Ukraine, Russia Accuse Each Other of Planning to Attack Europe’s Biggest Nuclear Plant

A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)
A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

Ukraine, Russia Accuse Each Other of Planning to Attack Europe’s Biggest Nuclear Plant

A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)
A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)

Ukraine and Russia accused each other Wednesday of planning to attack one of the world's largest nuclear power plants, but neither side provided evidence to support their claims of an imminent threat to the facility in southeastern Ukraine that is occupied by Russian troops.

The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant has been a focus of concern since Moscow's forces took control of it and its staff in the early stages of the war. Russia and Ukraine have regularly traded blame over shelling near the plant that caused power outages. Over the last year, the UN's atomic watchdog repeatedly expressed alarm over the possibility of a radiation catastrophe like the one at Chernobyl after a reactor exploded in 1986.

The six reactors at Zaporizhzhia are shut down, but the plant still needs power and qualified staff to run crucial cooling systems and other safety features.

Ukraine has alleged more recently that Moscow might try to cause a deliberate leak in an attempt to derail Kyiv’s ongoing counteroffensive in the surrounding Zaporizhzhia region. Russia is suspected of blowing up a dam in southern Ukraine last month with a similar aim.

Citing the latest intelligence reports, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy alleged Tuesday night that Russian troops had placed "objects resembling explosives" on top of several of the plant's power units to "simulate" an attack from outside.

"Their detonation should not damage power units but may create a picture of shelling from Ukraine," according to a statement from the general staff of Ukraine’s armed forces.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has officials stationed at the Russian-held plant, which is still run by its Ukrainian staff. IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said his agency's most recent inspection of the plant found no activity related to explosives, "but we remain extremely alert."

"As you know, there is a lot of combat. I have been there a few weeks ago, and there is contact there very close to the plant, so we cannot relax," Grossi said during a visit to Japan.

In Russia, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov raised the specter of a potentially "catastrophic" provocation by the Ukrainian army at the nuclear plant, which is Europe’s largest.

"The situation is quite tense. There is a great threat of sabotage by the Kyiv regime, which can be catastrophic in its consequences," Peskov said in response to a reporter’s question about the plant. He also claimed that the Kremlin was pursuing "all measures" to counter the alleged Ukrainian threat.

Grossi said he was aware of both Kyiv’s and Moscow’s claims and reiterated that "nuclear power plants should never, under any circumstances, be attacked."

"A nuclear power plant should not be used as a military base," he said.

A Russian attack on the plant would "probably not lead to the widespread dispersal of significant amounts of radiation" due to precautionary steps taken by the IAEA, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a think tank.

"A blast at Zaporizhzhia would spread radiation and sow panic, but the actual off-site radiation risk would be relatively low,’’ the think tank said in a recent assessment, adding that wind might blow some radiation toward Russia.

The most likely scenarios are a Russian-engineered explosion that exposes one of the reactor cores and starts a fire that burns spent fuel, or a blast involving the dry spent fuel on site that would carry the radiation far afield via wind, the IISS said.

Neither of those scenarios would bring a disaster on the scale of Chernobyl or Fukushima, Japan’s tsunami-wrecked nuclear plant, it said.

Renat Karchaa, an adviser to Russian state nuclear company Rosenergoatom, said there was "no basis" for Zelenskyy's claims of a plot to simulate an explosion.

"Why would we need explosives there? This is nonsense" aimed at "maintaining tension around the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant," Karchaa said.

Russian media on Tuesday cited Karchaa as saying that Ukraine’s military planned to strike the plant early Wednesday with ammunition laced with nuclear waste. As of Wednesday afternoon, there was no indication of such an attack.

Last week, Ukrainian emergency workers held a drill to prepare for a potential release of radiation from the plant. In case of a nuclear disaster at the plant, approximately 300,000 people would be evacuated from the areas closest to the facility, according to the country’s emergency services.

Ukrainian officials have said the shut-down reactors are protected by thick concrete containment domes.



NATO Intercepts Russian Military Aircraft Flying Over the Baltic Sea

 In this photo, provided by the French Army on Monday, April 20, 2026, a Russian supersonic Tu-22M3 strategic bomber, right, and an escorting Su-35 Russian fighter jet fly together over the Baltic Sea. (Etat-Major des Armees via AP)
In this photo, provided by the French Army on Monday, April 20, 2026, a Russian supersonic Tu-22M3 strategic bomber, right, and an escorting Su-35 Russian fighter jet fly together over the Baltic Sea. (Etat-Major des Armees via AP)
TT

NATO Intercepts Russian Military Aircraft Flying Over the Baltic Sea

 In this photo, provided by the French Army on Monday, April 20, 2026, a Russian supersonic Tu-22M3 strategic bomber, right, and an escorting Su-35 Russian fighter jet fly together over the Baltic Sea. (Etat-Major des Armees via AP)
In this photo, provided by the French Army on Monday, April 20, 2026, a Russian supersonic Tu-22M3 strategic bomber, right, and an escorting Su-35 Russian fighter jet fly together over the Baltic Sea. (Etat-Major des Armees via AP)

NATO intercepted Russian strategic bombers and fighter jets that flew over the Baltic Sea on Monday, a muscular display of air power on the alliance’s eastern flank away from the spotlight on the Middle East.

French Rafale fighters were deployed from a Lithuanian air base where they are stationed as part of a decades-long NATO air-policing effort. The fighters armed with air-to-air missiles joined jets from Sweden, Finland, Poland, Denmark and Romania. They all took to the skies to inspect and keep watch on the Russian flight, the French detachment said.

The Russian mission included two supersonic Tu-22M3s, as well as about 10 fighters — both SU-30s and SU-35s — that took turns escorting the larger strategic bombers, according to the statement.

The Russian Defense Ministry said the long-range bombers' flight was scheduled and occurred in airspace over the neutral waters of the Baltic Sea. The flight took more than four hours, the ministry said Monday on Telegram.

“At certain stages of the route, the long-range bombers were accompanied by fighters of foreign states,” the ministry said. “Crews of long-range aviation regularly conduct flights over the neutral waters of the Arctic, the North Atlantic, the Pacific Ocean, as well as the Baltic and Black Seas. All flights of Russian Aerospace Forces aircraft are carried out in strict compliance with international rules for the use of airspace.”

The ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday. It often reports flights by its strategic bombers over the Baltic Sea, including in January — when NATO jets also flew up to meet them — and at least four times last year.

NATO’s Allied Air Command also did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

The military alliance routinely scrambles fighter aircraft to intercept Russian warplanes that approach or fly near NATO airspace. NATO says the Russian planes it intercepts often fail to use their transponders and don't communicate with air traffic controllers or file a flight plan. NATO jets are sent up to identify them.

Many of the Russian flights that NATO monitors with its Baltic air policing mission, in place since Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia joined the alliance in 2004, are to and from the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. Even before the war in Ukraine, NATO was intercepting Russian planes around 300 times each year, mostly over waters around northern Europe.

A journalist from The Associated Press witnessed the French detachment's response on Monday from the sprawling Šiauliai Air Base in Lithuania. NATO uses the base for fighter patrols that police the skies on the alliance’s eastern flank.

Two French Rafale fighter jets’ two-man crews — a pilot and a navigator — were seen racing in two vans to the planes’ hangars from the headquarters building the French detachment uses during its four-month deployment on the air base.

The crews were already suited up because they’d been on standby, so they would be ready to take to the air within minutes if scrambled.

The two crews quickly took their places in their planes’ cockpits. They were then put on hold, with the planes’ jet engines ignited, until they got the order to take off. Then they taxied out of their hangars and roared off into the clear skies.

Monday's flight was the latest in Russia's maneuvers over the Baltic Sea.

Lithuania's defense ministry said NATO jets were scrambled four times from April 13-19 to intercept Russian aircraft that violated flight rules that included turning off flight transponders and flying without a flight plan.


Iran Arrests More Than 3,600 on Charges Related to War, Says NGO

People walk past a banner with a picture of the late Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohammad Pakpour, in Tehran Bazaar, amid a ceasefire between US and Iran, in Tehran, Iran, April 21, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
People walk past a banner with a picture of the late Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohammad Pakpour, in Tehran Bazaar, amid a ceasefire between US and Iran, in Tehran, Iran, April 21, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
TT

Iran Arrests More Than 3,600 on Charges Related to War, Says NGO

People walk past a banner with a picture of the late Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohammad Pakpour, in Tehran Bazaar, amid a ceasefire between US and Iran, in Tehran, Iran, April 21, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
People walk past a banner with a picture of the late Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohammad Pakpour, in Tehran Bazaar, amid a ceasefire between US and Iran, in Tehran, Iran, April 21, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters

Iranian authorities have arrested more than 3,600 people on charges related to the US-Israeli war ranging from sharing videos with media outlets based overseas to possessing Starlink internet terminals, an NGO said on Tuesday.

Norway-based Iran Human Rights (IHR) said the figure, based on state media reports and its own research, represented a minimum given the current internet restrictions in the country, and that the actual number of arrests was "likely much higher".

It said at least 3,646 people had been arrested since the war broke out on February 28, with at least 767 of the cases reported after the start of a ceasefire on April 8.

"The charges levelled against the detainees predominantly include espionage, communicating with foreign intelligence services, transmitting images or coordinates of sensitive locations to foreign-based media, and attempting to establish operational cells or conduct armed activities," it said.

People have also been arrested for using and distributing Starlink satellite-based internet terminals to circumvent internet blackouts, and for alleged cooperation with pro-monarchist groups.

IHR said more than 100 civil society activists were among those arrested, including prize-winning rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, who was detained on April 2.

Sotoudeh's daughter Mehraveh Khandan wrote on Instagram on Saturday that her mother had telephoned for the first time since her arrest, saying she was being held by the intelligence ministry but was not allowed to disclose where.

Her fellow rights activist and 2023 Nobel Peace Prize winner Narges Mohammadi remains in prison after her arrest in December, which took place before the war and mass protests in January.

Mohammadi on Tuesday turned 54 behind the bars of her prison in the northern city of Zanjan, her foundation said, after warning last week her health was "critical" following a heart attack in March.


US Forces Board a Sanctioned Oil Tanker in the Indian Ocean, the Pentagon Says

 Tankers and bulk carriers anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, Saturday, April 18, 2026. (AP)
Tankers and bulk carriers anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, Saturday, April 18, 2026. (AP)
TT

US Forces Board a Sanctioned Oil Tanker in the Indian Ocean, the Pentagon Says

 Tankers and bulk carriers anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, Saturday, April 18, 2026. (AP)
Tankers and bulk carriers anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, Saturday, April 18, 2026. (AP)

US forces have boarded an oil tanker previously sanctioned for smuggling Iranian crude oil in Asia, the Pentagon said Tuesday, as it puts into place a global warning to track down vessels tied to Tehran.

US forces “conducted a right-of-visit maritime interdiction” and boarded the M/T Tifani “without incident,” the Pentagon said on social media.

The Tifani was captured in the Bay of Bengal — between India and Southeast Asia — and was carrying Iranian oil, according to a US defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing military operation. The US military will decide in the next four days what to do with the vessel, such as tow it back to the US or turn it over to another country, the official said.

It's the latest move in the US war on Iran to stop any ship tied to Tehran or those suspected of carrying supplies that could help its government, from weapons and oil to metals and electronics. The announcement comes ahead of the expiration of an already tenuous ceasefire between the US and Iran, and as Pakistan attempts to broker talks between Washington and Tehran.

It is the second vessel linked to Iran that has been interdicted by the US military. The US Navy attacked and seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship Sunday that it said had tried to evade its blockade of Iranian ports, with President Donald Trump saying an American destroyer blew a hole in the ship’s engine room.

Targeting Iran-linked ships in international waters The Pentagon on social media described the Tifani as “stateless” despite it being a Botswana-flagged vessel.

“As we have made clear, we will pursue global maritime enforcement efforts to disrupt illicit networks and interdict sanctioned vessels providing material support to Iran — anywhere they operate,” the Pentagon announcement said, echoing previous statements from Trump administration officials. “International waters are not a refuge for sanctioned vessels.”

Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last week that the enforcement actions would extend beyond Iranian waters and the area under control of US Central Command.

US forces in other areas of responsibility, he told reporters at the Pentagon, “will actively pursue any Iranian-flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to Iran.” He specifically pointed to operations in the Pacific and said the US would target vessels that left before the blockade began outside the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway for energy and other shipments.

The military also detailed an expansive list of goods that it considers contraband, declaring that it will board, search and seize them from merchant vessels “regardless of location.” A notice published Thursday says any “goods that are destined for an enemy and that may be susceptible to use in armed conflict” are “subject to capture at any place beyond neutral territory.”

Blockades can be lawful in wartime, expert says

The US military’s actions against Iranian-linked vessels, namely the attack over the weekend on the cargo ship named the Touska, have raised questions about the two-week ceasefire.

The US and Iran are operating in “an awkward space where the law doesn’t give you a clean yes-or-no answer” on whether the ceasefire was violated, said Jason Chuah, a law professor at the City University of London and the Maritime Institute of Malaysia.

“The United States seems to take the line that the conflict never fully switched off — that is there is still a state of armed conflict,” Chuah said. “By saying that, it can keep doing things like enforcing a blockade and even using limited force at sea.”

But Iran is treating the ceasefire as a pause on all hostile acts, Chuah said. Iran’s joint military command has called the armed boarding an act of piracy and a violation of the ceasefire.

The US earlier had instituted a blockade against sanctioned oil tankers linked to Venezuela but had never fired on those vessels.

Blockades and even limited attacks on vessels can be lawful in wartime, with merchant vessels becoming legitimate targets if they contribute to military actions, carry contraband or are incorporated into enemy logistics, Chuah said.

It's harder to prove that a ship such as the Touska is realistically contributing to military action against the US, Chuah said.

“The whole dispute really turns on a deceptively simple question: Did the ceasefire actually suspend the right to use force?” Chuah said. “If it did, then firing on vessels or seizing them is very hard to square with the United Nations Charter.”

Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and a senior defense adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said a violation is up for interpretation because there were no defined terms.

“Trump announced it. The Iranians agreed. But there’s no formal agreement,” Cancian said. “So whether it broke the ceasefire or not depends on your perspective. ... Nothing was written down.”

Michael O’Hanlon, a defense and foreign policy analyst at the Brookings Institution, said the US did not violate the ceasefire because it was limited to bombing Iran, not the blockade.

“We agreed to stop dropping bombs on them, and that’s the basic thing they wanted,” O’Hanlon said, adding that the US still had to enforce the blockade “if you’re going to make it mean anything.”