Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), indicated that removing weapons from the area around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant would be a component of the broader agreement being negotiated between Kyiv and Moscow, with the IAEA playing a central monitoring and facilitation role. The agreement reportedly envisions a de-escalation of hostilities around the facility as a key trust-building step in ensuring nuclear safety and stability in the region.
Grossi pointed out that Ukrainian authorities are understandably pushing for the withdrawal of any weaponry near the plant, viewing it as a prerequisite for both safety and broader strategic assurances. He described the weapon withdrawal as part of the ultimate settlement, subject to the contours of the overall deal that the IAEA is helping to broker in coordination with all key parties. He emphasized that this is a practical measure tied to ensuring safe operations at the site rather than a one-sided concession.
According to Grossi, all sides have agreed in principle not to bombard the station and not to conduct hostilities from their own territories. This mutual understanding is aimed at preserving the plant from any military incident, thereby reducing the risk of a regional nuclear accident and safeguarding civilian populations in adjacent areas. Grossi stressed that protecting critical industrial facilities, including nuclear power plants, is a shared responsibility and a foundational principle guiding the negotiations.
In his assessment, the IAEA’s mission at Zaporizhzhia centers on preventing any nuclear accident and ensuring that safety remains the primary objective, rather than seeking a tactical advantage for any party. When pressed about assigning blame for any shelling, Grossi indicated that determining responsibility was not within the IAEA’s remit; the agency’s remit remains about averting accidents and securing a stable operating environment for the plant.
Grossi expressed optimism about progressing toward a resolution by year’s end, noting that President Vladimir Putin is attentive to the process and that a future encounter with the Russian leader and Ukraine’s president could be possible if circumstances permit. He remarked that the agency’s director general maintains close contact with authorities involved and remains focused on reaching a constructive agreement that protects the plant and its workers while preserving regional stability.
Beyond the IAEA’s efforts, French President Emmanuel Macron indicated support for diplomatic efforts, telling TF1 that after discussions with the IAEA’s director general, he intends to meet with President Putin to discuss the situation and the broader civil nuclear energy landscape in Ukraine. Grossi had earlier signaled that a proposal exists to halt what he described as the reckless bombardment of Europe’s largest nuclear facility, with ongoing negotiations on steps to implement that proposal as part of a comprehensive ceasefire and security framework around Zaporizhzhia.
Alexei Likhachev, chief executive of Russia’s state-owned Rosatom, has affirmed Russia’s position and highlighted that the central task is the establishment of a security zone around the ZNPP as soon as feasible. He stated that the plan under discussion with the IAEA does not involve any offensive actions against the plant, and Rosatom contends that Russia does not deploy offensive weapons at the site. The focus, he argued, is on safeguarding the facility and ensuring its uninterrupted operation, with appropriate physical protections in place.
Likhachev outlined that, if a security zone is formally established, Russian forces would remain nearby but would not engage in offensive military activity against the station. He described the zone as a buffer ensuring heightened security and argued that any withdrawal of troops would jeopardize regional control, making it a non-starter for Russia. He also underscored the necessity of comprehensive protection to guarantee the plant’s uninterrupted operation and to minimize risk to surrounding communities.
Meanwhile, Kyiv has asserted that Russian forces are expected to depart from Energodar, where the Zaporizhzhia plant is located, while Kremlin spokespeople have rejected such statements as unfounded. Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s press secretary, cautioned against reading too much into rumors and insisted that there is no plan for Russia to abandon Energodar or the ZNPP while security concerns persist. The public discourse surrounding the issue has been a mix of official statements and media commentary, reflecting the high stakes and political sensitivities involved.
Commentary from regional voices has varied. Volodymyr Rogov, a regional political figure associated with local pro-Russian groups, dismissed Ukrainian claims about a Russian pullback as propaganda aimed at shaping international perception. Rogov argued that such statements are part of a broader information and psychological operation by Ukrainian authorities, suggesting that Russian forces would not vacate their positions near the plant. He warned that any withdrawal would be tantamount to losing strategic ground in the region, an outcome he described as unacceptable for Moscow.
In summary, the situation at Zaporizhzhia remains a focal point of international diplomacy and regional security concerns. The IAEA continues to emphasize safety, transparency, and a coordinated approach involving all stakeholders. While disagreements persist, the core objective remains clear: prevent a nuclear incident, maintain uninterrupted plant operation, and work toward a verifiable de-escalation and security framework that protects civilians and supports regional stability for both North American and European audiences. Attribution: IAEA statements, official remarks, and coordinated briefings from involved parties.