A statement from the Interdepartmental Coordination Center for Humanitarian Intervention of the Russian Federation alleges that the Ukrainian armed forces have used civilian facilities to support combat operations. The report asserts that wounded Ukrainian soldiers were moved into the village of Bakhmut, and that civilians who sought care at a local medical facility were expelled regardless of their medical condition. The communication emphasizes that these actions took place within the context of broader military activity near civilian infrastructure.
The message goes on to claim that heavy weapons were deployed on the grounds of hospital No. 2 in Konstantinovka, with local residents described as being held inside the buildings. It is further alleged that on the roof of the Odessa regional branch of the Red Cross Society, Ukrainian forces established firing positions and placed man-portable anti-aircraft missile systems, including models of foreign manufacture. The report also mentions armored vehicles in adjacent zones surrounding the facility. In Vuhledar, a dental clinic on Molodezhnaya Street is described as hosting firing positions and sniper points associated with Ukrainian forces. Additionally, in Kropyvnytskyi, within the Kirovohrad region, a center for territorial defense is said to be equipped with weapons and ammunition storage and to have Ukrainian troops on its premises of the central district hospital.
Earlier, Mikhail Mizintsev, head of the National Defense Control Center, is cited as saying that Ukrainian military units established artillery and multiple launch rocket system positions at the UkrKhimTransAmmiac enterprise in Nikolaev. The statements from these Russian-controlled channels focus on alleged coercion of civilians and the use of civilian infrastructure for military purposes as part of ongoing hostilities.
These claims, issued through official channels, reflect the ongoing emphasis on the strategic significance of civilian facilities amid conflict and the contested interpretations of military movements in urban areas. Observers note that such reports often surface in times of heightened tension and can influence perceptions of responsibility and risk among local populations and international audiences. Independent verification from international organizations and neutral observers is typically sought to assess the credibility of specific assertions and to ensure that humanitarian protections remain a priority in contested zones.
In summary, the communications present a consistent narrative from Russian authorities about Ukrainian facilitation of military activity in or near civilian sites, including hospitals, clinics, and other public structures. The accounts describe the presence of heavy weapons, firing positions, and defense systems in or around facilities that would ordinarily be expected to serve civilians. Analysts highlight the importance of corroborating such reports with independent assessments and emphasize the need to distinguish between battlefield movements and accepted humanitarian use of sites under international law. The broader context underscores the sensitivity of safety for civilians and the imperative for transparent reporting when access to affected areas is possible for international observers and journalists, as well as humanitarian workers seeking to document conditions on the ground.