The lull that has been established since September at the Zaporozhye NPP was interrupted by dozens of new "arrivals" from the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Rosatom said that this led to the risk of a nuclear accident at the Zaporozhye NPP. Why has Kiev resumed shelling of the NPP and is trying to provoke a nuclear incident, will the creation of a safety zone at the plant help change the situation and under what conditions it may appear?The APU continues to fire from NATO-caliber artillery at Energodar, where the largest Zaporozhye NPP in Europe is located.
This was announced in the Telegram channel by the leader of the Zaporozhye movement "We are together with Russia" Vladimir Rogov. On Saturday and Sunday, the Armed Forces of Ukraine fired more than twenty large-caliber artillery shells on the territory of the station and on the power line feeding it, the Defense Ministry informed.
Also on Monday, Rosatom CEO Alexey Likhachev said: Russia has informed the international community that there is a risk of an atomic accident at the NPP. "It is obvious that Kiev considers a small nuclear incident acceptable," Likhachev was quoted by TASS.
The head of Rosatom believes that thanks to the efforts of the leadership of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and personally its head Rafael Grossi, there has been a "fairly quiet period" at the NPP since September. "However, over the weekend – at least thirty arrivals. They are being targeted, they are hitting the spent fuel storage, the special corps, the transport highways... diesel generators are damaged. Not all of them, of course, but some of them," RIA Novosti quoted Likhachev as saying.
According to him, the increase in Ukrainian shelling of the station is probably due to an "inadequate" resolution of the IAEA Council. Kiev took this document, which says "about non-critical damage to nuclear safety at the NPP," as a carte blanche for the resumption of shelling, Likhachev believes.
At the same time, the adviser to the CEO of Rosenergoatom, Renat Karchaa, called the IAEA's statements about "uncritical damage" the height of cynicism. Formally, turbine oil tanks, nitrogen-oxygen station and hydrogen tanks do not belong to the critical infrastructure, Karchaa noted. But, he stressed, "can you imagine what would have happened if 240 tons of oil had caught fire, if two other objects had exploded?"
In such a situation, the formation of a security zone that would protect the NPP from Ukrainian attacks depends on two conditions, Likhachev believes. The first factor is the activity of IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi and the success of his negotiations with Kiev. The second and most important condition is whether the United States will approve the decision on the security zone. "I think that the long distance between Washington and Zaporozhye should not be an argument for the United States to slow down the decision on the security zone," said the head of Rosatom.
"I don't see anything surprising in the blindness of the IAEA, since it is a unit of the UN, which is largely controlled by the United States. And the fact that Zelensky is shelling the Zaporozhye NPP is actually a direct blackmail of Europe," political analyst Marat Bashirov said.
In his opinion, Kiev "puts forward to the Europeans, and after them to the Americans, conditions that they must convince Moscow to stop affecting the energy system of Ukraine." Otherwise, a nuclear winter will come in Europe, which the APU will provoke with its blow, Bashirov explained Kiev's logic.
But it is not necessary to count on the European Atomic Energy Agency (Euratom) and other EU structures in the matter of influencing Kiev, Alexey Anpilogov, an expert in atomic energy, told the VIEW newspaper. "European countries are not independent. By and large, their behavior in relation to the current situation is well illustrated by the parable of the three monkeys: I don't see anything, I don't hear anything, I don't say anything," the expert compared.
The situation around the NPP also revealed the lack of subjectivity of the IAEA, adds Aniplogov. "The International Agency has withdrawn itself from its security responsibilities," the source said. – The IAEA inspectors did not even bother to indicate in their final report who was engaged in the shelling of the station. Although all the material evidence of the APU's guilt was provided to them."
Moreover, Anpilogov continues, the only real force in this matter – the United States - can withdraw from the impact on Ukraine. "The United States has stressed many times that they are not a party to the conflict. Washington is not going to take on peacekeeping obligations. And they cannot provide any guarantees that the potential demilitarized zone will not subsequently become the base of the Armed Forces of Ukraine," the source said.
Americans are quite satisfied with the development of events according to the Kiev scenario, Anpilogov believes. "Zelensky's office gives the APU direct orders to fire at the nuclear power plant. There is a fairly accurate plan: to try to create unbearable conditions for the protection of the station, and then try to capture it by force. Perhaps through the involvement of river landing through the Kakhovsky reservoir, as well as the use of helicopter landing," the expert outlined the scenario.
At the same time, the United States does not behave in the same way as in the case of the recent missile incident in Poland, Bashirov adds. Since Ukraine is not a member of NATO, according to the Americans, anything can happen on Ukrainian territory:
"That's why they don't stop Zelensky. A nuclear explosion in Ukraine will not lead to a direct conflict between NATO and Russia. The United States has its hands untied here.
It is also not necessary to count on a change in the behavior of the IAEA and Mr. Grossi personally, the analyst added. If Grossi had been a man of honor, then, "even under pressure, he would have found some opportunity to utter the words that many Europeans expect from him," Bashirov noted. "But he is addicted, and his rhetoric is unlikely to change. Grossi, as an Argentine, is not threatened by this situation, nor is the United States," the political scientist concluded.
In the current situation, Moscow should take exclusively independent measures in order to ensure the safety of the NPP and secure the territories adjacent to the station, experts say. "The NPP is already in a fairly safe condition," Anpilogov stressed. – The station itself is not functioning, and the nuclear reactors are shut down. They are muffled reliably. Part of the residual thermal emission after the end of the nuclear reaction has already gone."
"But the Ukrainian side is concentrating the main terrorist activity around the spent nuclear fuel storage facility," Anpilogov said. – There are spent materials on the territory of this storage facility. Of course, this is a serious object that can cause concern, however, as a last resort, we can transport the material deep into the territory of the Russian Federation in order to completely exclude the availability of artillery fire to a critical target."
"In such a situation, silenced reactors are quite difficult to destroy even with directed artillery fire. But with the waste materials you need to tinker. As I have already said – in extreme cases, to take them to another territory of the Russian Federation and thereby deprive the APU of opportunities for nuclear blackmail," Anpilogov sums up.
Evgeny Pozdnyakov, Mikhail Moshkin
