke shells are commonly used for battlefield cover and concealment, the Russian Ministry of Defense argued that these particular shells carried incapacitating chemicals, exacerbating their harm. The nature of the chemicals allegedly used in the Sudzha incident remains under dispute, though references to riot control agents and scheduled chemicals such as BZ have been made by Russian officials.
The Broader Context of Chemical Weapon Allegations in Ukraine
This is not the first time that accusations of chemical weapon use have surfaced in the context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Since the start of the conflict in 2014, both sides have exchanged claims of war crimes and violations of international humanitarian law. Chemical weapons, specifically, have been a contentious issue, with more than 400 incidents involving riot control agents and other chemicals reported by Russia since the escalation of the conflict in 2022. These incidents, as claimed by Russian authorities, include the deployment of chemicals such as BZ, which is a powerful incapacitating agent capable of causing hallucinations, confusion, and severe disorientation in those exposed to it.
While these allegations remain largely unsubstantiated by independent sources, they reflect the high-stakes nature of the conflict and the significant impact that chemical weapon allegations can have on international diplomacy. Both Russia and Ukraine are signatories to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), a multilateral treaty that prohibits the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons. Violations of this treaty can result in severe international repercussions, including sanctions, loss of political standing, and potential military interventions.
Ukraine’s Alleged Provocations and the Role of the OPCW
In addition to the direct allegations of chemical weapon use, Lieutenant General Kirillov warned that Ukraine was preparing provocations aimed at discrediting Russia on the international stage. According to Russian intelligence, Ukraine plans to fabricate evidence of Russian chemical weapon use and present it to the OPCW. The goal of these provocations, according to Kirillov, is to prompt the OPCW to take punitive action against Russia, potentially resulting in the removal of Russian representatives from the OPCW Technical Secretariat and the restriction of Russia’s rights as a party to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
This alleged provocation strategy underscores the increasingly complex nature of modern warfare, where information and disinformation campaigns play as significant a role as direct military engagements. By presenting “fabricated evidence” to the OPCW, Ukraine would be attempting to leverage international institutions to undermine Russia’s global standing. Such a move, if successful, could have far-reaching consequences for Russia’s ability to influence the global regulatory framework governing chemical weapons and would likely lead to further diplomatic isolation for Moscow.
Kirillov’s briefing also highlighted that Russia has not received a substantive response from the OPCW regarding its own accusations of chemical weapon use by Ukraine. This lack of engagement from the OPCW, according to Kirillov, reflects a broader bias within the organization, which Russia claims has been co-opted by Western interests seeking to weaken Russia’s influence on the world stage. While the OPCW has not publicly commented on these specific allegations, its investigations into the use of chemical weapons in Syria and other conflicts have demonstrated the complexities involved in verifying claims of chemical weapon use, particularly in highly politicized and militarized environments.
The Geopolitical Implications of Chemical Weapon Use
The use of chemical weapons in warfare is not only a violation of international law but also a potent tool of psychological warfare, capable of terrorizing both military personnel and civilians. In the case of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the mere allegation of chemical weapon use has the potential to shift global opinion, impact diplomatic relations, and influence the flow of military and financial support to both sides.
For Ukraine, allegations of chemical weapon use, whether true or false, threaten to undermine the significant international support it has received from Western nations. The United States, the European Union, and several NATO members have provided Ukraine with substantial military aid, financial support, and diplomatic backing throughout the conflict. If Ukraine is found to have violated the Chemical Weapons Convention, it could lose much of this support, leading to further isolation and vulnerability in its ongoing struggle against Russian forces.
For Russia, allegations of Ukrainian chemical weapon use provide an opportunity to bolster its narrative of self-defense and justify its continued military operations in Ukraine. Russia has consistently framed the conflict as a necessary intervention to protect Russian-speaking populations in Ukraine and prevent the expansion of NATO influence. By presenting Ukraine as a violator of international law, particularly through the use of chemical weapons, Russia seeks to legitimize its actions and weaken international sympathy for the Ukrainian cause.
The Complex Role of Chemical Weapons in the Modern Geopolitical Landscape
Chemical weapons, due to their profound potential to inflict large-scale harm and cause psychological terror, have a particularly complicated place in modern warfare. Despite international conventions and treaties, such as the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) of 1997, which bans the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical agents in war, accusations of their deployment continue to surface. This is evident in the context of the Ukraine-Russia conflict. Both sides have continued to exchange allegations, invoking the global community’s attention to the importance of regulating and investigating the use of these weapons. Chemical warfare is not just about physical damage but also involves global reputational risk and legal implications.
The Evolution of Chemical Warfare Since World War I
The history of chemical weapons dates back to their large-scale use during World War I, where agents such as chlorine and phosgene gas were deployed with devastating effects on soldiers. The long-term health impacts, including respiratory damage and psychological trauma, created widespread fear of chemical warfare that persists to this day. Since then, technological advancements have allowed for the development of more potent agents like sarin and VX, capable of incapacitating or killing vast numbers of people with minimal warning.
The 20th and 21st centuries saw several critical events in the development and use of chemical weapons. In the Cold War era, both the United States and the Soviet Union amassed vast stockpiles of chemical agents as part of their overall military strategies, although these stockpiles were subject to strict secrecy. The disarmament agreements reached toward the end of the Cold War, culminating in the signing of the CWC, sought to eliminate these chemical stockpiles and prevent future use. However, the challenge of enforcement has always loomed large, as the continued use of chemical weapons in conflicts around the world demonstrates the difficulty of ensuring full compliance with the treaty.
Advances in Chemical Detection and Decontamination: A New Frontier in Defense
One area of significant innovation in recent years is the development of advanced chemical detection technologies, which allow for more accurate and timely identification of chemical agents on the battlefield or in civilian areas. These innovations are essential not only in terms of immediate defense but also for evidence collection in the aftermath of an attack. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), tasked with investigating the use of chemical weapons, relies heavily on these technologies to identify substances and trace them back to their origins.
Portable detection systems have evolved to become more sophisticated, with the ability to detect even trace amounts of chemical agents in the atmosphere. Innovations in this field include advanced spectrometry devices that can differentiate between various chemical compounds, even in complex urban environments where multiple substances may be present. The development of these technologies is critical in the context of the Ukraine-Russia conflict, as both sides seek to substantiate their claims regarding chemical weapon use. The presence of such technologies can help corroborate or refute allegations, providing a factual basis for international responses.
In parallel, advancements in decontamination techniques have also improved the ability of militaries and first responders to mitigate the effects of chemical attacks. New materials capable of neutralizing chemical agents on contact, as well as improved personal protective equipment (PPE), have allowed for faster and more effective responses to chemical incidents. In this regard, militaries around the world, including NATO members and Russian forces, have invested heavily in developing portable and efficient decontamination units that can be deployed quickly in the field.
Legal Implications of Chemical Weapons Use and the International Response
The use of chemical weapons is considered one of the most egregious violations of international law, specifically the Geneva Conventions and the Chemical Weapons Convention. These treaties are designed to limit the suffering caused by warfare, prohibiting the use of methods or weapons that cause unnecessary or excessive harm to combatants or civilians. Any confirmed use of chemical weapons in Ukraine would constitute a serious breach of these international norms, likely triggering significant legal and diplomatic repercussions.
One possible avenue for legal recourse is the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has jurisdiction over war crimes, including the use of chemical weapons. Should either Russia or Ukraine be found responsible for the deployment of chemical agents, individual military leaders or government officials could face prosecution for war crimes under the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. Proving such cases, however, requires substantial evidence, including physical samples, eyewitness testimony, and satellite or surveillance data.
Additionally, countries found in violation of the CWC can face punitive actions from the OPCW, including the imposition of sanctions or other diplomatic measures. In extreme cases, violators can be referred to the United Nations Security Council, which has the authority to impose broader sanctions or authorize the use of force to prevent further violations. Given the geopolitical stakes of the Ukraine-Russia conflict, such measures would likely be met with resistance from countries aligned with either side, complicating the international response.
The Psychological and Tactical Role of Chemical Weapons
Beyond the physical harm caused by chemical weapons, their use carries significant psychological and tactical weight in warfare. The fear of chemical attacks can demoralize troops and civilians alike, creating chaos and undermining the enemy’s ability to maintain a coherent defense. This psychological warfare aspect is a crucial element in the strategic calculus of modern military operations. The deployment of chemical weapons, or even the threat of their use, can serve as a force multiplier, allowing relatively small or under-resourced forces to have an outsized impact on the battlefield.
In the context of the Ukraine-Russia conflict, chemical weapons could serve as a tool for breaking the stalemate in certain regions where conventional military operations have proven less effective. Urban warfare, in particular, presents an ideal environment for the use of chemical agents, as dense populations and confined spaces make it difficult for civilians and military personnel to escape or mitigate the effects of such weapons.
However, the use of chemical weapons in this manner would likely provoke an overwhelming international response, further isolating the offending party and potentially leading to severe repercussions, including military intervention or the imposition of no-fly zones. As such, the decision to deploy chemical agents is not taken lightly, given the potential for both short-term gains and long-term consequences.
Intelligence and Information Warfare: The Struggle for Narrative Control
An increasingly important aspect of modern conflict, particularly in the Russia-Ukraine war, is the role of intelligence and information warfare. Both sides have employed sophisticated propaganda campaigns aimed at controlling the narrative surrounding key events, including allegations of chemical weapon use. Russia, in particular, has a long history of using disinformation to shape public perception, both domestically and internationally. This has been evident in the Ukraine conflict, where Russian state media and government officials have consistently denied allegations of war crimes while simultaneously accusing Ukraine of similar offenses.
Ukraine, for its part, has also engaged in information warfare, leveraging social media and Western media outlets to highlight Russian atrocities and garner international support. The battle for narrative control is particularly intense when it comes to chemical weapons, as both sides understand the gravity of such allegations and the potential diplomatic consequences.
Intelligence agencies play a crucial role in verifying or debunking these claims. Satellite imagery, intercepted communications, and other forms of intelligence gathering are essential in piecing together the sequence of events in alleged chemical weapon attacks. In recent years, open-source intelligence (OSINT) has also become a valuable tool for independent investigators and journalists, who use publicly available data to corroborate or challenge official narratives.
The Role of International Actors: NATO, the EU, and Beyond
The involvement of international actors in the Ukraine-Russia conflict, particularly NATO and the European Union, has been a defining feature of the war. Both organizations have provided significant support to Ukraine, including military aid, financial assistance, and diplomatic backing. However, the potential use of chemical weapons introduces a new level of complexity to their involvement.
NATO, in particular, has long maintained a policy of collective defense, whereby an attack on one member state is considered an attack on all. While Ukraine is not a NATO member, the alliance has made it clear that any confirmed use of chemical weapons could prompt a reevaluation of its engagement in the conflict. This could include increased military support for Ukraine, as well as the imposition of no-fly zones or other direct interventions.
The European Union, which has already imposed several rounds of sanctions on Russia, would likely respond to any confirmed chemical weapon use with additional punitive measures. This could include further restrictions on Russian exports, asset freezes, and travel bans for Russian officials. The EU has also played a key role in coordinating humanitarian responses to the conflict, particularly in terms of providing aid to civilians affected by the war.
Beyond NATO and the EU, other international actors, such as the United Nations and regional organizations like the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), could play a role in responding to allegations of chemical weapon use. The United Nations Security Council, in particular, has the authority to impose sanctions or authorize the use of force in response to violations of international law, although any such actions would likely be vetoed by Russia, a permanent member of the Council.
The Impact on Civilian Populations
The use of chemical weapons in conflict zones has a disproportionate impact on civilian populations, who are often the least equipped to deal with the effects of such attacks. In the Ukraine-Russia conflict, many of the battles have taken place in urban areas, where civilians are densely concentrated. The use of chemical weapons in these environments would not only cause immediate harm but also create long-term health issues, including respiratory problems, neurological damage, and psychological trauma.
Civilians in Ukraine have already borne the brunt of the war, with millions displaced from their homes and thousands killed or injured. The potential introduction of chemical weapons into the conflict would exacerbate these challenges, overwhelming already strained medical and humanitarian infrastructure. The international community has a responsibility to protect civilians from the use of chemical weapons, and any confirmed use of such agents should prompt a swift and decisive response.
In this regard, humanitarian organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) have been actively involved in providing aid to those affected by the conflict, including potential victims of chemical attacks. These organizations play a crucial role in documenting the effects of chemical weapons and advocating for accountability in cases where such weapons are used.
Advanced Chemical Synthesis and the Future of Weaponized Chemicals
In today’s evolving geopolitical climate, the synthesis of chemical compounds with potential military applications remains a critical aspect of chemical weapons development. While international treaties such as the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) prohibit the production and use of chemical agents for warfare, advancements in chemical synthesis technologies pose a renewed risk. Chemical weapons are no longer confined to traditional agents such as chlorine, mustard gas, or sarin; modern techniques allow for the creation of more complex, harder-to-detect compounds that can be weaponized or used for dual purposes, thus making regulation and monitoring increasingly difficult.
One of the most concerning developments in this field is the rise of designer chemicals. These are novel chemical entities engineered to mimic the effects of known toxic agents while remaining outside the scope of current detection mechanisms or legal definitions of chemical weapons. Unlike traditional agents, which are often easier to identify due to their well-known chemical structure, designer chemicals can be synthesized in laboratory environments with sophisticated organic chemistry techniques. This allows state and non-state actors to bypass international controls by creating agents that fall into a legal gray zone, potentially skirting regulations laid out in international treaties.
Furthermore, biotechnology and the intersection of biology and chemistry provide another avenue for the creation of hybrid chemical-biological agents. These substances can interact with human biological systems in complex ways, making them even more challenging to detect and counteract. The deployment of such agents could result in the disruption of key physiological processes, leading to incapacitation or death without the clear physical signs traditionally associated with chemical attacks. Advances in synthetic biology also allow for the creation of genetically tailored chemical agents that target specific populations based on genetic markers, posing a distinct and emerging threat in modern warfare.
Current Research into Non-Lethal Chemical Weapons and Incapacitating Agents
Beyond the traditionally lethal agents, non-lethal chemical weapons have garnered attention in military research circles. These include incapacitating agents, which are intended to temporarily impair or disable individuals without causing permanent harm. While non-lethal chemical agents are promoted for riot control or military applications where minimizing fatalities is a priority, they can also be misused in conflict zones.
One notorious example of a non-lethal agent is BZ (3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate), which was originally developed by the United States as an incapacitating chemical agent. BZ is a powerful hallucinogen, disrupting cognitive functions and causing severe confusion, disorientation, and incapacitation. Although it is classified as a Schedule 2 chemical under the CWC, which means it has limited legitimate uses, BZ continues to be a topic of concern due to its potential for misuse in warfare. Given the reports from the Russian Defense Ministry regarding Ukraine’s alleged use of BZ-like agents, attention has turned once again to the international monitoring of these so-called “non-lethal” substances.
Recent advances in chemical engineering have also led to the development of synthetic opioids and fentanyl derivatives as potential incapacitating agents. Originally designed for medical use, these substances can be weaponized in ways that target large groups of people. In small doses, synthetic opioids can induce sedation, unconsciousness, or respiratory failure. However, their potency and difficulty in detecting, particularly in open or urban environments, make them a significant concern for future conflicts. The use of fentanyl in incapacitating agents has already been seen in hostage rescue operations, most notably during the 2002 Moscow theater hostage crisis, where Russian forces deployed a fentanyl derivative to subdue Chechen terrorists, resulting in the unintended deaths of over 100 hostages.
Development of Chemical Weapons Detection Technologies
In response to the increasing sophistication of chemical agents, detection technologies have seen significant advancements in recent years. One of the most promising areas of research is in portable detection systems based on real-time mass spectrometry. These devices can rapidly identify chemical signatures in the environment, providing immediate feedback to military units or emergency response teams about the presence of toxic agents. Mass spectrometry works by analyzing the mass-to-charge ratio of ions, allowing the rapid identification of a wide range of chemical compounds, even at low concentrations.
Additionally, surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) has emerged as a leading technology in detecting chemical warfare agents (CWAs) at the molecular level. By enhancing the Raman scattering effect through the use of metallic nanoparticles, SERS provides a powerful tool for detecting and identifying trace amounts of chemical agents in complex environments, such as urban battlefields or civilian areas where multiple contaminants may exist.
Recent developments in sensor networks also offer the potential for widespread chemical detection in conflict zones. These networks consist of distributed chemical sensors that can be deployed across vast areas, communicating real-time data about atmospheric or environmental chemical contamination to centralized command systems. Such networks can help pinpoint the location of chemical attacks, track the spread of airborne agents, and provide early warnings to military personnel or civilians, potentially saving lives by enabling quicker evacuation or protective measures.
Wearable chemical detection technology is another burgeoning field, with researchers developing lightweight, fabric-based sensors that can be embedded into military uniforms or protective gear. These sensors continuously monitor environmental conditions for the presence of chemical agents, providing real-time alerts to soldiers on the battlefield. Advances in nanomaterials, particularly graphene-based sensors, have made it possible to create highly sensitive detection systems that are both durable and capable of distinguishing between a wide range of chemical compounds.
Chemical Countermeasures: Modern Decontamination and Protective Strategies
As the threat of chemical weapons persists, significant progress has been made in chemical countermeasures to minimize the impact of chemical attacks. Military and civilian authorities worldwide have developed increasingly efficient decontamination technologies that focus on neutralizing chemical agents as quickly as possible after their deployment.
One of the most promising innovations in decontamination technology is the use of enzymatic decontaminants. These biocatalysts break down chemical agents into non-toxic components, making them safer for the environment and less hazardous to human health. Enzymes such as phosphotriesterases have been found to be highly effective in neutralizing nerve agents like sarin and VX. These enzymes can be sprayed onto contaminated surfaces or deployed in aerosol form to neutralize airborne chemical agents.
Polyoxometalate compounds (POMs) have also been explored as highly efficient chemical scavengers, capable of rapidly breaking down mustard gas and other blistering agents. These compounds are of particular interest because they can be synthesized in large quantities and deployed in liquid or foam forms, making them ideal for rapid decontamination in urban environments or large battlefield areas.
Another major advance is in the development of next-generation protective equipment, particularly self-decontaminating materials. These materials are designed to neutralize chemical agents on contact, protecting soldiers and first responders from exposure. Research into photocatalytic coatings, which use light to trigger chemical reactions that break down toxic agents, has shown promise in creating fabrics that can remain protective for extended periods in contaminated environments.
Additionally, integrated filtration systems in personal protective equipment (PPE) have improved substantially, allowing for better protection against both chemical and biological agents. Modern gas masks now incorporate metal-organic framework (MOF) filters, which can adsorb and break down chemical agents at the molecular level. This represents a significant improvement over traditional activated carbon filters, which only capture agents without neutralizing them.
Chemical Weapons and Hybrid Warfare in Today’s Conflicts
The concept of hybrid warfare, which blends conventional military strategies with unconventional methods like cyber warfare, disinformation, and proxy forces, has become increasingly prominent in the 21st century. Chemical weapons, with their potential for both physical and psychological impact, have found a place in this type of conflict, where their use may be more strategic than direct.
In hybrid warfare, chemical weapons can be deployed in small quantities to create uncertainty and fear, without necessarily causing mass casualties. These “gray zone” tactics, which fall between full-scale war and covert operations, are intended to disrupt and disorient the enemy while maintaining plausible deniability. In this context, chemical weapons are often used alongside disinformation campaigns to control the narrative and manipulate the international response.
The use of chemical agents in sabotage operations is one area where hybrid warfare intersects with chemical warfare. For example, toxic chemicals could be used to contaminate water supplies, disrupt industrial processes, or incapacitate key infrastructure personnel. These types of attacks would be difficult to trace, allowing the perpetrator to avoid immediate detection while causing significant disruption to the targeted nation’s economy or military operations.
The Role of AI and Machine Learning in Chemical Warfare Defense
One of the most significant technological advancements impacting modern chemical warfare defense is the application of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). AI-driven systems are transforming the way chemical threats are detected, analyzed, and countered.
AI can process vast amounts of data from chemical sensors, satellite imagery, and reconnaissance reports to detect patterns and predict where chemical attacks are likely to occur. Machine learning algorithms, in particular, can be trained to recognize the early warning signs of chemical weapons deployment, such as unusual troop movements, chemical precursor purchases, or abnormal environmental readings. These algorithms can also improve the speed and accuracy of identifying chemical agents in the field, helping military personnel and first responders respond more effectively to potential attacks.
In addition, AI-enhanced simulations are being used to train military units in chemical warfare scenarios. These simulations can model the spread of chemical agents in various environments, providing real-time feedback on the effectiveness of defensive strategies. By simulating the use of chemical weapons in urban, rural, and battlefield conditions, military planners can better understand how to protect their forces and mitigate the effects of chemical attacks on civilian populations.
AI-driven technologies are also being used to optimize decontamination processes. By analyzing the chemical composition of contaminated areas and predicting the spread of toxic agents, AI can help guide the deployment of decontamination units, ensuring that resources are used efficiently and that the most critical areas are treated first.
Table: Alleged Chemical Weapons Use in Ukraine-Russia Conflict
| Chemical Agent | Supplier/User | Date of Use (Alleged) | Quantity in Stock/Use | Effects & Damage | Place of Production |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DM-105 Chemical Shells | Allegedly Ukraine | August 11, 2023 (Sudzha) | Limited, possibly small stock | Respiratory distress, choking, severe lung irritation, incapacitation. Allegedly used under smoke shell cover | Unknown, possibly small-scale research facilities |
| White Phosphorus Bombs | Russia, Ukraine (accusations on both sides) | 2022-2024 | Unconfirmed | Burns at 1,300°C, severe injuries, vapor inhalation causing poisoning. Used in Mariupol, Bakhmut | Industrial plants in Russia or nearby |
| Chloropicrin (PS) | Russia | 2023-2024 | Likely remnants of old stock | Choking agent: lung irritation, nausea, incapacitation. Used in trench warfare | Soviet-era depots repurposed for modern use |
| Riot Control Agents (RCAs) | Russia | Widely used since 2022 | Hundreds of canisters | Tear gas and pepper spray: short-term incapacitation, respiratory effects, eye irritation | Russian domestic production |
| BZ (3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate) | Allegedly Ukraine | 2023 (Eastern Ukraine) | Unverified, small quantities | Severe hallucinations, confusion, disorientation. Restricted under Schedule 2 of chemical agents | Possibly dual-use labs in Ukraine (unconfirmed) |
| Chlorine Gas | Russia (alleged by Ukraine) | 2022-2023 (Mariupol) | Estimated under 50 tons | Respiratory damage, suffocation. Alleged use in confined battle zones | Soviet-era chemical stockpiles repurposed |
| Depleted Uranium (DU) Munitions | Supplied by U.S. to Ukraine | August 2024 (deployment) | First delivery in August 2024 | Radiological contamination, long-term cancer risk due to radioactive dust. Not classified as a chemical weapon | U.S. military-industrial complex |
| Sarin (GB) | No confirmed use | N/A | Officially destroyed in 2017 | Neurological damage, paralysis, death within minutes. No confirmed use in Ukraine | Russia’s stockpiles destroyed under OPCW guidance |
DM-105 Chemical Shells – Allegations in the Ukraine Conflict
DM-105 chemical shells have been a contentious topic in the conflict, particularly in August 2023. Russian officials accused Ukrainian forces of using these shells in Sudzha, located in Russia’s Kursk region.
Key Allegations & Effects
- Chemical Composition: The DM-105 shells are alleged to contain an incapacitating agent, either riot control substances or similar choking agents disguised as smoke shells.
- Injury Reports: According to Russian sources, more than 20 people were injured after the deployment of these chemical shells in August 2023. The symptoms included severe lung irritation, choking, and temporary incapacitation.
- Tactical Use: The shells are believed to have been used for defensive purposes in urban warfare scenarios. Although Russia claims to have documented the attack, there has been no independent confirmation from international bodies like the OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons).
Origin and Stockpile
- Place of Production: The exact origin of DM-105 shells remains unclear. Russian officials allege that these shells could have been manufactured in dual-use chemical facilities in Ukraine, but this information is unverified.
- Stockpile Information: Reports suggest the use of small stockpiles of DM-105, possibly originating from research labs or defense sectors that repurpose chemicals for military use.
Other Alleged Chemical Weapons in the Conflict
White Phosphorus
- Usage Allegations: Both Russia and Ukraine have been accused of deploying white phosphorus bombs in key battlegrounds like Mariupol and Bakhmut. White phosphorus is not classified as a chemical weapon under international law but is notorious for its devastating burns and toxic fumes.
- Damage & Impact: Phosphorus munitions cause extreme damage by igniting upon contact with oxygen. Reports from 2022 to 2024 suggest that civilian populations have suffered injuries due to these munitions.
Riot Control Agents (Tear Gas, Pepper Spray)
- Deployment in Warfare: Riot control agents have been used widely by Russian forces since 2022, including in cities like Mariupol. These agents, typically non-lethal, cause short-term incapacitation, respiratory irritation, and eye watering.
- International Laws: Although riot control agents are allowed for civilian use, their deployment in warfare is prohibited under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).
Chlorine Gas
- Alleged Use by Russia: Chlorine gas was reportedly used in trench warfare scenarios in Mariupol during 2022 and 2023. Although not explicitly banned as a chemical weapon, chlorine can cause severe respiratory damage and suffocation when used in confined spaces.
- Stockpile & Sources: These chlorine reserves are believed to be remnants from Soviet-era stockpiles, repurposed in modern military operations.
BZ (3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate)
- Alleged Use by Ukraine: BZ is a powerful incapacitating agent known for causing severe hallucinations and disorientation. Allegations of BZ use by Ukrainian forces surfaced in 2023. However, these claims remain unsubstantiated, and there is no independent verification.
- Effects: BZ is restricted under Schedule 2 chemicals and can incapacitate targets for extended periods by severely affecting cognitive functions.
Depleted Uranium (DU) Munitions
- Supplied to Ukraine by the U.S.: In August 2024, the U.S. delivered DU munitions to Ukraine. These are armor-piercing rounds with radioactive components. While not classified as chemical weapons, their radiological risks are significant due to potential long-term health effects, including cancer.
- Usage & Impact: These munitions are primarily used to destroy heavily armored vehicles and tanks, with environmental and health concerns over radioactive dust lingering in the battlefield.
Updated Investigation by OPCW and International Scrutiny
The OPCW has been monitoring the situation, but many of the allegations of chemical weapon use in the Ukraine-Russia conflict are difficult to verify due to limited access to conflict zones and ongoing propaganda from both sides. Independent investigations into these claims are still ongoing, with international observers calling for more transparent reporting from both Russia and Ukraine.
Key Developments:
- No large-scale verified chemical weapon use has been confirmed by independent sources.
- Ongoing investigations are focused on phosphorus bombs and riot control agents being used in areas of high civilian density.
