Situation Report

TACTICAL AND OPERATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (SITREP)

DTG: 030800Z NOV 25 ANALYST CONFIDENCE (Overall): MEDIUM

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (Current Operational Picture)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The operational geometry in the last four hours reflects a rapid, but ultimately unsuccessful, RF attempt to execute a deep strike, followed by a transition back to persistent, low-level drone attrition in the North. Kinetic activity in the critical Donetsk axis (Krasny Lyman/Seversk/Ivanopillya) remains the primary ground threat (per previous SITREP), though specific ground actions are not confirmed in new reporting.

• Deep Strike Aborted: The previously reported ballistic missile threat originating from the North-Eastern axis (0314Z) was terminated at 0341Z, confirming the launch either did not occur, or the systems were quickly withdrawn/neutralized before launch/impact. (FACT)
• Drone Attrition/Reconnaissance (North): A new RF Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) presence is confirmed in the Novhorod-Siverskyi Raion, Chernihiv Oblast, moving Westward (0346Z). This indicates an immediate shift from high-value ballistic threats to persistent ISR and low-level strike/attrition operations in the northern border regions. (FACT)
• Sustained Border Attrition (Sumy Oblast): RF attacks resulted in one civilian fatality in Sumy Oblast (0356Z). This confirms the sustained RF effort to maintain pressure and inflict casualties along the northern border areas. (FACT)

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

No specific weather constraints reported. The shift to UAV activity in Chernihiv Oblast suggests conditions remain suitable for low-altitude air operations and remote sensing.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

• RF Posture: RF C2 executed a rapid alert for the ballistic threat, followed by an immediate shift back to standard UAV/attrition operations in the North. This demonstrates operational flexibility to rapidly change targeting priorities or utilize deception tactics. RF forces continue to focus on kinetic attrition in the Sumy region.
• UAF Posture: UAF Air Force successfully managed the ballistic threat, transitioning from high alert back to standard readiness. Ground forces in the North must maintain enhanced vigilance against UAV threats and border penetration attempts.

---

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (Threat Assessment)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

Capabilities:

• Tactical Flexibility: RF demonstrates the capability to generate a high-priority ballistic alert (via positioning or deception) and subsequently terminate the action, quickly shifting to lower-level, persistent threats (UAVs). (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• Information Warfare (Sustained): RF continues to use state-affiliated channels (e.g., Rybar, Two Majors) to publish delayed, consolidated operational summaries, maintaining an illusion of continued operational momentum despite short-term setbacks. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)

Intentions:

1. Sustain Multi-Vector Attrition: RF intends to maintain pressure across multiple domains—ballistic threat generation (even if aborted), persistent UAV activity, and border shelling (Sumy)—to stretch UAF AD and resource allocation.
2. Reinforce Internal Narratives: RF intentions in the information environment (IO) focus on reinforcing domestic support (e.g., Rostov volunteer monument) and disseminating aggregated combat summaries to project success.

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

The immediate termination of the ballistic threat following its brief re-emergence (per the previous SITREP) may indicate one of three things: (1) successful UAF pre-emptive action (e.g., targeting launch assets), (2) a rapid operational security decision by RF C2 to abort, or (3) a purposeful feint designed to force UAF AD dispersal or reveal AD locations. The rapid follow-on with UAV activity supports the latter. (ANALYTICAL JUDGMENT)

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

The ability to generate a ballistic threat and immediately pivot to UAV operations suggests RF maintains sufficient strategic (ballistic) and tactical (UAV) munition stockpiles to sustain a flexible, multi-layered strike tempo.

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 remains effective in synchronizing deep fire planning with tactical fire execution, demonstrating clear operational priority setting (Deep Strike -> Tactical Attrition).

---

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (Blue Force Tracking)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

UAF AD systems demonstrated readiness by responding to the ballistic alert. The confirmed presence of a hostile UAV in Chernihiv requires UAF ground and AD forces in the North to maintain high readiness for low-altitude threats, particularly for ISR collection ahead of potential RF sabotage or cross-border raids.

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

TACTICAL SUCCESS: UAF AD effectively navigated the high-priority ballistic alert without confirmed engagement, preserving limited interceptor assets.

TACTICAL SETBACK: Confirmed civilian fatality in Sumy Oblast underscores the persistent challenge of border security and RF long-range/indirect fire effectiveness against soft targets.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

The immediate requirement is for ISR hardening in the northern border regions (Chernihiv, Sumy) to track and interdict persistent, low-flying RF UAVs before they can gather actionable intelligence on UAF defensive positions or C2 nodes.

---

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (Cognitive Domain)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

• Political De-escalation IO: Russian state media continues to amplify statements by international figures (e.g., Trump comments on Putin/Xi strength) that suggest the RF leadership is strategically capable and difficult to counter. The intent is to normalize the RF position on the global stage and project strength to partner nations. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• Domestic Mobilization/Support: RF channels (e.g., Colonelcassad) are promoting stories like the volunteer monument in Rostov. This IO is designed to bolster domestic support for the conflict, honor rear-area efforts, and normalize the "Special Military Operation" as a collective Russian national effort. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

The cycle of ballistic alerts followed by termination (or rapid interdiction) may generate intermittent public anxiety, but the shift to persistent UAV and border shelling threats reinforces the need for sustained AD vigilance.

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

The continued amplification of Western political rhetoric by RF media targets international audiences, aiming to erode faith in Western support for Ukraine by showcasing political divisions and perceived Russian strength.

---

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (Future Operations)

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

(HIGH CONFIDENCE) RF will consolidate forces for the next phase of the Donetsk offensive:

1. Ground Pressure in Donetsk: RF ground units will initiate or sustain high-intensity assaults in the previously targeted sectors (Krasny Lyman/Seversk/Ivanopillya), leveraging previously conducted GAB strikes. The lack of new kinetic reporting suggests consolidation prior to coordinated assault.
2. Sustained UAV/Attritional Strikes (North): RF will continue using UAVs for ISR and kinetic strikes in the Chernihiv/Sumy border regions to tie down UAF AD assets and facilitate deep reconnaissance into UAF rear areas.
3. IO Amplification: RF IO will focus on promoting the previous day's narrative (Leopard trophy, high UAF losses) to international audiences while providing updated, sanitized combat summaries internally.

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

(MEDIUM CONFIDENCE) RF utilizes the feint (ballistic alert/termination) for tactical advantage:

1. Feint Exploitation: The aborted ballistic threat was a deception. RF C2 now executes a major long-range strike (Cruise Missiles/Shahed UAV swarm) against a high-value AD or C2 target, exploiting the temporary lull and reset period following the ballistic alert.
2. Tactical Breakthrough (Ivanopillya): RF forces successfully breach UAF defensive lines near Ivanopillya following sustained attrition of blindages, creating a localized gap that can be exploited by mechanized reserves, threatening the defensive integrity of the central Donetsk line.

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS

1. J3/Fires (Northern Donetsk): IMMEDIATE GROUND FORCE STABILIZATION. Ground commanders must prioritize engineers and materiel to rapidly reinforce or replace fixed defensive blindages and field fortifications in the Ivanopillya sector. Failure to mitigate the success of RF attrition fires risks localized collapse. (URGENT)
2. J2/GUR (Exploitation Priority): EXPEDITE DPRK INTELLIGENCE DISSEMINATION. Immediately issue a preliminary intelligence assessment (PIN) based on initial DPRK POW debriefings, focusing on force integration, equipment specifications, and known forward deployment areas, to assist frontline units in identifying this new threat vector.
3. J7/Strategic Communications (External Focus): COUNTER RUSSIA'S POLITICAL IO. Develop and deploy a strategic communications package that links the political rhetoric (Trump statements) with the reality of Russian aggression (Sumy civilian fatality, GAB strikes). Frame Western support as a necessity against a ruthless adversary, directly countering the "Russia is too strong" narrative.

//END SITREP//