Situation Report

INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (SITREP) - TACTICAL FOCUS: RF KAB ESCALATION AND POKROVSK CRITICALITY

DTG: 022100Z NOV 25 ANALYST CONFIDENCE (Overall): HIGH. Confidence is HIGH regarding the RF's immediate focus on sustained KAB strikes and MEDIUM regarding the potential criticality of the Pokrovsk axis.

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (Current Operational Picture)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The RF continues a multi-axis pressure campaign, synchronizing stand-off KAB strikes in the North and South with intense localized attrition in Donetsk.

• Kharkiv Axis: Confirmed repeated RF strikes, specifically targeting the Kyivskyi and Industrial Districts. Mayor Terekhov reported one strike hitting open ground in the Industrial District with no immediate casualties. This confirms the RF intent to saturate the urban area with high-payload munitions. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• Zaporizhzhia Axis: Confirmed repeated launches of KABs by RF tactical aviation targeting Zaporizhzhia District, with one confirmed trajectory passing near Vasylivka toward the Zaporizhzhia district. This confirms the sustainment of the KAB campaign reported in the previous period. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• Pokrovsk Axis (CRITICAL): High-profile public assessment from a credible UAF non-government source (Deynega, "Return Alive" Foundation founder) stating that Ukraine has "practically lost Pokrovsk." While this requires tactical verification, it indicates severe pressure and potentially compromised defensive integrity along the key Pokrovsk defensive line, aligning with previous reports of RF success at Ivanopillya. (MEDIUM CONFIDENCE in status, HIGH CONFIDENCE in strategic importance)
• Kupiansk Axis: RF sources (Russian Spring War Correspondents) claim to have repelled a "NATO hedgehog" breakthrough attempt on Kupiansk, demonstrating sustained focus on this sector and RF counter-IO framing of UAF forces as Western proxies. (LOW CONFIDENCE in RF claim, HIGH CONFIDENCE in continued combat activity)

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

The continued high-tempo use of KABs implies sustained favorable flying conditions for RF tactical aviation operating at standoff ranges (Su-34/Su-35). Reports of an RF reconnaissance UAV over Southern Mykolaivshchyna and a drone headed towards Poltava (from the North) indicate clear conditions for both high-altitude ISR and low-level tactical UAV/Shahed operations across a wide operational depth.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

• RF Air Dominance Assertion: RF forces are leveraging their temporary localized air superiority to execute high-value strikes on urban and industrial centers, challenging UAF Air Defense (AD) responsiveness.
• RF Ground Pressure Shift: The focus on destroying UAF fixed fortifications (previously reported at Ivanopillya) and the current critical status assessment of Pokrovsk suggest a concentration of RF ground assault forces aiming to achieve a strategic operational breakthrough in the Donetsk sector.
• UAF AD Response: UAF Air Force is actively tracking and reporting KAB launches and drone trajectories (Mykolaiv, Poltava), demonstrating effective sensor coverage, though interception success against KABs remains low.

---

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (Threat Assessment)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

Capabilities:

• Sustained Glide Bomb Capacity: RF confirms the capacity to maintain simultaneous KAB strikes across widely separated axes (Kharkiv/Zaporizhzhia).
• Effective Combined Arms Attrition: RF has demonstrated effective use of fire superiority (artillery/air) to systematically degrade UAF fixed defenses (blindages) and infrastructure (Ivanopillya/Kharkiv strikes).

Intentions:

1. Strategic Dislocation: Maximize psychological and material damage to UAF rear areas via KAB strikes to compel the diversion of resources (AD, reserves) away from critical front lines like Pokrovsk.
2. Achieve Breakthrough at Pokrovsk: Exploit assessed UAF vulnerability near Pokrovsk to convert tactical attrition into an operational success, likely leveraging heavy fire support to enable maneuver.

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

• Multi-Domain Attack Coordination: The simultaneous execution of deep strikes (KABs), near-front pressure (Ivanopillya/Kupiansk), and strategic ISR (Mykolaiv/Poltava UAVs) indicates a sustained and coordinated multi-domain operational plan.

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

RF continues to display robust logistical support for its tactical air assets needed to sustain the high-volume KAB campaign. The documented success of RF fires against UAF fortifications suggests effective targeting and resupply of high-volume munitions, particularly high-explosive artillery and aerial bombs.

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 is highly effective in synchronizing air, ISR, and ground assets. The centralization of RF IO (Kremlin Leopard display) and synchronized strategic messaging (Z Committee updates) further highlights a unified command structure driving both kinetic and cognitive operations.

---

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (Blue Force Tracking)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

UAF posture is defensive, with localized counter-attacks (3rd Separate Assault Brigade previously reported) attempting to relieve pressure. The public assessment regarding Pokrovsk suggests that defensive lines in this sector are under extreme stress and potentially facing a major crisis point.

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

• SETBACK (Air Defense): The continued success of RF KAB strikes on Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia confirms the ongoing difficulty UAF AD has in countering this specific stand-off threat.
• SETBACK (Pokrovsk Defense): The credible public assessment of Pokrovsk's status suggests a major operational setback is either underway or highly probable.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

1. Reinforcements: Immediate need for mobile reserves and combat engineers to reinforce or establish secondary defensive lines behind the Pokrovsk sector.
2. Counter-Battery: Critical requirement to neutralize the RF artillery systems responsible for the sustained destruction of UAF fortifications in Donetsk, which is directly contributing to the Pokrovsk crisis.

---

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (Cognitive Domain)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

• RF Counter-IO: The RF continues to generate domestic and international IO, exemplified by the "Z Committee" announcing future updates and the "Russian Spring" channel framing UAF assaults as "NATO hedgehog" movements.
• UAF Internal Morale Threat: The public statement regarding Pokrovsk by a respected Ukrainian figure poses an immediate threat to domestic morale and requires rapid, transparent military communication to manage the perception of the situation.

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

Public anxiety will be high due to the repeated KAB strikes on major population centers (Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia). The critical reporting on Pokrovsk further risks morale collapse in the East unless a clear, successful defensive action is demonstrated.

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

The continued RF focus on demonstrating the futility of Western aid (Leopard components in the Kremlin, previously reported) aims to erode the positive geopolitical shifts (Germany removing spending limits, Turkey oil shift) reported yesterday. Sustained strategic counter-IO is vital to maintaining partner resolve.

---

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (Future Operations)

5.1. Most Likely Enemy Courses of Action (MLCOA) - Next 48 Hours

(HIGH CONFIDENCE) RF ground forces will mass resources and execute a localized, fire-supported penetration attack in the Pokrovsk sector (e.g., via Ivanopillya), seeking to exploit the confirmed degradation of UAF fixed defenses and achieve a tactical breakthrough. Concurrently, RF tactical aviation will sustain KAB strikes against Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia industrial/logistical nodes to prevent UAF reserve mobilization or resupply.

5.2. Most Dangerous Enemy Courses of Action (MDCOA) - Next 48 Hours

(HIGH CONFIDENCE) RF achieves an operational breakthrough near Pokrovsk, forcing a significant UAF localized retreat and compromising the strategic defensive geometry in Donetsk Oblast. This breakthrough could allow RF forces to bypass fortified areas and directly threaten logistical hubs, accelerating the exhaustion of UAF reserves. This would likely be supported by a high-volume deep strike on Kyiv or Dnipro using the pre-positioned Iskander/KN-23 systems (previously reported) to suppress strategic reserves and C2.

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS

1. J3/Reserve Command (URGENT Defense): COMMIT LOCAL RESERVES TO POKROVSK REAR AREA. Immediately establish a hardened secondary defensive position utilizing prepared reserves south and west of the Ivanopillya-Pokrovsk axis. Prioritize the deployment of high-value anti-armor systems (e.g., Javelin, Stugna) to counter a potential RF armored breakthrough.
2. J7/Strategic Communications (IO Damage Control): INITIATE POKROVSK NARRATIVE STABILIZATION. Task J7 to collaborate with GUR to rapidly produce and disseminate verified, optimistic reporting on UAF reserve deployment and counter-fire successes in the Pokrovsk sector to mitigate the negative impact of public assessments.
3. J2/GUR (Intelligence Exploitation): HIGH-PRIORITY INTELLIGENCE TRADE FOR AD ASSETS. Utilize the actionable intelligence gained from the DPRK POW exploitation as immediate leverage with NATO partners, specifically requesting expedited delivery of SHORAD/MRAD systems capable of countering KAB launch platforms (Su-34/Su-35) operating near the FLOT.

//END SITREP//