![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Following the November 2015 “leak†of a classified slide purporting to show a Russian nuclear-armed and nuclear-powered drone intended to create long-lasting “zones of extensive radiological contamination,†both Russian and Western observers have suggested that Moscow may be developing a cobalt bomb. This conjectural device, which served as the basis of the “doomsday machine†in the classic 1964 film Dr. Strangelove, would employ radioactive cobalt to create unusually intense long-lived fallout. This article reviews the history and science of the cobalt bomb to assess the likelihood that Russia is developing such a weapon. It argues that while the lethality of the cobalt bomb compares unfavorably to that of “conventional†thermonuclear weapons, it might actually be a preferred means of creating long-lasting radioactive contamination because it could force an adversary to abandon territory while minimizing the number of immediate fatalities. But exploiting this principle in practice would be forbiddingly difficult because of the difficulty of predicting the ultimate distribution of the radioactive contamination, particularly for an underwater detonation like that envisioned for the “Status-6†drone seen in the Russian slide. While the underwater detonation of a massive cobalt or “conventional†nuclear weapon might create zones of long-lasting contamination, Russian decision makers would have little confidence that these areas would be in the intended locations, undermining the strategic case for such attacks. These findings suggest that the Kremlin is not pursuing radiological “doomsday bombs,†even though the nuclear-powered drone on the slide seems to be a real research project.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. One kiloton of fission is about 1.45 × 1023 fissions, and therefore consumes this many neutrons. This number of fissions produces about 530 gamma Megacuries of radioactivity (measured at one hour after detonation), while the absorption of one neutron by 1.45 × 1023 Co-59 atoms produces a mere 15635.399 curies (Glasstone and Dolan Citation1977).
2. The relationship between the density of radioactive contamination and dose rates (variously dubbed as the Source Normalization Constant or “k-factor†in US fallout literature) is highly uncertain (Bridgman Citation2001). Values here assume that the dose rate from 15635.399 Ci of Co-60 per square kilometer is equal to 1/8750 that of fission products at one hour after detonation, chosen to adjust for the relatively higher penetrating power of gamma rays from Co-60 decay relative to the fission products.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Edward Moore Geist
Edward Moore Geist is a MacArthur Nuclear Security Fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. Previously a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow at the RAND Corporation, he received his doctorate in history from the University of North Carolina in 2013.