Russia Rejects Allegation of Deliberately Targeting Train Carrying Western Political Figures

Dragon Media News Desk

Russia has rejected allegations that its forces deliberately targeted a train carrying former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, former CIA Director David Petraeus and other Western officials during strikes in western Ukraine. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on September 15 that the September 13 strikes were directed at military facilities and transport and logistics infrastructure used for military purposes.

Zakharova said the Russian Armed Forces do not deliberately target civilians or civilian transport and maintained that the strikes were conducted against facilities supporting military operations. She reiterated Moscow’s position that railway junctions, depots and locomotives used to transport Western weapons and military supplies to Ukrainian forces can be considered military targets.

She dismissed claims that the presence of Western political figures near the affected railway area indicated that they had been intentionally targeted. According to Zakharova, portraying the incident in that way was part of an information campaign aimed at generating greater support for additional military assistance to Ukraine.

The Russian spokeswoman also said Moscow had previously warned foreign citizens, diplomats and their families about security risks associated with remaining in or travelling to Ukraine. She stated that Russia had informed diplomatic missions that its forces were carrying out systematic strikes against defence-related facilities and command and decision-making centres.

Zakharova further argued that Russian strikes were being conducted in response to Ukrainian attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure inside Russia. Moscow has also accused Ukrainian authorities of placing foreign political visitors near military transport routes, a claim rejected by Kyiv.

Ukraine and its Western partners, meanwhile, have repeatedly argued that attacks on railway and transport infrastructure endanger civilians and disrupt essential civilian services. The conflicting accounts once again highlight the broader dispute over the military use of transport infrastructure and the protection of civilian movement during the ongoing war.