Two men from Russia have given rare, detailed accounts of clandestine activity they say they carried out on behalf of Ukraine’s military intelligence, describing surveillance networks, hits on military assets and a shadowy campaign that Kyiv acknowledges in general terms but will not publicly claim.
What the men say they did
One man, identified in the reporting as "Ivan", says he operated inside Russia and supported Ukrainian strikes against strategic bombers and munitions plants. A second figure, called "Foma", is reported to be in exile in Poland and to run a volunteer surveillance network that monitors senior officers whom Ukraine’s intelligence service, the HUR (GUR), may consider as potential targets. Both men appear in a BBC World Service documentary produced by an independent journalist.
"I'm not sure of anyone, except myself,"
That caution came from one of the men's handlers at GUR when asked if operatives could be fully trusted — an exchange that underlines the opacity and distrust that surround covert operations.
Context and official stances
Kyiv has publicly described a campaign of co‑ordinated drone attacks and clandestine action against what it calls legitimate military targets inside Russia, but Ukrainian authorities routinely refrain from publicly claiming responsibility for specific strikes. The GUR has told the documentary makers that it has employed the two men, but it also acknowledged limitations in its knowledge, leaving many of the specific claims difficult to independently verify.
Media reports have previously documented alleged sabotage and targeted killings inside Russia since the onset of the war. The documentary offers an unusual first‑hand perspective from someone claiming to have operated on Russian soil and from an organiser running networks from abroad.
How the networks are described
Reporting indicates the operations combine:
- surveillance by volunteers within Russia to track movements of senior officers;
- coordination with Ukrainian intelligence to select targets;
- use of drones and other means to strike facilities such as airbases and munitions factories.
Foma emphasises that the volunteer networks he oversees do not carry out attacks themselves, but rather collect intelligence on potential high‑value targets.
Verification and limits
Both the documentary and the GUR are careful about details. The agency confirmed the two men worked with it but said it could not provide a complete picture. Independent verification of the specific operations the men describe is not possible based on available evidence in the documentary and public reporting.
| Source | Role described |
|---|---|
| "Ivan" | Claims operational role inside Russia supporting strikes on strategic bombers and munitions sites |
| "Foma" | Runs a network of volunteer surveillors from Poland, gathers intelligence on high‑level officers |
The reporting also echoes known patterns in the conflict: Ukraine has said it uses covert means and drones to strike military infrastructure, and there have been several high‑profile assassinations and explosive incidents inside Russia since the war began. A previously admitted Ukrainian intelligence operation was cited in media past reporting as having been behind the killing of a senior Russian military figure, underscoring the high stakes.
Implications for allies and the public
For NATO members and Western partners, such accounts complicate the public narrative of the conflict, because they signal an active clandestine campaign extending into Russian territory. They also raise operational and legal questions about espionage, targeted strikes and civilian risk in a protracted war.
For Canadians following the conflict, the documentary provides an uncommon window into the murky logistics of intelligence work: handlers who distrust their own people, volunteers who risk operating inside an authoritarian state, and a state actor that publicly acknowledges the tactics but not the specifics. The result is a portrait of modern hybrid warfare where plausible deniability and secrecy are central to strategy.
Given the delicate nature of the material and the limitations on independent corroboration, the accounts in the documentary must be treated as claimed actions rather than fully verified events. Nevertheless, they add to a growing body of reporting that suggests Kyiv’s campaign includes both overt military strikes and covert operations beyond its borders.
