Shootings between SBU and military intelligence in Kyiv wound three HUR fighters

Why it matters

The incident marks an unprecedented open armed clash between two Ukrainian security services in the capital, producing casualties and criminal proceedings against officers of both the SBU and HUR. It exposes a serious inter-agency conflict with major counter-intelligence implications — the SBU alleges that an RDK officer under HUR was preparing FSB-directed assassinations in Kyiv — and has already triggered high-level personnel decisions ordered by President Zelensky.

What happened

Two shooting incidents involving the SBU and HUR occurred in the courtyard of the Kyiv apartment building of RDK deputy commander Stepan Kaplunov, in the Rusanivka neighborhood of the Dnipro district. The first shots were fired around 23:00 on September 1 when SBU representatives attempted to enter Kaplunov's apartment; a second escalation occurred around 08:00 on September 2. Three HUR fighters were wounded — one with light injuries and two in moderate condition — and were hospitalized. According to RDK commander Denys Kapustin, the SBU opened fire and shot at the legs rather than to kill, and HUR did not return fire; the SBU officially stated that during a search its officers were attacked and its Alfa special forces used weapons against those resisting.

The clash was linked to Kaplunov's August 23 detention by the SBU, which the service calls a detention but which Kaplunov and the RDK describe as an abduction. Kaplunov said he was held for nine days at two sites, denied knowledge of his whereabouts, threatened and forced to confess during interrogations; the SBU says he admitted contacts with the FSB and cooperated with the investigation. The SBU alleges that, on FSB orders, Kaplunov was preparing in Kyiv the killing of a Russian opposition figure due to arrive in Ukraine for Independence Day and several Ukrainian military personnel; media reports cited SBU as believing the plot targeted Chechen Republic of Ichkeria head-in-exile Akhmed Zakayev abroad. Zakayev's circle said it learned of the plot only from media.

The State Bureau of Investigation opened a pretrial investigation into the armed conflict. On September 3 the Prosecutor General announced that one representative of each side — an SBU officer and a HUR serviceman, identified as Serhiy Ivanov, commander of a GUR squad — had been notified of suspicion: the SBU officer under Part 2 of Article 365 of the Criminal Code (exceeding power or official authority by a law enforcement officer), Ivanov under Article 348 (encroachment on the life of a law enforcement officer). On September 4 the Pechersk court in Kyiv chose personal surety for Ivanov and released him from custody. President Zelensky announced dismissals of the deputies of the heads of SBU and HUR responsible for the situation and on September 3 dismissed Oleh Khramov, head of the SBU's department of state secrets protection and licensing.

A separate row erupted after ex-MP Ihor Mosiychuk, who is under NSDC sanctions imposed by Zelensky in May 2025 for spreading pro-Russian propaganda, published on his Telegram channel what he said were the names and personal data of three SBU officers from the 5th Directorate of Counterintelligence detained after the shooting. Blogger Ihor Lachenkov alleged that a DBR employee had requested the information on orders from DBR director Oleksiy Sukhachov. The DBR denied any transfer of Ukrainian special services officers' data to the Russian side, denied that Sukhachov gave such an order, called the accusations a deliberate attempt to discredit the bureau, and opened a pretrial investigation into the dissemination of officers' personal data. The SBU had not publicly commented on the alleged leak as of September 4. HUR said on September 3 that a targeted disinformation campaign against it was being waged via media, bloggers and Telegram channels of dubious reputation, including for financial reward.

Where reporting differs

Four main points of disagreement are reported across sources.

First, the August 23 action against Kaplunov: the SBU calls it a detention, while Kaplunov and the RDK call it an abduction. Kaplunov says he was held for nine days, denied knowledge of his whereabouts, threatened and forced to confess; the SBU says he voluntarily admitted contacts with the FSB and cooperated.

Second, who fired first and how during the courtyard shootings: Kapustin says the SBU opened fire and shot at the legs without aiming to kill, with HUR not returning fire; the SBU officially states that its officers were attacked during a search and that its Alfa special forces used weapons against those resisting.

Third, the alleged DBR leak of SBU officers' personal data to the Russian side: Lachenkov and Mosiychuk assert a DBR employee requested the data on orders from director Oleksiy Sukhachov; the DBR denies any such transfer, denies that Sukhachov gave such an order, and calls the accusations a deliberate attempt to discredit the bureau.

Fourth, the description of the alleged FSB assassination plot: media reports cite SBU as believing the plot targeted Akhmed Zakayev abroad; the SBU's public statement describes the target as a Russian opposition figure due to arrive in Ukraine for Independence Day and several Ukrainian military personnel.

Background

The Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK) is subordinated to Ukrainian military intelligence (HUR) and is linked to the 'Tymur Special Unit' led by a commander known as Timur; political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko notes that both the RDK and the 'Tymur Special Unit' were created on the initiative of HUR head Kyrylo Budanov. Fesenko links the underlying confrontation to a personal and political rivalry between SBU head Oleksandr Poklad and HUR head Kyrylo Budanov. RDK commander Denys Kapustin states that all of Kaplunov's contacts with the Russian side were known to his leadership and that Kaplunov had no unauthorized contacts. Ex-MP Ihor Mosiychuk, who published the contested personal data, is under NSDC sanctions for spreading pro-Russian propaganda imposed by President Zelensky in May 2025. Blogger Ihor Lachenkov publicly accused DBR director Oleksiy Sukhachov of ordering the alleged data leak, an allegation the DBR has rejected.