Situation Report

OPERATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (SITREP) - IPB ANALYSIS

DTG: 210600Z NOV 25 REPORTING PERIOD: 212330Z NOV 25 – 210600Z NOV 25 ANALYST CONFIDENCE (Overall): HIGH. RF operational synchronization across the kinetic and cognitive domains is sustained. The immediate tactical focus remains the Pokrovsk salient, while the strategic focus is on disrupting Ukrainian diplomatic readiness via information operations (IO). The confirmed use of KABs reinforces the mechanized assault.

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (Current Operational Picture)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

STATUS: CRITICAL/ACTIVE EXPLOITATION. The RF mechanized penetration west of Mirnohrad (Pokrovsk axis) is sustained, and the threat environment is escalating. NEW DATA: Confirmed air activity targeting Donetsk Oblast via KABs (Guided Aerial Bombs) (Source: UAF Air Force), directly supporting the ground maneuver. This confirms the RF operational pattern of utilizing high-volume kinetic strikes to suppress defenses immediately prior to or during ground assaults. KEY TERRAIN IMPACT: Continued KAB usage degrades urban defensive positions and compounds the logistical and maneuver difficulty for UAF reserves attempting counter-penetration operations.

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

STATUS: UNCHANGED. Favorable conditions for mechanized maneuver and precision-guided munitions (PGMs) persist. High operational tempo is expected to continue until weather conditions degrade.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

RF DISPOSITIONS: RF forces (40th/155th OMBR) are supported by high-volume aviation assets deploying KABs in the Pokrovsk axis. RF UAV assets are actively targeting Kharkiv Oblast (new track towards Lozova), maintaining pressure on secondary axes and fixing UAF AD assets further south and east. UAF CONTROL MEASURES: UAF AD remains under persistent pressure. The deployment of reserves to the Mirnohrad breach zone is the primary operational determinant, but this deployment is now challenged by focused KAB strikes.

---

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (Threat Assessment)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

Capabilities (HIGH CONFIDENCE):

1. Integrated Air-Ground Synchronization: Proven capability to synchronize massed mechanized maneuver with heavy KAB application to rapidly suppress forward UAF positions.
2. Multi-Axis AD Fixing: Sustained UAV operations targeting critical infrastructure in secondary axes (e.g., Lozova, Kharkiv Oblast) ensures AD resources remain dispersed and cannot be concentrated on the primary Pokrovsk axis.
3. Cognitive Warfare against Policy: RF IO can immediately leverage diplomatic events and external (US-based) deadlines to fuel narratives of external control and policy paralysis within Kyiv.

Intentions (JUDGMENT - HIGH CONFIDENCE): RF intent is twofold: Tactical Penetration on the Pokrovsk axis supported by suppressing KAB strikes, and Strategic Cognitive Disruption aimed at Kyiv's decision-making structure by leveraging US expectations regarding a peace plan deadline (FT report). This synchronization aims to maximize UAF internal stress during the kinetic assault.

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

The confirmed use of KABs in direct support of the Pokrovsk assault (Source: UAF Air Force) is not new but reinforces the high-value kinetic prioritization of this sector. The UAV track towards Lozova indicates continued focus on logistics and staging areas in the Kharkiv region, despite RF tactical successes being concentrated in Donetsk.

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

RF logistics remain constrained by successful UAF deep-rear rail sabotage (Perm/Sverdlovsk). However, tactical logistics supporting the 40th/155th OMBR thrust are currently sustained, enabling continued KAB use and mechanized advance. This tactical sustainment is brittle and must be targeted if the salient expands.

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 remains HIGHLY EFFECTIVE. The immediate synchronization of KAB strikes, the targeting of Lozova, and the rapid deployment of diplomatic IO (targeting Trump's "peace plan" and the US deadline) confirm centralized, multi-domain control.

---

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (Blue Force Tracking)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

UAF forces are at a critical decision point. Readiness is severely challenged by the combined kinetic (KABs/Ground Assault) and aerial (UAV saturation) threats. The immediate task is to secure the primary GLOC (Kostiantynivka) and launch the counter-penetration operation before RF forces consolidate under the protection of KAB strikes.

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

Setbacks: The continued, supported penetration (KABs) west of Mirnohrad. Successes: Deep-strike operations (Sverdlovsk/Perm) continue to exert strategic pressure on RF logistics.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

IMMEDIATE REQUIREMENT: Protected, rapid deployment of UAF tactical reserves to the Mirnohrad breach zone, utilizing routes that minimize exposure to KAB targeting. CRITICAL CONSTRAINT: Protection of deployed reserves against KAB strikes, necessitating high-speed maneuver and potential expenditure of limited mobile AD assets (e.g., dedicated short-range AD/EW coverage for advance-to-contact).

---

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (Cognitive Domain)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

ESCALATION/SYNCHRONIZATION (HIGH CONFIDENCE): RF IO is actively leveraging external diplomatic developments to undermine UAF leadership resolve.

1. US Deadline Amplification: The Financial Times report on a US deadline (27 NOV) for Kyiv to present a peace project is immediately amplified by RF IO, positioning Ukraine as an externally controlled state responding to US demands, rather than acting in its own national interest.
2. Leadership Degradation: RF messaging (e.g., "Зеленский дал команду гавкать в ООН на план Трампа") employs aggressive, animalistic imagery ("barking like a dog") to degrade the President’s diplomatic authority and independence, specifically linking him to US political figures (Trump) to fuel internal and external political friction.
3. Domestic Focus (TASS): The announcement regarding mandatory notification of debt inheritance in Russia (24 NOV) is a domestic-facing IO tactic, subtly normalizing the high casualty count and subsequent logistical issues related to administering the estates of mobilized or killed personnel.

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

The synchronization of military setbacks (Pokrovsk breach) with intense pressure on diplomatic deadlines and leadership character assassination is designed to induce political paralysis and public demoralization. The narrative shift to external control ("Washington expects...") undermines national resilience.

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

The US deadline (FT report) and Kyiv's subsequent diplomatic response (speaking at the UN) demonstrate heightened international pressure for a defined path to conflict resolution. This pressure, while intended to force strategic planning, is being weaponized by RF IO to create policy friction.

---

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (Future Operations)

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

(HIGH CONFIDENCE - Exploitation and Cognitive Assault)

1. Sustained Breach Pressure: RF forces will utilize KABs in a coordinated schedule to maximize suppression, ensuring the 40th/155th OMBR can consolidate the breach perimeter (3-5 km depth). KAB targeting will likely shift to known UAF reserve assembly areas.
2. GLOC Interdiction Execution: Spetsnaz elements will likely initiate active interdiction operations on the Kostiantynivka GLOC (M-30/T-05-15) within the next 4 hours to coincide with reserve deployment chaos.
3. Targeted Cognitive Strike: RF IO will escalate narratives surrounding the 27 NOV deadline, aiming to generate internal political dissent and external perception of UAF weakness leading up to the expected strategic missile strike.

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

(MEDIUM CONFIDENCE - Operational Paralysis)

1. Operational Paralysis: RF successful interdiction of the Kostiantynivka GLOC coincides with KAB strikes effectively suppressing UAF counter-penetration forces in the breach zone. Logistical breakdown and the perceived political weakness (due to IO synchronization) forces a premature and disorganized operational withdrawal from the Pokrovsk salient, creating a major new vulnerability on the eastern front.

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS

1. J3/J7: ADAPTIVE COUNTER-PENETRATION STRATEGY (MISSION PRIORITY ONE).

   • Action: Immediately commit tactical reserves. Modify the advance-to-contact plan to utilize dispersed, high-speed movement between KAB strike windows. Prioritize flanking maneuvers targeting RF logistics elements within the breach rather than direct frontal assaults against consolidated positions.
   • Rationale: The threat environment (KABs) requires abandoning slow, predictable formations. Reserves must deny RF consolidation and target logistical soft spots (fuel/ammo dumps) within the salient.

2. J4: HARDENING LOGISTICS AGAINST KAB/SPN THREAT (IMMEDIATE).

   • Action: Designate all primary and secondary routes in Donetsk Oblast as HAZARD ZONE (KAB RISK). Deploy mobile short-range air defense (SHORAD) and EW assets (e.g., dedicated Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems (MANPADS) teams with jammers) to protect reserve staging and GLOC QRF positions.
   • Rationale: Logistical elements and newly deployed reserves are now primary targets for RF KABs. Active, layered protection is mandatory for survival and mission success.

3. STRATCOM/J2: COUNTER-IO DIRECTIVE (URGENT).

   • Action: Issue a high-level diplomatic statement reaffirming UAF sovereignty and the impossibility of negotiating under Russian military duress (Pokrovsk assault). Simultaneously, minimize official engagement with the US deadline narrative; if addressed, frame the deadline as a constructive step towards strategic planning, not a surrender demand.
   • Rationale: Directly combat the RF narrative of political paralysis and external control, reinforcing national resolve during the kinetic crisis.

4. Air Force/J4: CONTINUOUS AD VIGILANCE (HARKOV AXIS).

   • Action: Despite the primary kinetic threat being in Donetsk, maintain vigilance and dedicate local AD assets to tracking the UAV toward Lozova (Kharkiv Oblast). If the target is assessed as critical infrastructure (e.g., major rail node), utilize necessary interceptors, even if prioritizing AD conservation for the strategic missile threat.
   • Rationale: RF is employing secondary attacks to exploit AD weaknesses. Preventing a logistics strike in the north will ease pressure on the beleaguered southern GLOCs.

//END SITREP//