Situation Report

OPERATIONAL SITUATION REPORT (OSITREP) TIME: 100730Z DEC 2025

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (IPB Step 1)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The operational focus remains on two critical axes: the Donetsk Front (Pokrovsk Axis), where urban counter-infiltration operations (CIO) are ongoing, and the Zaporizhzhia/Donetsk Junction (Stepnohorsk-Huliaipole Axis), where a significant Russian flanking maneuver is confirmed.

• Pokrovsk UBA: UAF defense holds the line against mechanized infiltration, utilizing prepared anti-tank obstacles effectively (Confirmed footage of RF losses on anti-tank ditch). However, the initial perimeter breach identified in the D-3 report remains a vulnerability.
• Deep Battle/CNI: The Area of Interest (AOI) has expanded significantly due to RF deep strikes. Confirmed UAV strikes targeted critical infrastructure (CNI) in Odesa Oblast, reinforcing the strategic targeting pattern previously observed at Slaviansk TPP and Fastiv.
• RF Deep Territory: UAF Deep Strike capability demonstrated against industrial/military targets in RF territory, triggering air alerts in Lipetsk Oblast (location of major industrial sites and airbases) and confirmed interception over Bryansk.

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors

The strategic threat of Hydro-Weaponization stemming from the Pechenihy Dam strike (D-3 report) remains a critical factor for UAF defensive engineering and logistics in the Kharkiv sector, though no new specific environmental updates were reported.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

• RF (Red Force): High-tempo, multi-domain attack profile. Ground forces are consolidating positions following the Pokrovsk breach and appear to be concentrating effort with the 33rd Guards Motor Rifle Regiment (GMRR) in the Dobropolsky salient (confirmed by fundraising appeals and thank-you videos). Air assets executed a complex, massed UAV attack (approx. 80 assets).
• UAF (Blue Force): Currently executing decentralized CIO at Pokrovsk and maintaining a high state of air defense readiness. Successful interception/suppression rate of 50/80 UAVs (62.5%) during the latest strike wave. Strategic Air Defense assets are concentrated protecting critical CNI nodes (Dnipro, Lviv) but the Odesa hit suggests localized AD saturation or insufficient coverage remains.

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (IPB Step 2)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

The RF continues to employ overwhelming drone attrition, forcing UAF to divert scarce AD assets to protect rear areas and infrastructure. The confirmed RF losses on the Pokrovsk anti-tank ditch indicates poor tactical reconnaissance or persistent, frontal assault tactics despite UAF prepared defenses.

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

• Fact: RF maintains high industrial output supporting massed UAV attacks (80 assets used in the recent wave).
• Judgment: The reliance on crowdfunding for the 33rd GMRR suggests that while major equipment logistics are centrally supported, tactical unit sustainment (C3, drones, specialist vehicles) relies heavily on non-governmental funding, indicating internal logistical friction at the unit level. (MEDIUM CONFIDENCE)

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 demonstrated effective coordination for the simultaneous, massed deep strike across multiple Oblasts (Odesa, Bryansk, Lipetsk alert). C2 remains focused on multi-domain kinetic operations prioritized over ground tactical efficacy (evidenced by the costly frontal attempts at Pokrovsk).

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (IPB Step 3)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

UAF forces are successfully leveraging prepared defenses and specialized drone units (Madyar's Birds) to inflict heavy losses on RF mechanized attempts, effectively denying decisive exploitation of the Pokrovsk breach in the short term. The Air Force readiness and response tempo were robust, achieving an excellent localized kill/suppression ratio (62.5%) against the latest strike wave.

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

• Successes: Successful defense of the Pokrovsk perimeter obstacle against mechanized assault. Confirmed deep strikes on targets requiring activation of air defense systems across multiple RF regions (Bryansk, Lipetsk).
• Setbacks: Confirmed CNI damage in Odesa Oblast, indicating ongoing logistical and energy vulnerability. The continued fragmentation of the "BRAVO-BLOCK" reserve (D-3) directly threatens the ability to counter the 33rd/38th GMRR flank maneuver.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

• Air Defense: Urgent need to reinforce mobile SHORAD in coastal regions (Odesa) and along critical logistical corridors (rail bypasses) to mitigate the confirmed massed drone threat profile.
• Technology Transfer: Negotiations for crucial MiG-29 assets are constrained by Poland's demand for UAF drone/missile technology exchange. This forces a strategic choice between immediate conventional air capability and retaining key, sensitive defense technology.

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (IPB Step 4)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

• RF Narrative: The primary narrative seeks to amplify the perception of Western collapse and abandonment. Specific targeting of US political divisions (NATO exit) aims to create uncertainty regarding future aid commitments. Secondary focus is internal morale boosting via state media (Autovaz production) and specific unit glorification (33rd GMRR).
• UAF Narrative: Dominated by a resilience and remembrance theme. Heavy reliance on public commemorations and the national minute of silence to reinforce internal cohesion following infrastructure attacks and casualties.

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

UAF morale is being actively maintained through highly visible national memorializing efforts. RF morale, while targeted by state propaganda, shows underlying strain evidenced by the need for intense public fundraising for basic tactical unit needs (33rd GMRR).

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

• Poland (Conditional Aid): The proposed bartering of MiG-29s for UAF missile/UAV technology represents a significant shift from unconditional aid to conditional strategic exchange. This complicates immediate force modernization. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)
• US Political Alignment: Ukraine's public alignment with former President Trump's proposed peace framework (reported by Congressman Wilson) is a clear strategic communications effort aimed at hedging against future US political shifts and ensuring bipartisan support.

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (IPB Step 5)

5.1. Most Likely Enemy Courses of Action (MLCOA)

RF will execute a phased, multi-domain attrition campaign focused on deep strikes and localized ground breakthroughs.

1. Phase I (Deep Attrition): RF maintains the massed UAV/missile strike tempo (80+ assets per cycle) targeting energy facilities, rail nodes, and staging areas in Southern and Eastern Ukraine (Odesa, Kharkiv).
2. Phase II (Pokrovsk Reinforcement): RF commits high-casualty units to pin UAF defenders at Pokrovsk while mechanized reinforcement elements (likely from reserve BATTALION TACTICAL GROUPS - BTGs) exploit the initial breach NLT 111200Z DEC 25.
3. Phase III (Flanking Consolidation): The 33rd GMRR in the Dobropolsky salient, supported by the 38th GMRB maneuver, will attempt to bypass or isolate the fragmented "BRAVO-BLOCK" reserve, aiming for the operational rear of the Stepnohorsk axis NLT 120600Z DEC 25.

(CONFIDENCE: HIGH)

5.2. Most Dangerous Enemy Courses of Action (MDCOA)

RF successfully integrates compromised CI data (Kuzmuk leak, D-3 report) with kinetic action to achieve decisive operational effects.

1. Decapitation Strike: RF executes precision strikes (missile/KAB) based on CI data against relocated TrO CPs or major reserve assembly areas, crippling internal defense coordination and logistics security in the rear.
2. Stepnohorsk Encirclement: The 33rd/38th GMRB flanking maneuver achieves high velocity, bypassing the fragmented BRAVO-BLOCK entirely and severing the main lines of communication (MSRs) into Stepnohorsk, forcing a disorganized UAF withdrawal.
3. Hydro-Weapon Exploitation: Simultaneously, RF targets critical engineer stabilization efforts at Pechenihy Dam, triggering catastrophic flooding, which destabilizes UAF forward positions in the Kharkiv sector, demanding immediate resource redirection from the Donetsk/Zaporizhzhia axis.

(CONFIDENCE: MEDIUM - dependent on the scope of the D-3 CI leak)

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS (CCIR)

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS