Global Jihad: temi, piste di diffusione e il fenomeno del reducismo ...

These key differences between nuclear and radiological weapons necessitate
different approaches to analysing the magnitude of the threat posed by each, and
their control and counter-measures.
Framing the discussion: the faces of nuclear and radiological (NR) terrorism
Nuclear and radiological terrorism is most often discussed together but it must be
stressed from the outset that there are fundamental and intrinsic differences between
the two that
affect how discussions of terrorism using these weapons should be
framed, and how countermeasures should be approached. Both types of terrorism,
however, are usefully discussed by assessing the threat in terms of specific likely
scenarios on how a terrorism event may be perpetrated. By identifying these
scenarios, further key differences between the two become apparent.
Nuclear terrorism is most often examined by looking at four main scenarios –
clear terrorism. 135 popularly known as the four faces of nu
According to Ferguson,
Potter et al, these are:
• The theft and detonation of an intact nuclear weapon
• The theft or purchase of fissile material leading to the fabrication and
detonation of a crude nuclear weapon – an improvised nuclear device (IND)
• Attacks against and sabotage of nuclear facilities, in particular nuclear power
plants, causing the release of large amounts of radioactivity
• The unauthorized acquisition of radioactive materials
contributing to the
fabrication and detonation of a radiological dispersal device (RDD) – a
“dirty
bomb” – or radiation emission device.
135 see Ferguson, Charles D., & Potter, W.C.,et al, Four Faces of Nuclear Terrorism (Monterey Institute of
International Studies, Monterey: 2004)
214