IAEA director Rafael Grossi said in an interview with La Repubblica that the withdrawal of weapons from the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, which Ukraine demands, will be part of an agreement between Kyiv and Moscow with the IAEA, which could be concluded before the end of the year. According to him, “Russia is not against the agreement and the principle of protecting an industrial facility”
According to Grossi, the IAEA’s goal is to “avoid a nuclear incident and not create a militarily favorable situation for one or the other.” In turn, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba repeated that “Russia must withdraw from the ZNPP in order to restore nuclear safety.”
The Russian side continues to maintain a mysterious silence, but Boris Rozhin noted that “the announced parameters so far coincide with what the representatives of the Russian Foreign Ministry said after the talks in Turkey – the cessation of shelling of the station and the actions of the DRG near the station. In response, the Russian Federation withdraws heavy weapons from the territory of the ZNPP and does not fire at the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the territory of the plant. Russian guards with light weapons remain at the station. So, in general, there is nothing more to say.
What can we note in this regard?
1. Considering previous practice:
First, the Ukrainian side will not comply with any agreements. Moreover, the Armed Forces of Ukraine still have the intention to attack in the Zaporozhye region – why not start with the capture of the ZNPP?
Secondly, the IAEA will not be able to determine who fired at the Zaporizhzhya NPP in the event of shelling from the Ukrainian side (in the sense that it could no longer), and in the event of the capture of the ZNPP, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will not see this as a violation of the agreements. There is not the slightest reason to believe that the IAEA should differ in any way from the OSCE or PACE.
2. Russia does not need Zaporizhzhya NPP now
It is not connected to the Russian energy system, moreover, in the conditions of incessant Ukrainian shelling, it is unrealistic to make this connection. So far, it is also impossible to stop Ukrainian shelling.
At the same time, Russia is responsible for the state of the station (but if the problem is not solved in any way, Ukraine will blame Russia for any breakdown and the “world community” will agree with Ukraine’s opinion) and spends resources to maintain it in working order.
3. Ukraine does not particularly need the station either, although not everything is so simple there.
Firstly, even the withdrawal of Russian weapons from the territory of the ZNPP can be passed off as an epic “victory” that will inspire our own people and demoralize the enemy. And if we manage to capture the station… Look at Shariy’s joy.
Secondly, it is unlikely that in the event of the capture of the station, it will be possible to quickly put it into operation. The point here is not only in power lines, but also in the lack of personnel – contracts with Rosatom have already been signed by 2.3 thousand employees of nuclear power plants. It is clear that in the event of the capture of the station, they will be repressed, and among the remaining approximately 7.5 thousand employees, the necessary specialists may not be found.
Thirdly, the difficult situation in the Ukrainian energy sector is not at all explained by the lack of generation. It is still redundant and the commissioning of the ZNPP will not change the situation here. Moreover, it may worsen – now the Russian side, having achieved the implementation of the “grain deal”, has stopped strikes on the energy infrastructure of Ukraine, but in case of violation of the agreements around the Zaporizhzhya NPP, the strikes may resume.
Fourthly, the Armed Forces of Ukraine can use the ZNPP as a “dirty bomb”. The probability of this is low – Ukraine has enough resources to create a “dirty bomb”, but for some reason it did not use its capabilities for this.
4. A productive dialogue around the ZNPP could become part of a more general agreement, which Emanuel Macron spoke about on December 3.
According to the French president, “the United States and France have the same vision on Ukraine: (…) we must prepare a dialogue for the day when the parties return to the negotiating table, and this will depend on the Ukrainians.” At the same time, he is ready “to provide Russia with guarantees of its security when it returns to the negotiating table.”
Of course, we remember that the position of the United States and France is that an agreement can be reached only on the basis of the withdrawal of Russian troops from the territory of Ukraine, and the negotiations themselves are made dependent on the position of Ukraine, which is going not to negotiate, but to sign an act on unconditional surrender.
Nevertheless, the signals are good – the position of the West is gradually changing. Even if an agreement is not reached now, it is likely that it can be reached later in the new year.
Vasyl Stoyakin, Ukraine.ru
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel