What Radioactive Material Killed Alexander Litvinenko in London in November 2006, and How Did the Investigation Develop Between 2007 and 2016? Do the British Authorities Have a Theory on Who Ordered His Killing?

Direct Answer

Alexander Litvinenko, a former Russian intelligence officer and outspoken critic of Vladimir Putin, was killed in London in November 2006 by Polonium-210, a rare and highly radioactive isotope (BBC News, 2016). The investigation, which unfolded between 2007 and 2016, revealed that Litvinenko was deliberately poisoned through a cup of tea at a London hotel. British authorities concluded that Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun, both former KGB agents, carried out the assassination and that the operation was “probably approved by President Vladimir Putin” (UK Public Inquiry Report, 2016).

1. What Radioactive Material Killed Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006?

The substance that killed Alexander Litvinenko was Polonium-210, an alpha-emitting radioactive isotope that is extremely toxic when ingested or inhaled. Polonium-210 emits alpha particles that cannot penetrate skin but cause fatal damage to internal organs when consumed (World Health Organization, 2017). Litvinenko fell ill on November 1, 2006, after meeting two Russian associates, Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun, at the Millennium Hotel in London’s Mayfair district.

Following his rapid decline, British scientists at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston identified Polonium-210 as the cause of death (BBC News, 2016). It was the first confirmed case of lethal Polonium-210 poisoning in the world. The discovery was significant not only for its scientific rarity but also because the isotope’s production and handling are tightly controlled, implying state-level access (Higgins, 2017).

Polonium-210’s origin traced back to a nuclear reactor, which led investigators to suspect a government-directed operation rather than a criminal act. The presence of radioactive traces on the flight from Moscow to London and several locations in the UK reinforced the theory that Litvinenko’s assassination was politically motivated and carefully executed (Harding, 2016).

2. How Did the Litvinenko Investigation Develop Between 2007 and 2016?

The British investigation into Litvinenko’s death spanned nearly a decade, marked by diplomatic tensions, forensic breakthroughs, and political implications. In 2007, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) charged Andrei Lugovoi with murder, but Russia refused to extradite him, citing its constitutional ban on extraditing citizens (BBC News, 2016). The refusal escalated tensions between London and Moscow, with diplomatic expulsions on both sides.

Between 2008 and 2010, the investigation faced delays due to the sensitivity of evidence tied to national security. However, in 2011, Litvinenko’s widow, Marina Litvinenko, campaigned for a full public inquiry, arguing that her husband’s death involved state actors. After multiple legal appeals, a public inquiry was finally launched in 2014 under the chairmanship of Sir Robert Owen (Owen, 2016).

By 2016, the inquiry’s final report concluded that there was “a strong probability” that the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) directed the operation and that it was “probably approved” by both Nikolai Patrushev, then head of the FSB, and President Vladimir Putin himself (UK Public Inquiry Report, 2016). This finding transformed the case from a criminal matter into a geopolitical confrontation, symbolizing a modern act of state-sponsored assassination on British soil.

3. Who Do British Authorities Believe Ordered Litvinenko’s Assassination?

According to the 2016 UK Public Inquiry Report, British authorities concluded that President Vladimir Putin and senior Russian officials likely authorized the assassination. The inquiry’s evidence showed that Lugovoi and Kovtun acted as direct agents of the Russian state, with logistical support that only a government intelligence network could provide (Harding, 2016).

The report cited multiple motives for the killing: Litvinenko’s open criticism of Putin, his exposure of Russian corruption, and his cooperation with British intelligence services (Owen, 2016). At the time of his death, Litvinenko was assisting MI6 and Spanish authorities in investigating Russian organized crime (Harding, 2016). This dual involvement positioned him as a perceived traitor to the Kremlin.

Moreover, the inquiry emphasized the political symbolism behind using Polonium-210—a method that unmistakably pointed to state resources and served as a warning to other defectors. British authorities therefore viewed the assassination not only as a targeted murder but also as a message of deterrence to critics of the Russian regime (BBC News, 2016).

4. The Forensic Trail: Scientific Evidence and Traces of Polonium

The forensic investigation into Litvinenko’s death was unprecedented in British criminal history. Scientists detected radioactive contamination across multiple London sites, including the Millennium Hotel, Litvinenko’s home, and several airplanes that had flown between London and Moscow (World Health Organization, 2017).

Radiation tracing was used to reconstruct the assassins’ movements. The isotope’s decay signature allowed investigators to confirm that Lugovoi and Kovtun were the likely handlers. Both men left detectable traces of Polonium-210 in hotel rooms, restaurants, and aircraft seats (Harding, 2016).

This scientific evidence was pivotal because it established an unbroken chain between the poisoned teapot and the suspects’ presence. The complexity and precision of the operation further supported the theory of state-level orchestration. The radioactive trail, described by British police as a “forensic fingerprint,” provided undeniable proof of intentional poisoning rather than accidental exposure (BBC News, 2016).

5. The Political and Diplomatic Consequences of the Case

The Litvinenko assassination severely strained diplomatic relations between the United Kingdom and Russia. In response to Moscow’s refusal to extradite the suspects, the UK expelled several Russian diplomats and imposed restrictions on official contacts (BBC News, 2016). Russia retaliated with similar measures, denying any involvement and accusing Britain of politicizing the issue.

The case also prompted discussions in international law regarding extraterritorial assassinations and state accountability. Britain’s eventual public inquiry marked a rare instance in which a Western democracy directly accused another state of political murder within its jurisdiction (Owen, 2016).

By 2016, the UK government had imposed sanctions on the two suspects, and in subsequent years, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that Russia was responsible for Litvinenko’s assassination, ordering compensation to his widow (ECHR, 2021). The ruling further validated the inquiry’s findings and reinforced the perception of Litvinenko’s murder as an act of state terrorism rather than isolated espionage.

6. Legacy and Impact on International Security

The assassination of Alexander Litvinenko reshaped global understanding of state-sponsored assassinations and nuclear security. It revealed vulnerabilities in border safety and the difficulty of detecting radioactive materials used in covert killings. The case became a reference point for future incidents, such as the 2018 poisoning of Sergei Skripal with a nerve agent in Salisbury, which echoed the methods and motives seen in Litvinenko’s death (BBC News, 2018).

Furthermore, Litvinenko’s case influenced how Western intelligence agencies monitor dissidents and defectors. It also heightened awareness of nuclear materials trafficking and reinforced the need for international cooperation in countering chemical and radiological threats (World Health Organization, 2017).

The symbolism of Litvinenko’s poisoning—dying in a British hospital while publicly accusing Vladimir Putin—cemented his image as a martyr for truth and transparency. His death remains one of the most chilling illustrations of how geopolitics and personal defiance intersect in the post-Cold War world.

7. Conclusion

In summary, Alexander Litvinenko’s death in 2006 was caused by Polonium-210, a rare radioactive isotope accessible only through state-controlled nuclear facilities. The decade-long investigation from 2007 to 2016 concluded that Russian agents Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun carried out the assassination, and that the operation was “probably approved” by President Vladimir Putin (UK Public Inquiry Report, 2016).

This event marked one of the most extraordinary cases of state-sponsored assassination in modern British history, intertwining science, espionage, and geopolitics. The legacy of the Litvinenko case continues to influence diplomatic relations, national security policies, and the ethics of state power in international affairs.

References

BBC News. (2016). Litvinenko Inquiry: Russia ‘probably’ approved ex-spy’s murder. London.
BBC News. (2018). Skripal poisoning: What we know so far. London.
European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). (2021). Case of Marina Litvinenko v. Russia. Strasbourg.
Harding, L. (2016). A Very Expensive Poison: The Definitive Story of the Murder of Litvinenko and Russia’s War with the West. Guardian Books.
Higgins, A. (2017). The radioactive polonium trail: Unraveling Litvinenko’s murder. The New York Times.
Owen, R. (2016). The Litvinenko Inquiry: Report into the death of Alexander Litvinenko. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2017). Radiological hazards of Polonium-210. Geneva.

What Radioactive Material Killed Alexander Litvinenko in London in November 2006, and How Did the Investigation Develop Between 2007 and 2016? Do the British Authorities Have a Theory on Who Ordered His Killing?