The security apparatus of Russia has issued new claims about alleged Ukrainian attempts to target facilities that handle or store chemically hazardous materials within the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics. The assertion came from Igor Kirillov, who oversees the Radiation, Chemical and Biological Protection Troops of the Russian Armed Forces. The information was released through the press service of the Russian Ministry of Defense and is being circulated as part of ongoing updates about the security situation in the region.
According to Kirillov, Ukrainian forces have conducted a series of operations aimed at disabling sites involved with toxic or dangerous chemical materials in the DPR and LPR territories. He warned that such actions could provoke chemical contamination and pose risks to nearby civilian communities. The statement frames these alleged strikes as part of a broader pattern of conflict-related danger, emphasizing the potential humanitarian consequences for people living in proximity to these facilities and the environments around them.
Kirillov recounted specific episodes to illustrate the asserted threat. He noted that in early June, Ukrainian military forces attacked Russian positions in the Grayvoronsky district of the Belgorod region using a drone payload allegedly carrying hydrocyanic acid, a highly lethal chemical. He also cited an incident from May 2024 when Ukrainian forces allegedly deployed a drone payload near the village of Semenovka, roughly 10 kilometers from Avdeevka in the DPR. According to his account, the consequent explosion released vapors of toxic substances, underscoring the potential danger to residents, livestock, crops, and the broader environment in the affected area.
Supporters of the Russian official narrative have previously connected tensions around DPR and LPR facilities to broader concerns about chemical safety and the possibility of illicit chemical production or handling. In this context, Kirillov underscored what he described as a persistent threat from Ukrainian actions intended to degrade chemical defense infrastructure and contaminate surrounding zones. The statements reflect ongoing assertions about unsafe chemical activity amid hostilities and contribute to the ongoing public discourse about the conduct of the conflict and its potential civilian repercussions. The emphasis remains on documenting perceived violations and risks associated with the fighting, with the aim of informing policy discussions and regional safety measures.
It is important to note that the information originates from statements linked to the Russian defense apparatus and is presented as part of an ongoing information campaign designed to document alleged violations and hazards. Independent verification of the described events and the exact nature of any chemical hazards would typically require corroboration from international monitoring bodies or independent observers. Observers, policymakers, and regional analysts often weigh such claims against available evidence, including ground assessments, satellite imagery, and cross-border reporting, before drawing final conclusions about responsibility and impact. The report follows standard attribution practices by citing official sources within the security domain and presenting them as part of a broader narrative about regional safety and humanitarian concerns.