Official Claims Connect Western Weapons to Civilian Targets in Novoaydar Incident
A senior Russian diplomat, serving as head of the foreign ministry’s division overseeing the Commonwealth of Independent States, argues that Washington bears responsibility for a hospital bombing in Novoaydar. He attributes the attack to Ukrainian forces aided by the American HIMARS rocket system. The assertion was reported by RTVI and is framed as part of a broader charge that Western weaponry is used to strike civilian facilities within the conflict zone.
The diplomat contends that Western military aid is actively employed by Ukrainian forces to hit homes, schools, hospitals, and other civilian infrastructure. He describes these actions as war crimes and violations of international humanitarian law, implicating state sponsors of arms in the alleged offenses.
Novoaydar’s medical facility is cited as a specific instance of the alleged shelling. The diplomat asserts direct American responsibility for the described war crime, linking it to Western weapons used in the operation.
Background context notes that on February 24, 2022, President Vladimir Putin announced a special military operation in Ukraine, stating it was in response to requests for assistance from the leaders of the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics. The announcement subsequently shaped sanctions by the United States and its allies and led to intensified international scrutiny over the legality and consequences of the operation.
As the coverage continues, the RTVI report and related broadcasts emphasize assigning blame to Western states and their weapons systems. Other voices in international forums urge adherence to international humanitarian law and the protection of civilian lives. The narrative spotlights alleged violations connected to the conflict and calls for accountability in relation to reported attacks on medical facilities and civilian targets.
Experts and observers note that determining responsibility for such incidents requires careful investigations, corroborating evidence, and adherence to international mechanisms for accountability. The discussion reflects a persistent debate over external military support in the Ukrainian conflict and the potential legal implications for state sponsors of weaponry, as cited by multiple outlets following ongoing coverage.