Proponents of the current military strategy argue that targeting major logistics hubs like those owned by Wildberries is a necessary step to bring the reality of the war to the Russian interior. By disrupting the supply chains that keep the Russian economy functioning, Ukraine is effectively demonstrating that no part of the Russian infrastructure is immune to the consequences of the invasion. This approach is seen as a way to force the Russian leadership to account for the economic costs of the conflict.
From this viewpoint, the distinction between military and economic targets becomes blurred in a total war scenario. Because large retailers like Wildberries provide the logistical backbone that supports the daily lives of citizens and, by extension, the stability of the state, they are viewed as legitimate targets for pressure. The goal is to create enough economic friction to hinder the state's ability to maintain a sense of normalcy while its military continues operations in Ukraine.
Supporters also point out that these strikes are a direct response to the destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure by Russian forces. By hitting high-value economic targets, Ukraine is attempting to achieve a level of strategic parity. The hope is that the cumulative effect of these disruptions will eventually limit the resources available to the Russian government, thereby shortening the duration of the conflict by making the war effort increasingly difficult to sustain at home.
Ultimately, this perspective emphasizes that economic pressure is a vital component of modern warfare. If the Russian public begins to feel the direct impact of the war through the loss of retail services and increased costs, the internal pressure on the Kremlin may grow. This strategy is viewed as a pragmatic use of limited resources to achieve maximum psychological and economic impact.