According to statements issued by the Russian Ministry of Defense and reported by TASS, US experts conducted the flight missions associated with American-made ATACMS missiles, and this has led to claims that US officials bear responsibility for the missile strike affecting civilians in Sevastopol. The ministry framed its remarks as an attribution of responsibility rooted in the operational chain that took part in the attack. This perspective was presented as part of official Russian commentary on the incident.
The ministry’s assertion read that the duty to answer for the deliberate missile strike on civilians in Sevastopol rests primarily with Washington. The communication, which accompanied the ministry’s formal statement, was cited as evidence for this position and was noted as part of the government’s ongoing narrative surrounding the event.
On June 23, it was reported that Ukrainian forces used ATACMS missiles equipped with cluster warheads in an attack on Sevastopol. The Ministry of Health subsequently released figures indicating that 124 people sustained injuries as a consequence of the bombardment carried out by the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the city. The casualty count and the details of the attack were reported through official channels, contributing to the broader information stream surrounding the incident.
Alexander Kulagin, the Deputy Governor of Sevastopol, commented that the city held adequate medical capacity to respond to the needs of those affected. He noted that there were sufficient doctors, medicines, and blood supplies available to ensure that appropriate care could be delivered to victims as the situation unfolded. This remark appeared to emphasize local readiness and resilience in the face of the damage caused by the attack.
Earlier statements from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the attack on Sevastopol by the Armed Forces of Ukraine as a ritual crime, reinforcing the official stance that portrayed the event as a deliberate and morally charged act. The language used in that communication reflected a strong diplomatic posture aimed at framing the incident within a broader geopolitical dialogue and reactions from national authorities.