A Russian source connected with Moscow’s permanent mission to the United Nations informed RIA Novosti and TASS that Russia had asked for a UN Security Council briefing on August 11 about Ukrainian strikes against the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) and the potential for catastrophic consequences.
The source stated that the Russian Federation requested an afternoon Security Council briefing on August 11 to discuss the recent Ukrainian attacks on the Zaporozhye nuclear facility and the possible catastrophic outcomes.
Later, Dmitry Polyansky, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN, confirmed via Telegram that a briefing had been requested. He described the issue as one that required a candid, collective discussion within the Security Council and argued that Ukrainian provocations should be made transparent to the public.
According to TASS, Russia also invited IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi to participate in the upcoming briefing.
World on the edge of the abyss
Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, commented on the UN and IAEA responses to the ZNPP bombing. She criticized the UN for what she called an irresponsible decision regarding the lack of coordination around Grossi’s planned visit, suggesting that such a failure could have dangerous consequences.
Zakharova urged the UN Secretariat to recognize the gravity of the nuclear energy issue, warning that the world is approaching a dangerous turning point. She framed the events as criminal acts linked to Kyiv’s actions and emphasized that the repercussions would transcend borders, as voiced on a Sputnik radio broadcast.
Earlier, Grossi had voiced concerns about the ZNPP bombing, stating that any military action threatening plant safety is unacceptable and must be avoided. He underscored that IAEA experts in safety, protection, and security are ready to lead a mission. Subsequently, the Russian Foreign Ministry claimed that coordination gaps within the UN Secretariat helped enable renewed Ukrainian strikes on the plant.
Biden did not call
Senator Alexei Pushkov of the Federation Council suggested that a direct call from the US President to Ukraine’s leader could stop the shelling of the ZNPP. He described President Biden as showing astonishing irresponsibility for not taking that step.
Pushkov argued in a Telegram post that a Presidential call could avert a nuclear incident at the Zaporozhye plant, while accusing Biden of playing with fire by not acting. He added that the bombardment jeopardizes nearby nations and lamented what he viewed as a lack of decisive European leadership to prevent a potential disaster.
According to Pushkov, the European leadership has shown indifference to a possible revival of a catastrophe comparable to Chernobyl, which would threaten parts of Europe should a disaster unfold.
Off sky mode
On August 9, Anatoly Zlenko, representing Ukraine at the UN, called during the NPT Review Conference for a no-fly zone over Ukraine to protect power facilities and to strengthen air defense systems for Kyiv. He urged the international community to act quickly to close the skies over Ukraine’s nuclear sites and to bolster defenses.
Another Ukrainian official, Deputy Foreign Minister Mykola Tochitsky, had made a similar appeal a week earlier. Petr Kotin, head of Energoatom, also urged the creation of a demilitarized zone around the ZNPP.
Responding to Zlenko, Zakharova proposed a cautious approach and suggested allowing the IAEA delegation access to the plant rather than pursuing sweeping measures. She framed the discussion as a practical starting point rather than a grand plan, hinting that misconceptions spread through certain channels could distort perceptions.
Washington is watching
White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre called on Moscow to return full control of Zaporozhye and other nuclear facilities to Ukraine. She urged an end to all military actions near Ukraine’s nuclear sites and reaffirmed that Ukraine should manage these facilities, praising Kyiv’s commitment to nuclear security under difficult circumstances.
The United States noted that it is monitoring the situation around the station and reported that current radiation levels have not shown signs of abnormal activity. The U.S. emphasized its support for Ukrainian authorities in maintaining safety under challenging conditions.
Plan B for civilians around the ZNPP
Alexander Volga, head of Energodar’s city administration, announced the existence of an emergency evacuation plan should a crisis arise at the nuclear plant. He stated that evacuation plans are in place and continuously updated to reflect the evolving situation.
ZNPP, located in Energodar, stands as Europe’s largest nuclear power facility by installed capacity. The plant is under Russian military control since February but is operated by Ukrainian personnel. Since the start of Russian operations in Ukraine, the site has faced repeated bombardments by Ukrainian forces. In the recent weeks of July and August, shelling intensified, with fragments and a rocket engine landing within 400 meters of a working unit during a late-night attack on August 6-7.
Related posts:
{“rewritten_html”:”Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, noted a dramatic reduction in the workforce at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant. Only about three to four thousand of the ten thousand employees remain on site, a stark contrast to the plant’s full operational capacity. This situation has drawn international attention as the IAEA monitors the safety and security of nuclear facilities amid ongoing tensions in the region. The head of the agency underscored how the personnel depletion is affecting the plant’s ability to maintain steady operations and oversight. He emphasized that looking after nuclear safety requires a robust and consistent workforce, and he conveyed concern over the exodus of staff and the dwindling on-site presence. Grossi spoke as the IAEA leader about the current staffing reality and how it could influence safety measures and the plant’s resilience in difficult circumstances. He acknowledged that many workers had left the area and that the remaining personnel were pressed to continue essential functions under challenging conditions. These statements reflect the IAEA’s ongoing assessment of the situation at the largest nuclear installation in Europe by unit count and installed capacity, a distinction that has positioned Zaporozhye NPP as a focal point in regional energy security discussions. The plant sits on the left bank of the Dnieper River near Energodar and has been under control of the Russian military since March, a status that has complicated normal governance and daily operations. Officials from Energodar have repeatedly alleged that the site has suffered bombardment from forces of Ukraine, which has added to the intensity of the information environment surrounding the facility. The IAEA continues to pursue and verify information regarding the safety protocols and incident reports to ensure accurate situational awareness for member states and international observers. Grossi reiterated that he has a plan for establishing a safety zone around the Zaporozhye facility. This proposed exclusion area, if realized, would aim to reduce exposure to potential hazards and create a clear buffer that supports uninterrupted safety monitoring and response capabilities. He described the plan as an essential step toward mitigating the risk of a nuclear accident and strengthening international oversight of the site during a period of heightened risk. The IAEA chief also touched on the difficulty of identifying those responsible for any hostile actions that may have occurred around the plant. In a September statement, he indicated that determining the exact perpetrators behind the alleged bombing was not possible at that time, reflecting the complexity of obtaining verifiable information in a conflict zone and the challenges of attribution in such incidents. The agency remains committed to transparency and steady communication with the international community as it continues to assess safety conditions, verify claims, and support collective efforts to prevent any escalation that could compromise nuclear safety. The broader context includes ongoing debates among international actors about the appropriate safeguards, the role of international law in protecting critical infrastructure, and the responsibilities of involved parties to prevent damage to facilities with potentially far-reaching consequences for regional and global energy stability. Throughout these developments, the IAEA emphasizes that safeguarding nuclear facilities requires not just technical expertise but also stable staffing, reliable procedures, and clear, verifiable information. The agency’s leadership continues to call for careful assessment, continuous monitoring, and practical steps that can be implemented to reduce risk while respecting the realities on the ground. By maintaining emphasis on safety culture, procedural clarity, and international cooperation, the IAEA seeks to support a safer operational environment at Zaporozhye NPP and contribute to a broader framework that protects communities dependent on nuclear energy in North America and beyond. This ongoing discourse reflects a shared concern about safeguarding critical energy infrastructure in a volatile geopolitical landscape, with the IAEA positioned as a central voice in promoting verifiable safety standards, reliable oversight, and proactive risk mitigation. The situation remains dynamic, and the organization continues to update its assessments as new information becomes available, inviting careful scrutiny from member states and stakeholders around the world. In its communications, the IAEA strives to balance the need for transparency with the constraints of operating in a conflict area, aiming to provide accurate, timely, and actionable guidance to ensure the highest possible level of nuclear safety under challenging conditions. The overarching goal remains clear: to prevent a nuclear accident and uphold the integrity of the world’s nuclear safeguards regime, even in the face of disruption and uncertainty. This commitment underscores the IAEA’s mission to protect people and the environment while supporting safe, secure, and peaceful use of nuclear technology. Attribution: IAEA statements and public briefings related to Zaporozhye NPP safety and staffing conditions.”} Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant Talks: IAEA Pushes for Safety and De-Escalation IAEA Mission to Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant Sees Mixed Reactions and Safe Passage Challenges IAEA Calls for Security Zone and Safe Access at Zaporizhzhia NPP {} Rosatom Officials Confirm IAEA Finalizing Zaporizhzhia NPP Security Plan and Ongoing Inspector Rotations Zaporizhzhya NPP Safety Fragility and IAEA Protective Principles Rafael Grossi cautions against strikes and emphasizes IAEA transparency IAEA Eyes Immediate Zaporizhzhia Mission Amid Tensions Over Nuclear Safety IAEA Nears Security Agreement Over Zaporizhzhia NPP IAEA Chief Warns Over Falling Water Levels at Zaporizhzhia NPP Cooling System IAEA Team Visits Zaporozhye Nuclear Plant Under Fire: Oversight and Dialogue