- Gloomy experts believe it is only a question of time
before terrorists use a "dirty bomb," a device that would spew
radioactive debris over a city, making parts of it uninhabitable for years,
New Scientist says.
-
- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) records point
to "a dramatic rise" in the smuggling of radiological substances,
the raw material for this bomb, the British science weekly says in next
Saturday's issue.
-
- "In 1996, there were just eight of these incidents,
but last year there were 51," the report says.
-
- "Most cases are believed to have occurred in Russia
and elsewhere in Europe. Smugglers target the radioactive materials used
in factories, hospitals and research laboratories, which are not guarded
as securely as those used by the nuclear industry."
-
- A "dirty bomb" is not a nuclear bomb. It would
use conventional explosive to disgorge radioactive material over a wide
area, unleashing panic and making the area unusable.
-
- Since 1993, there have been 300 confirmed cases of illicit
trafficking in radiological materials, 215 of them in the past five years.
-
- But, according to the IAEA documents, the true figure
may be far higher. There have been 344 further suspected cases of trafficking
over the past 11 years that have not been confirmed by any of the 75 states
that monitor this activity.
-
- The agency adds that there are still 1,000 radioactive
sources that are unaccounted for in Iraq. And of 25 sources stolen from
the Krakatau steel company in Indonesia in October 2000, only three have
been recovered.
-
- A terrorist attack of this kind is "a nightmare
waiting to happen," Frank Barnaby, a nuclear consultant and former
British nuclear military scientist, was quoted by New Scientist as saying.
-
- "I'm amazed that it hasn't happened already."
-
- Eliza Manningham-Buller, director-general of the British
counter-intelligence agency MI5, had said last year that a crude radiological
attack against a major western city was "only a matter of time,"
the report said.
-
- © 2004 AAP
-
- http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/02/1086058919614.html
|
