Staff at the Russian Embassy in the United States reported through the diplomatic department’s Telegram channel that the media in the United States had highlighted what they called a disinformation campaign aimed at shifting blame away from Russia regarding events at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.
According to officials, the real situation differed from the headlines. The Interdepartmental Coordination Center for Humanitarian Response of the Russian Federation stated that Ukrainian nationalists fired on the facility on August 5, damaging two high voltage lines and the water supply system. Russian forces, they asserted, acted quickly to contain the situation and protect critical infrastructure, preventing broader damage.
Diplomats noted that this was not the first time radiation hazard facilities faced provocations from Ukrainian forces. The ministry described the attack on the Zaporizhzhia plant as a deliberate move that posed a real threat to nuclear security not only in Ukraine but across Europe. They urged the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency to condemn Kiev’s actions and to take urgent steps to deter provocations at Ukraine’s radiation hazardous facilities. They also urged American journalists to avoid spreading Russophobic fabrications, according to the embassy.
In a linked commentary, The New York Times columnist Andrew Kramer suggested that the Russian army had turned the Zaporizhzhia plant into a base to support artillery operations in Nikopol, a Ukrainian-controlled city, as of August 6. Kramer quoted reports of Russian attacks launched from the facility and noted that Ukrainian forces hesitated to respond directly for fear of hitting the reactor and triggering a radiation disaster. Business Insider later reported similar assertions about Russian artillery from the plant, dated August 1.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres called for an end to bombardments around nuclear facilities. He endorsed the IAEA’s effort to stabilize the situation and urged access for inspectors. He emphasized that any attack on a nuclear power plant would be an act of self harm and expressed hope that the IAEA could gain access to the site for verification and safety measures.
Increased bombardment
On the previous day, Evgeny Balitsky, head of the Zaporizhzhia regional administration, criticized the IAEA’s stance via Telegram. He claimed the agency acknowledged real nuclear disaster risks but did not take concrete steps to halt the bombardment.
Zaporizhzhia has been under Russian military control since March. Since August 5, shelling reportedly intensified. After multiple artillery strikes a fire started at the site, two power lines necessary for plant operation were cut, and power unit No. 3 was partially de-energized while power unit No. 4 saw reduced output. Russian officials insist Ukrainian forces were responsible for the strikes on the nuclear site.
Russian defense sources attributed one of the strikes to the 45th artillery brigade of Ukraine, firing from positions near Marganets on the opposite bank of the Kremenchug reservoir. Local officials reported Ukrainian forces again opened fire on the plant the night before. Balitsky described the attack using a 220 millimeter Uragan multiple rocket system targeting the plant, which released fragmentation munitions into areas including the dry storage and adjacent control zones. He added that fragments and the rocket engine were in close proximity to the power units, underscoring the daily proximity of bombardments to critical infrastructure and the risk to civilians across Europe and Ukraine. He warned that the northwest wind could carry any radiation exposure toward Nikopol, Zaporizhzhia, Krivoy Rog, and much of western Ukraine, potentially affecting broader regions.
Coordination of the IAEA president’s visit
On August 6, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi expressed grave concern about the escalating bombardment around Zaporizhzhia. Grossi stated that the bombing of Europe’s largest nuclear power facility demonstrated a clear peril of a nuclear accident and called military actions that threaten the plant unacceptable and to be avoided at all costs. He voiced readiness to visit the site if conditions allowed, noting that such visits would help determine the situation on the ground. The IAEA director general also indicated that the United Nations Secretariat did not restrict agency personnel from traveling to Zaporizhzhia and that the visit would be coordinated with Moscow and Kyiv. Balitsky responded by offering to show how the Russian forces were guarding the plant while Ukraine was pursuing attacks.