difficult

On Thursday, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) finally managed to visit the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant, which is under shelling. The visit, which had been discussed for several months, almost fell through at the last moment due to the intensification of hostilities in the area of ​​​​this largest nuclear power plant in Europe. Having briefly examined the facility, the head of the IAEA, Rafael Grossi, called the situation around it “very difficult”, but left without saying who was to blame.

News reports of an IAEA delegation advancing into the Russian-controlled Ukrainian Energodar, home of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, read like a Hollywood action movie script. At six in the morning, the pro-Russian administration of the city announced that it was under massive artillery fire from the Ukrainian armed forces. At eight in the morning, information appeared regarding the landing of Ukrainian sabotage groups in the Energodar area, the purpose of which was allegedly to capture the station.

At nine o’clock, the Russian Ministry of Defense reported the details: on the coast of the Kakhovka reservoir, 3 km northeast of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, two sabotage groups of the armed forces of Ukraine with a total number of up to 60 people were landed on seven high-speed motor boats, they were blocked and destroyed by units of the Russian Guard and Russian armed forces, while army aviation helicopters were involved. Later, the department announced that a few kilometers from the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, in the area of ​​​​the village of Vodyanoye, another attempt to land a Ukrainian landing force to capture a nuclear power plant was thwarted. This time, the saboteurs, as specified in the message of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, followed on two self-propelled barges that left Nikopol. As a result of fire damage by the Russian military, both boats, according to them, were sunk.

According to Moscow, the Ukrainians wanted to recapture the station right now so that the IAEA mission, upon arrival at the site, would record its transfer under the control of Ukraine.

At the same time, no less disturbing comments were coming from Kyiv, but in the opposite direction. Oleg Nikolenko, a spokesman for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, said that the Russian military, violating their obligations, is intensively shelling the corridor along which the IAEA mission is to pass. In turn, adviser to the head of the office of the President of Ukraine Mikhail Podolyak added that Russia is attacking Energodar and the route of the IAEA mission in order to blame the Ukrainian side for this.

In the meantime, nine white SUVs with UN symbols (IAEA – a United Nations structure) that had left Kyiv, although with a delay of several hours, continued to follow the intended path. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi categorically answered all journalists’ questions: “We understand that the risks are in the gray zone (between Ukrainian and Russian forces.— “uh”) are very, very big… but we won’t stop.” At half past one, the cars of his delegation crossed the line of contact, an hour later they finally arrived at the nuclear power plant.

The IAEA delegation consisting of Rafael Grossi and 13 inspectors spent several hours at the Zaporozhye NPP. Representatives of Rosatom drove them around the facility. In Energoatom, this caused bewilderment: the head of the Ukrainian operator Petr Kotin, in an interview with Archyde.com, doubted that in such conditions the experts might collect the necessary information.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, however, did not publicly complain regarding the host country. Having carried out an initial inspection of the facility, he called the situation around the station “very difficult.”

“It was difficult to get there, but the most important thing is that we got here. In a couple of hours we were able to piece together a lot of information. I saw the key things that I needed to see, the explanations were clear,” Rafael Grossi told reporters.

He specifically noted the “selfless work of the staff and management” of the station, who “despite very difficult circumstances, professionally perform their work.” The head of the IAEA, however, did not speak publicly regarding whose fault the situation around the Zaporizhzhya NPP escalated, noting only that “the physical integrity of the plant was obviously repeatedly violated.” “We all have one goal – to protect the station from a nuclear accident … We must do everything possible to find an opportunity and agree with all parties,” said Rafael Grossi.

According to him, the agency still has a lot of work to do, for which several inspectors accompanying him will remain in place until September 4-5 (according to Energoatom, there are five of them). Among other things, they would like to communicate with the inhabitants of Energodar. At the same time, it follows from the comments of Rafael Grossi that in the future a permanent presence of IAEA experts will be organized at the station. Earlier, the representative of the Russian Federation to international organizations in Vienna (where the headquarters of the agency is located), Mikhail Ulyanov, said that Russia would welcome this.

Dmitry Polyansky, First Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN, said on Thursday evening that “in light of the ongoing Ukrainian shelling of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant and today’s reckless provocation by the Kyiv regime aimed at disrupting the visit of IAEA inspectors to the plant,” Russia requested a meeting of the UN Security Council for September 6. At it, the Russian Federation also proposes to hear Rafael Grossi on the results of his team’s stay at the nuclear power plant.

Elena Chernenko