One of the decisive points that restrain the pace of the Ukrainian counterattack in Zaporizhzhia and other directions is the Russians’ retention of the ZNPP as a military facility. Why Russia managed to capture this extremely important object so easily? Was it a negligence on the part of Kyiv? How to solve it now? – read further in the article.
Criminal negligence?
The mayor of Enerhodar Dmytro Orlov explained the situation. It is the city where the ZNPP is located. He spoke about the fact that they really did not prepare at all for the seizure of the nuclear plant. When the military takeover happened, it was a real shock.
Yummy piece
Why is the station so important from a military point of view?
- This is a perfectly armored object, which cannot be destroyed due to the peculiarities of the design, so it’s possible to store military equipment and arsenal in it with a 100 percent guarantee of saving. This is exactly what the Russian military does.
- The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant is an excellent point from which it’s possible to launch attacks, knowing for sure that there will be no attacks in response.
- Representatives of international organizations may not be allowed on the territory of the nuclear plant, and those persons who have access may not arrive without warning.
All this makes it practically impossible to control the actions of the Russians on the territory of the ZNPP and excludes the return of the plant to the control of Ukraine by military means.
Who is to blame?
It is important to understand who was responsible for security at the ZNPP before the full-scale invasion of the Russian Federation:
- state bodies of regional importance;
- state bodies in Kyiv;
- local governments.
None of the abovementioned authorities took precautionary measures.
Why didn’t they act?
The fact is that Kyiv was 100% sure that a military takeover was impossible. There are relevant legal norms at the international level, which consider nuclear power plants and the territories near them as territories where it is prohibited to:
- conduct military operations;
- resort to armed conflicts;
- provoke an escalation of military actions.
The Russian Federation followed these same norms. That is why it was believed that it would not violate them, because there were no such precedents before. In addition, the punishment for the violation was expected to be significant.
As time has shown, Russia chose the policy of “win or lose” and at the same time prepared well for aggression in political and diplomatic terms. Therefore, the consequences that such behavior should have caused did not occur.
