Kremlin says Russia has widened the range of targets it strikes in Ukraine

A broader targeting posture

The Kremlin has publicly described a widening of Russia's target set in Ukraine, linking the change to Kyiv's intensified attacks on Russian economic and strategic infrastructure. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on September 13 that Moscow had previously exercised greater restraint but had changed its approach after Ukrainian strikes inside Russia, according to an individual report inspected from the Kyiv Independent.

The statement is important as an articulation of policy, but it is not independent proof of the legality, purpose or effects of any particular strike. Peskov presented the expansion as retaliation. Russian President Vladimir Putin had used similar language in August when threatening responses against sensitive sectors of Ukraine's economy. Moscow has long denied deliberately targeting civilians even as its missiles and drones have repeatedly damaged homes, energy systems, railways and commercial facilities.

Infrastructure pressure before winter

The announced posture comes during a marked rise in jet-powered drone attacks and sustained pressure on Ukrainian fuel and logistics networks. The Kyiv Independent reports that Kyiv faced almost continuous drone activity from late August into early September, while attacks on filling stations spread beyond frontline regions. Ukraine has simultaneously expanded operations against Russian refineries, depots and other facilities intended to reduce Moscow's military fuel supply and energy revenue.

Recent Russian attacks documented separately in the edition's exclusion index are not republished here as a new event. Their relevance is contextual: Peskov's statement supplies a political rationale for a broader campaign already visible across several regions. A September 9 statement from Ukraine's Foreign Ministry independently records missiles and drones being directed at cities and communities, including a residential building in Kyiv and an international border crossing in Odesa Oblast.

The development raises two questions to watch. The first is operational: whether subsequent Russian strike patterns show a sustained increase against fuel distribution, transport and other economic infrastructure. The second is diplomatic and legal: whether Moscow's public explanation is cited by Ukraine and its partners as evidence of retaliatory attacks insufficiently distinguished from protected civilian objects. Because the story concerns a policy statement rather than a newly verified strike, it does not qualify for a map alert.