Situation Report

TACTICAL AND OPERATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (SITREP)

DTG: 030700Z NOV 25 ANALYST CONFIDENCE (Overall): MEDIUM

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (Current Operational Picture)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The operational environment is characterized by two distinct kinetic threats: renewed ballistic risk in the North-East and sustained air/artillery attrition in Donetsk Oblast.

• Renewed Ballistic Threat (North-East): Confirmed alert for the threat of ballistic missile employment originating from the North-Eastern axis (0314Z, 0315Z). This re-establishes the deep strike threat following a brief lull, likely targeting C2 nodes, critical infrastructure, or AD systems.
• Donetsk Attrition (Krasny Lyman/Seversk Axis): RF tactical aviation is confirmed to be employing Guided Aerial Bombs (GABs) against targets in Donetsk Oblast (0314Z). RF state media claims "clearing operations" are underway east of Krasny Lyman and south of Seversk (0315Z), indicating kinetic preparatory fires are supporting imminent or active ground maneuver in these areas.
• RF Deep Security (Rostov Oblast): RF Air Defense Forces (ADF) claim to have intercepted UAVs across five districts in Rostov Oblast (0310Z). This confirms continuous UAF deep strike/ISR activity against RF rear areas.

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

No specific weather constraints reported. UAV activity in Rostov and the deployment of GABs indicate generally favorable conditions for air operations and remote sensing.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

• RF Posture: RF C2 is synchronizing the renewed ballistic threat with active GAB strikes and claimed ground advances in the Krasny Lyman/Seversk area. This indicates a coordinated, multi-domain pressure campaign following the previous deep strike pause.
• UAF Posture: UAF AD is on high alert for the ballistic threat. Ground forces in Donetsk are under intense kinetic pressure from GABs and must prepare for potential RF ground assaults following the claimed "clearing operations."

---

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (Threat Assessment)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

Capabilities:

• Ballistic Recurrence: RF retains the capability to execute rapid-onset ballistic missile strikes from the North-Eastern axis. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• Synchronized Ground Maneuver: RF is attempting to synchronize tactical aviation (GABs) with ground operations in key sectors (Krasny Lyman/Seversk), suggesting an intention to achieve localized breakthroughs. (MEDIUM CONFIDENCE)
• IO Denial of Success: RF state media effectively denies UAF deep strikes (UAV claims in Rostov) while amplifying exaggerated UAF casualty figures (4.2k losses in Luhansk) to project operational success and degrade UAF morale. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)

Intentions:

1. Re-engage Deep Strike: RF intends to resume the high-tempo multi-directional deep strike campaign after a brief operational security/repositioning pause, focusing on high-value Ukrainian AD or C2 nodes.
2. Exploit Fire Superiority: RF intends to convert the established fire superiority (GABs) into tangible territorial gains east of Krasny Lyman and south of Seversk, regions critical for the overall defensive line.
3. Sustain Attrition Narrative: RF intentions in the information environment are to convince internal and external audiences that UAF is suffering unsustainable losses, exemplified by the highly exaggerated claims of 4,200 casualties near Luhansk.

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

The immediate re-emergence of the ballistic threat, coupled with active ground claims in the northern Donetsk axis, confirms RF's operational rhythm involves alternating between saturation strikes (Deep Fires) and frontal attrition (GABs supporting ground action). This complex sequencing attempts to maximize UAF resource depletion and C2 confusion.

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

The immediate readiness for renewed ballistic strikes suggests the logistical pipeline supporting Iskander/KN-23 systems remains robust. Continuous GAB employment confirms steady munition supply for tactical aviation.

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 demonstrates effective synchronization, immediately transitioning from a ballistic lull to a renewed threat, while concurrently leveraging tactical air assets and managing ground maneuver in critical sectors.

---

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (Blue Force Tracking)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

UAF forces must rapidly transition back to high-alert AD status while simultaneously preparing for enhanced defensive operations against ground assaults in the Krasny Lyman/Seversk sectors following the claimed RF "clearing operations."

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

TACTICAL SUCCESS: Confirmed UAF deep strike activity (UAVs) against military targets in Rostov Oblast, forcing RF ADF response and confirming UAF projection capability remains intact.

TACTICAL SETBACK: The renewed ballistic threat requires immediate resource allocation to AD, potentially drawing assets away from critical frontline support.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

The primary constraint is the continuous need to divert limited AD assets to counter both the persistent UAV threat (Rostov/Mykolaiv) and the renewed, high-value ballistic threat. The urgent requirement remains enhanced SEAD capabilities to counter GAB platforms in Donetsk.

---

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (Cognitive Domain)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

• Attrition Exaggeration (TASS/Marochko): RF state media is aggressively disseminating highly inflated casualty figures (4,200 losses in Luhansk) to degrade UAF resolve and convince partner nations of the war's futility. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• Operational Control Projection: RF claims of successful "clearing operations" near Krasny Lyman and Seversk aim to project operational initiative and momentum, potentially demoralizing UAF forward defenders. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• Denial of UAF Success: The quick reporting of successful RF ADF interceptions in Rostov aims to neutralize the psychological and physical impact of UAF deep strikes.

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

The confluence of renewed ballistic alerts and highly aggressive RF casualty propaganda may generate tactical anxiety among the civilian population and frontline personnel.

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

The information environment remains dominated by the RF's strategic IO (Leopard tank display, aggressive casualty claims) designed to undermine Western support.

---

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (Future Operations)

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

(HIGH CONFIDENCE) RF will attempt to achieve localized tactical objectives in northern Donetsk:

1. Ground Assault in Seversk/Krasny Lyman: RF will execute ground assaults, likely at battalion tactical group (BTG) strength, against UAF positions east of Krasny Lyman and south of Seversk, exploiting the softening of defenses by GAB strikes.
2. Ballistic Strike Execution: The ballistic threat will materialize within the next 6 hours, targeting a high-value critical node in eastern or central Ukraine (e.g., major rail hub, power station, or known AD position).
3. Sustained Attrition Fire: GAB and long-range artillery strikes will continue to target fixed UAF positions, particularly in the Ivanopillya/Pokrovsk area, to maintain material attrition across the Donetsk front.

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

(MEDIUM CONFIDENCE) RF achieves a decisive coordinated effect:

1. Double Breakthrough: RF forces successfully penetrate UAF defenses simultaneously in the Ivanopillya sector (central Donetsk) and the Krasny Lyman sector (northern Donetsk). This would force UAF to fragment reserves and risk a wider collapse of the defensive line.
2. Successful AD Suppression: RF employs the renewed ballistic strike in conjunction with loitering munitions to successfully neutralize a major Western-supplied AD system, achieving a temporary window of local air superiority for tactical aviation across a broader front.

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS

1. J3/Fires (Northern Donetsk): PRIORITIZE COUNTER-GAB AND ATTRITION FIRE. Immediately shift UAF counter-battery and deep fires resources to interdict RF forward positions and fire control elements responsible for supporting ground advances east of Krasny Lyman and south of Seversk. Stabilize the defensive lines by neutralizing the fire support. (URGENT)
2. J2/GUR (Exploitation Priority): INTEGRATE DPRK INTEL INTO FRONTLINE THREAT ASSESSMENT. Task DPRK POW exploitation teams (CRITICAL P1) to prioritize information regarding RF unit identification and operational TTPs in the Donetsk axis, providing immediate, actionable data to forces currently under attack.
3. J7/Strategic Communications (External/Internal): PRE-EMPT CASUALTY IO. Develop and pre-position a media response package that preemptively challenges the veracity of inflated RF casualty claims (4.2k losses), focusing on verified combat losses and maintaining public trust in official UAF reporting.

//END SITREP//