Situation Report

INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (SITREP) - OPERATIONAL UPDATE: RF AD SATURATION AND CONTINUED UAF CNI TARGETING

DTG: 020000Z NOV 25 ANALYST CONFIDENCE (Overall): HIGH. The operational focus remains on strategic kinetic exchanges deep in the RF rear and high-tempo RF air activity against Ukrainian objectives, indicating a rapid, escalating cycle of strike and counter-strike.

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (Current Operational Picture)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The operational geometry is defined by simultaneous UAF counter-CNI operations in the RF deep rear and sustained RF air saturation efforts across the contact line depth.

• Deep RF Rear (Black Sea Coast): Confirmed Battle Damage Assessment (BDA) shows the Tuapse Marine Oil Terminal (Rosneft) suffered kinetic damage, specifically the deepwater pier ("neftepirs") is reported burning post-UAV attack (23:42Z). This confirms the strategic success of the UAF deep strike (Previous SITREP, 012330Z). Furthermore, RF local authorities confirmed collateral damage to a residential building in Sosnovy village, Tuapse district by UAV debris (23:41Z).
• Central RF Rear (Air Activity): Unconfirmed reports of drone overflights ("UFO") in Orel City resulted in emergency services response (ambulances, fire trucks) (23:42Z). This reinforces the widespread operational pressure UAF is applying on RF domestic AD.
• Frontline Depth (Ukraine): RF is executing renewed air saturation attacks targeting Eastern and Southern Oblasts:
  • Kharkiv Oblast: UAV activity confirmed (00:00Z).
  • Zaporizhzhia Oblast: High-speed air targets detected (00:01Z), followed by an official air raid alert (00:03Z), confirming continued RF kinetic intent against the Zaporizhzhia axis.
• FLOT Activity (Propaganda): RF forces are actively producing and disseminating propaganda footage of BM-21 Grad MLRS operations, emphasizing unit readiness and effectiveness (23:35Z).

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

Night conditions continue to facilitate drone operations and high-speed missile/UAV launches for both sides, leading to high AD alert levels.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

• RF AD: RF forces are visibly stretched, attempting to defend both fixed CNI targets in the deep rear (Tuapse) and central population/logistics hubs (Orel, Lipetsk—as per previous report). This dispersion is successfully creating windows for UAF deep strikes.
• UAF Deep Strike Assets: UAF continues to demonstrate the capability to bypass RF AD and strike fixed, high-value economic targets with tactical precision (pier strike at Tuapse confirmed).

---

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (Threat Assessment)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

Capabilities:

• Tactical Firepower (HIGH CONFIDENCE): RF maintains high readiness for tactical indirect fire support, demonstrated by the quick turnaround and dissemination of propaganda footage featuring BM-21 Grad MLRS deployment and firing (23:35Z).
• Air Warfare Coordination (MEDIUM CONFIDENCE): RF continues to launch coordinated air targets (UAVs/missiles) against multiple Ukrainian oblasts (Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia), suggesting effective C2 for saturation attacks aimed at exploiting UAF AD gaps.

Intentions:

1. Impose Cost on UAF Rear: Exploit UAF AD constraints by continuing the multi-axis saturation campaign (Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia) to maintain constant operational stress.
2. Propaganda Amplification: Counter the strategic shock of the Tuapse strike with domestic messaging emphasizing frontline combat readiness and tactical successes (MLRS video).

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

• RF Domestic Alert Standardization: The widespread, reactive alerts and subsequent emergency service responses in Central Russia (Orel, Lipetsk) suggest RF is relying on a broad warning system rather than effective pre-interception of UAF deep strike assets.

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

• RF Energy Export Degraded (HIGH CONFIDENCE): The confirmed damage to the Tuapse oil loading pier represents a direct, tactical incapacitation of a key Black Sea export node, significantly impacting RF revenue generation for sustainment.

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

• RF C2 remains effective at coordinating saturation air campaigns against Ukraine but shows persistent vulnerability in rapidly and effectively countering UAF deep strike CNI missions.

---

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (Blue Force Tracking)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

• UAF retains the strategic initiative in the counter-CNI campaign, demonstrated by the confirmed BDA at Tuapse.
• UAF AD forces must maintain high readiness to counter the immediate and confirmed air threats against Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts.

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

• Success (STRATEGIC): Confirmation of the deep-strike damage to the oil-loading pier at the Tuapse terminal.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

• Continued, effective AD coverage is the critical constraint, particularly in defending logistics nodes and C2 centers against the confirmed multi-axis RF air campaign.

---

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (Cognitive Domain)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

• RF Narrative (Domestic Security/Frontline Power): RF is attempting to simultaneously minimize the domestic impact of the CNI strikes (attributing debris damage to stray fragments, not direct hits) while promoting high-tempo military activity (MLRS propaganda) to maintain a facade of control.
• UAF Counter-Narrative (Strategic Reach): UAF affiliated channels are effectively using confirmed BDA imagery (Tuapse) to amplify the message of strategic reach and the successful imposition of costs on the RF economy.

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

• Ukrainian morale is boosted by confirmed deep strikes. Conversely, the repeated air alerts and collateral damage in RF rear areas (Tuapse residential area) increase domestic unease within Russia.

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

• The RF political focus remains dispersed, as noted by Peskov's comments on the Venezuela-US situation (23:51Z), suggesting the Kremlin attempts to project normality despite immediate kinetic setbacks at home.

---

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (Future Operations)

5.1. Most Likely Enemy Courses of Action (MLCOA) - Next 12-24 Hours

(HIGH CONFIDENCE) RF will execute a coordinated escalation of the air campaign using a mix of Shahed UAVs and high-speed missiles against energy, logistics, and industrial targets in Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv Oblasts. The intent is to maximize the stress on UAF AD forces in areas where RF ground forces seek tactical advantage. This will be the immediate kinetic response to the Tuapse strike.

• Indicators: Continued, successive waves of air targets entering Ukrainian airspace; targeting alerts focusing on major regional cities (Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia City).

5.2. Most Dangerous Enemy Courses of Action (MDCOA) - Next 12-24 Hours

(MEDIUM CONFIDENCE) RF conducts a massed, concentrated strike on a critical UAF port or logistics hub (e.g., Odesa, Mykolaiv, or a major rail yard) after identifying a vulnerability created by AD dispersal following the initial saturation campaign. This would aim to disrupt UAF logistics and international export capacity simultaneously.

• Indicators: Electronic reconnaissance (ELINT/COMINT) spikes near southern ports; confirmed large-scale launch (10+ cruise missiles) targeting a narrow geographical area.

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS

1. J3/Air Force (AD Counter-Saturation): IMMEDIATE ACTION. Prioritize the immediate deployment of mobile AD units to establish overlapping coverage protecting critical logistics and C2 in the Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia regions against the confirmed multi-axis air threat. Focus on intercepting high-speed targets detected over Zaporizhzhia.
2. J7/GUR (Exploitation): ACTION. Leverage the confirmed BDA of the Tuapse oil pier to create a focused international media product. Emphasize that UAF can impose direct, measurable economic costs on the RF regime through targeted strategic strikes.
3. J2/G2 (Targeting Cycle): ACTION. Based on confirmed RF AD dispersal to defend Central Russia (Orel/Lipetsk) and the Black Sea (Tuapse), immediately review the target list for secondary, less-defended CNI targets in Western Russia that can be leveraged for follow-up strikes, maintaining strategic pressure.

//END SITREP//