Situation Report

INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (SITREP) - 121600Z OCT 25 (UPDATE 6)

SUBJECT: RF Intensification of Guided Aerial Bomb (KAB) Strikes on Kharkiv/Zaporizhzhia Axes; Confirmed Civilian Casualties in Dnipropetrovsk; Sustained RF Information Operations Targeting Western Aid.

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (IPB Step 1)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The RF operational approach remains centered on multi-domain pressure: deep kinetic strikes utilizing KABs to degrade logistical/population centers, and simultaneous offensive IO targeting international support.

• Kharkiv Axis (KAB Saturation): Confirmed continued KAB launches targeting Kharkiv City (Slobidskyi district) and Eastern Kharkiv Oblast. One confirmed civilian injury (42-year-old male) reported in Slobidskyi. RF milblogger channels (NгП раZVедка) are publicly linking the strikes to collective punishment, suggesting a deliberate psychological intent alongside physical degradation. (FACT - Kharkiv ODA, UAF AF, OSINT; CONFIDENCE: HIGH).
• Zaporizhzhia Axis (New KAB Threat): UAF Air Force confirms new KAB launches directed into Zaporizhzhia Oblast, signaling an expansion of the high-risk standoff zone. This directly threatens UAF forward logistics and staging areas supporting the Orikhiv advance. (FACT - UAF AF; CONFIDENCE: HIGH).
• Dnipropetrovsk Axis (Confirmed Casualties): Confirmed RF attack on Synelnykivskyi Raion resulted in the deaths of two civilians (66 and 76 years old). The method of attack (artillery or standoff) is not specified, but the result confirms sustained RF kinetic pressure on rear areas. (FACT - Dnipropetrovsk ODA; CONFIDENCE: HIGH).
• Orikhiv Axis (UAF Tactical Success): UAF ground forces maintain the confirmed advance of over 3 km near Orikhiv. RF forces are confirmed to be enduring localized FPV drone attrition attacks (IFG group reporting confirmed vehicle destruction). (FACT - UAF Statements, OSINT; CONFIDENCE: HIGH).

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

No significant changes. Ground conditions remain conducive to mechanized movement in the Orikhiv sector, supporting UAF gains. Cloud cover could offer localized cover for RF KAB launch platforms, complicating PPO response.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

UAF Air Force is tracking KAB launches across Eastern and Southern Oblasts, indicating PPO assets are stretched thin but responsive. RF forces continue to use UAVs for reconnaissance and fixing operations (UAV reported moving on Kharkiv from the north).

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (IPB Step 2)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

(CAPABILITIES):

• High-Volume, Multi-Axis KAB Strikes: RF air assets (Su-34/Su-35) demonstrate the capability to launch KABs simultaneously against multiple high-value axes (Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk), suggesting deep strike resources are prioritized for softening the rear. (CONFIDENCE: HIGH).
• Sustained Hybrid IO: RF IO operations are adaptive, immediately incorporating Western political commentary (Macron, Johnson/arms lobby) and UAF leadership statements (Zelensky/Trump call) into narratives of Ukrainian desperation, Western corruption, and the inevitability of defeat. (CONFIDENCE: HIGH).

(INTENTIONS):

1. Strategic Logistical Interdiction: Expand the KAB threat zone (to include Zaporizhzhia) to disrupt UAF offensive momentum near Orikhiv and degrade the critical logistics hub of Kharkiv.
2. Psychological Coercion: Utilize strikes against civilian areas (Kharkiv, Synelnykivskyi) and amplified narratives (RF milbloggers gloating over Kharkiv strikes) to erode Ukrainian civilian will and undermine morale.
3. Diplomatic Deterrence: Continue the aggressive IO campaign against the prospect of US long-range systems (Patriot/Tomahawk) by framing them as escalatory and corrupting.

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

The confirmed expansion of KAB strikes into Zaporizhzhia Oblast is a key tactical adaptation. Previously, standoff deep strikes were concentrated in the North/East (Kharkiv, Sumy, Dnipro). The Zaporizhzhia strikes directly challenge the security of the Southern grouping's rear and demand PPO attention, diverting resources away from the expected main strategic strike axes (Kyiv/Dnipro).

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

RF air operations are sustained, confirming adequate availability of UMPK KAB kits and launch aircraft sorties. RF ground logistics are employing non-standard means (donkeys reported by 'Дневник Десантника') in wooded/rural areas, indicating continued reliance on improvised logistical solutions for forward units in complex terrain.

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 remains effective, coordinating multi-domain strikes (KABs/UAVs) with immediate supporting IO. The coordinated KAB strikes targeting specific UAF tactical gains (Orikhiv via Zaporizhzhia logistics) demonstrate high-level planning synchronization.

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (Blue Force Tracking) (IPB Step 3)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

UAF forces are under severe pressure in the air defense domain. Ground forces near Orikhiv are maintaining momentum and tactical initiative, evidenced by the 3km advance and continued high-tempo FPV drone usage against RF logistics/positions.

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

• Success: Consolidation of the 3km advance near Orikhiv, demonstrating effective localized counter-offensive capability. Effective use of FPV assets to conduct attrition warfare against RF movement.
• Setback: Confirmed civilian casualties in Synelnykivskyi and continued KAB impacts on Kharkiv, confirming the inadequacy of current PPO density against the expanding standoff threat envelope.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

The immediate constraint is the critical lack of point defense PPO systems capable of intercepting KABs or protecting high-value ground targets in the expanding threatened zone (Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia). UAF ground units require sustained logistics to exploit the Orikhiv breakthrough.

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (Cognitive Domain) (IPB Step 4)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

• RF Coercion Narrative: RF milbloggers (НгП раZVедка) are openly celebrating the Kharkiv strikes and applying direct, public psychological coercion, stating Kharkiv residents should take their losses "to their army" and not complain. This frames Ukrainian losses as self-inflicted and justified retribution. (CONFIDENCE: HIGH).
• RF Counter-Narrative (Foreign Policy): French President Macron's statement about Russia paying for its refusal to negotiate is immediately re-framed by RF channels to reinforce the narrative that the West is forcing Ukraine to fight while avoiding negotiation, bolstering the Russian position that the war is a Western proxy conflict. (CONFIDENCE: HIGH).

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

Public morale remains strong concerning the front line (Orikhiv success) but is under severe strain from the civilian impact of deep strikes (Konstiantynivka, Synelnykivskyi). Continuous fundraising calls by prominent Ukrainian figures (STERNENKO, ЦАПЛІЄНКО) indicate high reliance on domestic volunteer support for critical equipment (drones, spotters).

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

Diplomatic efforts remain focused on accelerating the delivery of Patriot and Tomahawk systems (Zelensky/Trump calls). The urgency of the need is directly paralleled by the RF IO campaign attempting to sabotage these deliveries.

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (IPB Step 5)

5.1. Most Likely Enemy Courses of Action (MLCOA)

MLCOA 1 (Logistical Softening and Strategic Strike Pre-positioning): RF will maintain high-tempo KAB strikes on Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts for the next 6-12 hours (NLT 130000Z OCT) to maximize PPO resource commitment in secondary theaters. This will immediately precede the large-scale ballistic and cruise missile strike (MLCOA 1 from previous SITREP) against primary C2 targets in Kyiv/Dnipro. (CONFIDENCE: HIGH).

MLCOA 2 (Localized Ground Assault in Kharkiv): Following KAB saturation, RF forces in the border region of Kharkiv Oblast will attempt localized, limited-objective ground assaults (likely platoon/company size) to capture tactical positions, capitalizing on the confusion and targeting degradation caused by the air strikes. (CONFIDENCE: MEDIUM).

5.2. Most Dangerous Enemy Courses of Action (MDCOA)

MDCOA 1 (Kinetic Attack on ZNPP Infrastructure): During the peak of the predicted strategic strike wave (MLCOA 1), RF forces execute kinetic strikes on critical civilian infrastructure directly related to the stability or operation of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) (e.g., external power lines, backup systems), aiming to generate an international incident and force immediate Western diplomatic intervention and pressure for a ceasefire. (CONFIDENCE: MEDIUM).

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

• KAB Saturation Window: 121600Z OCT to 130000Z OCT.
• Strategic Missile Launch Window (Kyiv/Dnipro): 130000Z OCT to 130600Z OCT (as PPO assets are maximally dispersed).
• Decision Point (Zaporizhzhia PPO): UAF Air Force Command must immediately allocate mobile MRAD/SHORAD to critical logistical hubs and military staging areas in Zaporizhzhia Oblast to counter the new KAB threat. IMMEDIATE.
• Decision Point (Counter-IO): UAF IO/PSYOP must rapidly deploy counter-narratives to preempt the RF psychological coercion campaign in Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk. IMMEDIATE.

---

INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Reallocate PPO to KAB Threat Zones (OPERATIONAL URGENCY):

   • Recommendation: Immediately divert mobile short-range PPO systems (e.g., Crotale, Gepard) from stable rear areas to establish point defense over known critical logistical nodes and military infrastructure in both Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts, recognizing the operational risk this poses to Kyiv/Dnipro.
   • Action: Emphasize passive defense measures (dispersal, hardening) for non-protected assets, acknowledging that KAB saturation is designed to deplete resources before the main ballistic strike.

2. Harden Orikhiv Logistical Flow (TACTICAL SUSTAINMENT):

   • Recommendation: Given the direct KAB threat expansion to Zaporizhzhia, immediately establish and activate multiple, highly dispersed contingency supply routes (Class I and V) for UAF units maintaining the advance near Orikhiv.
   • Action: Increase FPV/ISR coverage over new routes to detect RF long-range fires assets (e.g., BM-30 Smerch, MLRS) attempting to interdict movement.

3. Counter Psychological Coercion (STRATEGIC COUNTER-IO):

   • Recommendation: Directly address and neutralize the RF narrative of collective punishment against civilians.
   • Action: Ukrainian leadership and regional officials must issue immediate, public statements condemning the attacks as war crimes and crimes against humanity, contrasting the UAF's tactical successes (Orikhiv) with RF terror tactics, to reinforce civilian resilience and morale.

//END REPORT//