# Gunfight Between Ukraine’s Security Services in Kyiv Exposes Wartime Rift

*Wednesday, September 2, 2026 at 6:05 PM UTC — Hamer Intelligence Services Desk*

**Published**: 2026-09-02T18:05:48.844Z (1h ago)
**Category**: conflict | **Region**: Eastern Europe
**Importance**: 8/10
**Sources**: OSINT
**Permalink**: https://hamerintel.com/data/articles/16630.md
**Source**: https://hamerintel.com/summaries

---

**Deck**: A shootout between Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) and military intelligence (HUR) in Kyiv wounded three servicemen and pushed President Volodymyr Zelensky to demand internal investigations and possible leadership changes.

Two of Ukraine’s key security agencies opened fire on each other in the capital while the country is at war with Russia. A confrontation between officers from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and the Defence Ministry’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (HUR) in Kyiv’s Dnipro district left three servicemen wounded, two of them in serious condition.

The clash grew out of a HUR operation to locate a kidnapped colleague, identified in reports as Stepan Kaplunov, a Russian volunteer fighting for Ukraine. When the HUR team moved to detain the alleged kidnappers, they discovered that the suspects were members of the SBU’s “Alpha” special unit. A brief standoff escalated into a gunfight between the two services.

President Volodymyr Zelensky said there must be accountability for what happened, including potential personnel decisions affecting the heads of the security services involved, and called for internal investigations in both agencies. The head of the President’s Office, former HUR chief Kyrylo Budanov, said a thorough probe is needed and that the State Bureau of Investigation will handle the case.

The immediate human cost is clear: three wounded servicemen who were supposed to be on the same side. For Ukrainian forces more broadly, the episode raises concerns about coordination and trust among institutions that manage operations, share intelligence and conduct sensitive missions.

The timing is particularly sensitive because the SBU and HUR have recently reported disrupting high-risk operations allegedly planned by Russia’s FSB, including what they described as a foiled terrorist attack targeting a Russian opposition figure visiting Ukraine for Independence Day. Visible conflict between Ukrainian services offers Moscow material for propaganda and potential openings to exploit divisions.

The shootout also highlights how wartime pressure can strain chains of command. With overlapping jurisdictions, rapid decision-making and high-stakes missions, disagreements over authority or methods can harden quickly if not managed by clear rules and oversight.

Ukraine’s foreign partners, who share intelligence and supply advanced weapons, will be watching how Kyiv responds. They will look for signs that internal disputes can be contained through formal investigations and discipline rather than force.

The central risk is straightforward: when agencies responsible for national security resort to weapons against one another, they weaken the state’s ability to fight an external enemy.

Indicators to watch now include the progress and transparency of the State Bureau of Investigation’s inquiry, any dismissals or reshuffles in SBU and HUR leadership, and steps by Kyiv to clarify legal authorities and coordination mechanisms between services.