Situation Report

INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (ISR) UPDATE 1.5

TIME: 111600Z DEC 25 SUBJECT: Critical EU Aid Slowdown Confirmed; UAF Personnel Policy Shift (DShV); Persistent Ballistic Missile Threat & Northern AD Penetration

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (SITREP)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The overall kinetic tempo remains high, focused on maximizing pressure on the UAF's planned retrograde and exploiting AD vulnerabilities in the deep rear.

• Zaporizhzhia Axis (CRITICAL PRESSURE): RF kinetic saturation (TOS/FAB) in the Huliaipole/Zaliznychne corridor continues to test the integrity of Contingency Plan PHOENIX. UAF forces are successfully maneuvering, but the rate of fire is unsustainable without effective counter-battery suppression (per ISR 1.4).
• Pokrovsk Axis (DIMITROV ISOLATION): The tactical situation remains unchanged from previous reporting; UAF elements in Dimitrov are isolated or under heavy fire control, demanding immediate extraction protocols.
• Deep Rear/Western Ukraine (AD VULNERABILITY): Confirmed high-altitude drone strike near Lviv (Sokilnyky) civilian infrastructure. This confirms RF capability to penetrate UAF AD layers in the deep west, likely targeting logistical or C2 centers, or testing AD response times.
• Air Domain: UAF Air Force reports a Ballistic Missile Threat originating from the Northeast, confirming continued RF intent for high-value strategic targeting (C2, logistics, infrastructure).

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

• Low cloud and fog continue to restrict RF fixed-wing CAS in the Donbas sectors (FACT, per previous ISR). This meteorological condition is temporary and RF air superiority will return upon clearing.

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

• UAF: UAF General Staff has implemented a critical personnel policy change: personnel returning from unauthorized absence (AWOL/СЗЧ) will only be permitted to return to high-intensity units (DShV/Assault Regiments). This is an operational adaptation prioritizing the concentration of high-quality manpower in elite maneuver units and accepting higher risks to address personnel shortages.
• RF: Sustaining overwhelming fire saturation in the South. RF claims high attrition of UAF UAVs over its border regions (Belgorod 11,600+), likely inflated for domestic consumption, but confirming sustained high-rate UAF deep strike activity.

---

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (THREAT ASSESSMENT)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

• Capability (HIGH): RF retains robust, flexible deep strike capabilities (Ballistic/UAV) capable of penetrating AD in the Western Operational Zone, coupled with overwhelming tactical fire support (TOS/FAB) in the Eastern and Southern Operational Zones.
• Intention (Strategic): RF primary strategic intention is to exploit the confluence of diplomatic uncertainty (Korean Model IO) and the confirmed European materiel slowdown (FACT). RF will likely increase kinetic pressure over the next 30-90 days, seeking decisive tactical gains before anticipated future UAF resupply. (CONFIDENCE: HIGH)
• C2/CI Exploitation: The arrest of a spy in Kyiv passing C2/TETs location data confirms that RF espionage networks are actively targeting relocated UAF high-value assets, leveraging the previously noted counter-intelligence breach.

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

• No immediate changes to frontline maneuver doctrine observed in the current reporting cycle. The focus remains kinetic attrition and infrastructure strikes.

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status

RF sustainment remains focused on high-volume artillery supply (confirmed by SAR spike at 260th GRAU base, previous report). RF domestic messaging focusing on alleged US political instability and 'woke' culture is designed to sustain internal support for the war effort despite high confirmed casualties (Akhmat unit report).

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 remains effective in coordinating complex multi-domain strikes (Ballistic/UAV/Ground Fire). The ability to consistently target critical infrastructure and penetrate Western AD indicates effective tasking and ISR gathering.

---

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (BLUE FORCE TRACKING)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

• Posture: The force posture is adaptive but constrained. The new personnel policy (AWOL only to DShV/Assault) demonstrates a necessary but high-risk measure to rapidly reinforce elite units.
• Readiness: High, but increasingly constrained by materiel sustainment uncertainty (EU aid slowdown).

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

• Successes: Successful counter-intelligence operation in Kyiv (C2/TETs spy arrest) mitigates immediate threat to command centers. Continued high-tempo deep strike operations (per Belgorod RF claims).
• Setbacks: The EU military aid slowdown is a critical, confirmed strategic setback (FACT). Confirmed drone strike in Lviv Oblast highlights critical AD gaps in the deep rear/logistical hubs.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

• Requirement: Immediate need for strategic diplomacy to reverse or mitigate the EU aid slowdown. Tactical requirement remains concentrated counter-TOS/FAB fires and mobile AD reinforcement for logistical corridors (e.g., Lviv, Dnipropetrovsk).
• Constraint: Finite AD assets forcing severe prioritization, exacerbated by the confirmed reduction in the flow of European materiel.

---

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (COGNITIVE DOMAIN)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns

• The "Korean Model" IO blitz remains the primary threat, confirmed by STERNENKO as a repeat of earlier Russian narratives designed to create diplomatic fatigue and preempt UAF peace initiatives. (CONFIDENCE: HIGH)
• RF secondary IO objectives include internal propaganda leveraging US culture war issues (Hegseth cartoon) to delegitimize and sow division within Western security partners.

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

Morale is stressed by the combined narrative of diplomatic compromise (Korean Model) and the domestic impact of deep strikes (Lviv incident). Government efforts to provide social support ("Winter Support") are failing in implementation, creating negative domestic perception.

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

• CRITICAL DETERIORATION: Analysis confirms a sharp slowdown in European military aid for 2025. This vulnerability must be addressed immediately to ensure sustained combat operations into 2026. (FACT, per Kiel Institute data)
• Positive Counter-Narrative: Former PM Boris Johnson's intervention urging maximum pressure on Putin provides a useful diplomatic counterweight to the appeasement narrative being pushed.

---

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (FUTURE OPERATIONS)

5.1. Most Likely Enemy Courses of Action (MLCOA) – (HIGH Confidence)

RF will exploit confirmed European aid delays by maximizing kinetic output over the next 60 days, targeting UAF logistics and C2 to generate a materiel deficit crisis.

1. Sustained Kinetic Overload: RF will maintain or increase the TOS/FAB saturation in the Zaliznychne/Huliaipole area to ensure the PHOENIX retrograde fails to consolidate into a cohesive secondary line.
2. Northern Deception: RF will use ballistic and KAB strikes (e.g., Sumy/Chernihiv) alongside Spetsnaz activity to force the commitment of UAF reserves, preventing their use in the Eastern/Southern critical sectors.
3. IO Escalation: RF will aggressively link the EU aid slowdown to the "Korean Model" narrative, arguing that international partners are preparing for a negotiated cease-fire on RF terms.

5.2. Most Dangerous Enemy Courses of Action (MDCOA) – (HIGH Confidence)

1. Zaporizhzhia Breakthrough & Logistical Interdiction: Coordinated RF mechanized breakthrough at Zaliznychne coincides with successful deep strikes (Ballistic/UAV) on two key UAF rail/road choke points (e.g., Stepnohorsk Rear, Shyriaieve). This combination severs the main supply artery for OC South, forcing an accelerated, unorganized withdrawal.
2. Strategic AD Failure: RF successfully employs a coordinated swarm attack (e.g., 50+ Shaheds/Cruise Missiles) that saturates and disables a primary AD node protecting a critical military industry or relocated command center, inflicting irreparable strategic loss.

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS