Shopping Malls, Markets, Warehouses: How Russian Strikes Are Destroying Ukraine's Retail Infrastructure
As of August 27, 2026, the T4P initiative database has documented 8,179 attacks on various businesses. We present the most significant examples of such attacks and their consequences.
Attacks on Large Retail Facilities
Recently, on August 21, at around 4:30 p.m., a Russian drone struck the Solnechnaya Galereya shopping center in Kryvyi Rih. At the time, the shopping center was open and crowded. About half an hour later, another drone struck the same shopping center. The attack killed at least 16 civilians and injured 128 others, including at least 23 children.
The strike caused a massive fire and significant damage inside the shopping center. The floors, roof, and storefronts were damaged, and part of the building was reduced to rubble. After the first strike, police, rescuers, and medics arrived at the scene, began evacuating people, providing aid to the injured, and extinguishing the fire. During this work, the second strike occurred.
“The fact that the shopping center was struck twice with an interval of approximately 30 minutes strongly indicates that it was the specific target of this attack,” stated Danielle Bell, Head of the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine.
Following the attack, Russian media outlets began circulating their own explanations for the strike. They claimed that drones were allegedly stored inside the shopping center, military equipment was located in the parking lot, and a “secondary detonation” supposedly occurred after the initial hit. Some pro-Russian channels explicitly stated that the shopping center building was a deliberate target of the attack.
Representatives from the UN Monitoring Mission visited the strike site and the hospital, speaking with victims and eyewitnesses. They confirmed that the shopping center was open and filled with civilians at the time of the attack. At the time of their inspection, observers found no signs of military presence, military activity, or equipment that would have turned the facility into a military target. The Mission assessed that the attack itself likely constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law.
According to Maksym Havryushyn, head of the Ukrainian Council of Shopping Centers, “Solnechnaya Galereya” was the 39th retail facility in Ukraine to be damaged since the start of the full-scale invasion. Meanwhile, as of August 27, 2026, the T4P database had documented 8,179 incidents of attacks on shops, factories, and other business facilities. One of the most severe Russian attacks on a commercial facility was the strike on the Amstor shopping mall in Kremenchuk on June 27, 2022. A Russian missile hit the mall while it was open and occupied by civilians. Twenty-two people were killed, and dozens were injured. The Russian side claimed the target was actually a nearby factory and an ammunition depot. However, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine found no evidence that weapons were stored at the facility. The Commission also determined that the missile struck the mall directly, rather than damaging it with a fire spreading from the neighboring plant. The Commission classified this incident as an indiscriminate attack, noting that Russian forces failed to take necessary precautions. Specifically, they did not properly verify the target or select means of attack that would minimize risks to civilians.
Another strike on a commercial facility occurred on May 25, 2024, in Kharkiv. Russian forces attacked the Epicentr home improvement hypermarket with two aerial bombs. It was a Saturday; the store was open, and customers and staff were inside. Nineteen people were killed, and 54 were injured. After investigating the attack, the organization Truth Hounds found no military targets either inside the hypermarket or in its immediate vicinity. The organization also noted that the nature and consequences of the analyzed attacks could indicate a deliberate targeting of civilian facilities.
As of early August 2026, the Epicentr company reported 11 destroyed shopping centers—located in Mariupol, Chernihiv, Bucha, Nikopol, Kharkiv, Kamianske, Sumy, Kryvyi Rih, Zaporizhzhia, and two in Kherson. At least 15 other facilities in the chain had sustained damage. On August 24, two more Epicentr stores in Odesa were added to this list after being damaged in yet another Russian attack.
Shelling of markets
Russian strikes have also repeatedly targeted markets—places where hundreds of civilians gather daily. One of the deadliest such incidents occurred on September 6, 2023, in Kostiantynivka, Donetsk region. Around 2:00 p.m., a strike hit the market in the city center. Seventeen people were killed, and more than 30 were wounded. The fire engulfed retail pavilions and damaged vehicles and nearby buildings.
Kharkiv’s Barabashovo market—one of the country’s largest commercial complexes—was also attacked repeatedly. In March 2022, shelling sparked a massive fire that covered about seven hectares. While rescue workers were extinguishing the blaze, Russian forces launched a follow-up strike. One State Emergency Service employee was killed, and another was wounded. In July of that same year, the market came under fire again: two people were killed, and more than 20 were injured. In May 2025, following another attack, dozens of retail pavilions were destroyed, and over a hundred were damaged.
On October 1, 2024, Russian artillery shelled the area around the Central Market in Kherson. The attack occurred around 9:00 a.m., when people were already out shopping or heading to work. Retail outlets, a pharmacy, and a public transport stop came under fire. Six people were killed, and another six were wounded.
In February 2026, Russian forces struck a market in Druzhkivka, Donetsk region. According to investigators, a Smerch multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) with cluster munitions was used in the attack. Seven people aged 43 to 81 were killed, and at least 15 were wounded. After the strike, local authorities temporarily closed the market because of the risk of repeated attacks.
Destruction of warehouses and logistics centers
Russian strikes on warehouse infrastructure began as early as 2022. According to estimates by the Bureau of Investment Programs, approximately 600,000 to 700,000 square meters of warehouse space were destroyed during the first year of the full-scale war in Ukraine. Major losses included the West Gate Logistic complex in Stoianka near Kyiv—where goods belonging to Goodwine, Watsons, and other companies burned down—as well as ATB warehouses and the central Foxtrot warehouse in Hostomel. On March 12, 2022, Russian shelling also destroyed a large frozen food warehouse in Kvitneve, which stored products from MHP, among others. The company estimated its losses at approximately 230 million hryvnias.
A new wave of attacks became particularly pronounced in 2025–2026. On November 25, 2025, a missile struck a NOVUS logistics center spanning over 50,000 square meters; four supplier drivers were killed, and five other people were injured. In early 2026, strikes on major warehouses began occurring in rapid succession. In February, Roshen’s largest finished-goods warehouse in Yahotyn was almost destroyed; in April, a fire engulfed over 21,000 square meters of the logistics center serving the “Simi” and “Sim23” chains in Lutsk; and in May, the “UVK” center—part of the Fozzy Group—was destroyed in Dnipro. On June 3, a direct drone strike disabled one of ATB’s largest distribution centers (37,500 square meters), which supplied goods to around 300 stores.
The list of losses continued to grow in July. On July 2, a Denka Logistics warehouse was destroyed; it housed products for Intertop Ukraine, BookChef, OKWINE, and other companies. During the same attack, Russian forces destroyed MOYO’s only warehouse, which covered approximately 7,500 square meters. On the night of July 19, a missile destroyed the Amtel logistics complex in the Kyiv region. Companies that stored goods there, including Goodwine, Knigolav, and other brands, suffered losses. The Ukrainian Council of Shopping Centers reported on the aftermath.
The most extensive series of strikes occurred in August 2026. On the night of August 5, several missiles again struck the NOVUS logistics center, completely shutting down its operations. That same night, fires broke out at four Fozzy Group distribution centers that supplied goods to the Silpo, Fora, and THRASH! chains. According to updated company data, eight employees were killed, and another 21 were injured. Three ballistic missiles destroyed a Rozetka distribution warehouse in Brovary, which handled over 100,000 orders daily. In Kyiv, an Epicentr logistics center burned down, and a strike on a Nova Poshta sorting center killed three people—two drivers from a partner company and an employee of a contractor.
The attacks continued into the second half of August. On August 18, an EVA distribution center in Brovary was damaged, followed two days later by a new Fora center in Martusivka, which had begun operations just about a week before the strike. Damage was also reported at a warehouse belonging to a VARUS logistics partner in Boryspil.
The scale of these losses is already affecting retail chains’ operations. According to Yevhenia Loktionova, Director of UTG, the Ukrainian retail sector lost approximately 400,000 square meters of warehouse space—including 80,000–100,000 square meters of cold storage—following the August series of strikes. In the Kyiv region, only about 2.5% of warehouse space remained available, with virtually no large facilities exceeding 10,000 square meters. Consequently, chains are forced to alter delivery routes, transport goods via other warehouses, and redistribute inventory across regions. For consumers, the consequences manifest as the temporary unavailability of certain products, a reduced assortment, and delays in online orders.
Who bears responsibility for such attacks?
Shopping centers, supermarkets, markets, shops, and civilian warehouses are protected under international humanitarian law. According to Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, parties to a conflict must distinguish between civilian objects and military objectives and direct attacks only against the latter. Article 52 of the Protocol defines the criteria for a military objective: the object must make an effective contribution to military action, and its destruction or neutralization in the prevailing circumstances must offer a definite military advantage.
The proximity of a shop, market, or warehouse to a military objective does not, in itself, make it a legitimate target. Even if a military objective is indeed located nearby, the attacking party must consider the risks to civilians. Article 51 of Additional Protocol I prohibits indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, while Article 57 requires that feasible precautions be taken regarding the choice of target, weapons, and method of attack.
Therefore, when investigating attacks on shopping centers, markets, or warehouses, it is crucial to establish exactly what the military identified as the target, what information they had about the object before the strike, whether they verified how many civilians might have been present at the time, and what weapons were used. Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court classifies the intentional direction of an attack against a civilian object as a war crime.
Specific rules apply to food warehouses. Article 54 of Additional Protocol I protects objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, particularly foodstuffs and food supplies. The Rome Statute also defines the intentional use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime. To establish such a classification, investigators must determine the objective of the attack, the warehouse’s role in supplying the population, and other circumstances surrounding the strike.
Liability may extend to various individuals involved in planning and executing the attack. Articles 25 and 28 of the Rome Statute provide for individual liability and, under certain conditions, command responsibility. This concerns, in particular, those who directly committed the crime, issued the order, facilitated its Commission, or—as commanders—knew or should have known about their subordinates’ crimes yet failed to take necessary measures.
One such trial is already underway in Ukraine. In July 2026, a case was referred to court against five high-ranking Russian military officials whom Ukrainian investigators link to the strike on the “Epicentr” store in Kharkiv on May 25, 2024. The accused are charged with violating the laws and customs of war involving premeditated murder. The court must make a final assessment of the evidence and the accused’s actions.
Ultimately, the issue here extends far beyond whether a specific building was damaged. Each such strike demands answers to several simple yet fundamental questions: what exactly was the target, did the military know civilians were present, and did they do everything possible to avoid endangering them? The legal classification of the attack—and the ability to identify the specific individuals responsible—hinges on the answers to these questions.
For the people involved, the consequences are far more tangible than legal terminology: shoppers and staff who lost their lives, business owners left without a place of trade, and employees of the destroyed warehouses and retail chains forced to restructure their supply lines within a matter of days. That is precisely why attacks on retail infrastructure should be viewed simultaneously as an issue of civilian safety, economic loss, and liability for potential war crimes.
