Situation Report

MILITARY INTELLIGENCE SITUATION REPORT (SITREP)

TIME: 121100Z DEC 25 SUBJECT: GRAU INTERDICTION WINDOW CRITICAL; TVER UAV STRIKE CONFIRMED; KHARKIV RECONNAISSANCE DETECTED; INTENSIFIED RF IO ON US POLITICAL AMBIGUITY.

---

1. SITUATION OVERVIEW (IPB Step 1)

1.1. Battlefield Geometry and Key Terrain

The Slovyansk-Kramatorsk Defensive Agglomeration (SKDA) remains under critical pincer threat from the confirmed RF seizure of Siversk (North) and urban combat continuing in Konstantinovka (South). The integrity of the Konstantinovka defense holds the center of the defensive line. Logistical security across the Donbas sector is now the center of gravity, critically dependent on the immediate closure of the P1 intelligence gap.

1.2. Weather and Environmental Factors Affecting Operations

Nighttime, low visibility conditions persist. Ground saturation due to recent weather patterns slightly restricts mechanized movement off-road in the SKDA area but favors continued RF FPV and long-range UAS reconnaissance operations (Confirmed by Kharkiv detections).

1.3. Current Force Dispositions and Control Measures

DEEP BATTLE UPDATE (FACTS):

• Tver Incident (RUSSIA): RF state media (TASS 120112Z DEC) confirms the incident was a successful UAV attack on a residential building, injuring seven civilians. This closes the P4 BDA gap, confirming a successful UAF kinetic strike deep within the RF homeland, forcing RF internal security commitments.
• Odesa BDA: Confirmed infrastructure damage and partial loss of electricity and water following the recent RF deep strike (RBK-Ukraine 120103Z DEC).
• Kharkiv UAV Activity: Air Force Command (120113Z DEC) reports multiple UAVs approaching Kharkiv from the South and West, indicative of immediate preparatory reconnaissance for follow-on kinetic strikes targeting the energy grid or military staging areas in the Kharkiv region.
• SKDA Front: UAF maintains defensive lines in Konstantinovka, utilizing urban terrain for close defense against RF penetration.

---

2. ENEMY ANALYSIS (IPB Step 2)

2.1. Enemy Capabilities, Intentions, and Courses of Action

RF intent is to collapse the SKDA defensive structure via overwhelming fire superiority while simultaneously using deep strikes and coordinated IO campaigns to force Western partners to halt or condition SAFE II funding.

2.2. Recent Tactical Changes or Adaptations

RF tactical adaptation is reactive in the cognitive domain but proactive in the kinetic domain:

1. Internal Security/AD Commitment: The confirmed UAF UAV strike on Tver forces the RF General Staff to divert internal security and AD assets to protect strategic depth, potentially drawing resources away from frontline combat zones.
2. Strike Pattern Shift: Following the Odesa strike, the observed UAV reconnaissance near Kharkiv suggests RF is prioritizing infrastructure targeting in Eastern Ukraine to degrade UAF staging and logistics capacity.

2.3. Logistics and Sustainment Status (CRITICAL)

JUDGMENT: The 260th GRAU cargo remains unlocated (P1 Gap). Time has elapsed since the previous report (121000Z DEC). The remaining estimated window for successful kinetic interdiction of the rail transport en route is now CRITICAL: T+0 to T+03:00 HR before the cargo reaches forward railheads (Ilovaisk/Volnovakha) and disperses. Failure to act within this narrow window will guarantee overwhelming RF fire support for the decisive SKDA assault.

2.4. Command and Control Effectiveness

RF C2 demonstrates high effectiveness in managing external political IO, synchronizing reconnaissance (Kharkiv), and containing the narrative fallout from the Tver UAV strike. This level of synchronization suggests centralized control over both kinetic and cognitive domains.

---

3. FRIENDLY FORCES (IPB Step 3)

3.1. Ukrainian Force Posture and Readiness

Readiness remains strained but resilient. The confirmation of the Tver deep strike capability provides a vital strategic leverage point by demonstrating UAF projection capabilities and forcing RF reallocation of AD assets.

3.2. Recent Tactical Successes or Setbacks

• Successes: Confirmed kinetic success of the Tver UAV strike (P4 closed). Continued holding actions by UAF forces in Konstantinovka, slowing the RF pincer movement.
• Setbacks: Confirmed loss of critical infrastructure in Odesa (power/water loss), demonstrating persistent vulnerability to RF deep strike campaigns.

3.3. Resource Requirements and Constraints

CRITICAL CONSTRAINT: All available Long-Range Precision Fire (LRPF) assets must be committed to the immediate closure of the P1 Gap (GRAU interdiction). Any diversion of these assets, even to reinforce the Kharkiv AD posture, must be weighed against the catastrophic risk posed by the unimpeded arrival of the GRAU munitions.

---

4. INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT (IPB Step 4)

4.1. Propaganda and Disinformation Campaigns (CRITICAL INTENSIFICATION)

RF IO is intensely exploiting the uncertainty generated by former US President Trump's remarks, utilizing the narrative that President Zelenskyy is the sole obstacle to a diplomatic solution (TASS 120103Z DEC). This is a direct, coordinated attack designed to fracture the unified Western diplomatic front immediately preceding crucial US/EU/UA meetings. Russian political commentary is simultaneously promoting the geopolitical tension between Trump and Europe, furthering the "New Cold War" narrative and suggesting the US seeks new blocs that marginalize Ukraine's key European allies. (Confidence: HIGH)

4.2. Public Sentiment and Morale Factors

Domestic sentiment is likely being affected by the Odesa power/water loss, confirming that rear areas are not secure. The RF IO campaign (Trump quotes) poses a significant risk to strategic morale by undermining confidence in unwavering Western support and portraying UAF leadership as intransigent.

4.3. International Support and Diplomatic Developments

The immediate strategic objective is to stabilize the diplomatic narrative before the upcoming high-level meeting. The current RF IO operation attempts to precondition the meeting, making financial and military aid contingent on perceived UAF concessions.

---

5. PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS (IPB Step 5)

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

1. SKDA Breakthrough Effort (T+12 to T+48 HRS): RF will maintain maximum pressure on Konstantinovka to achieve a decisive penetration, synchronized with the arrival of the 260th GRAU munitions NLT 130000Z DEC.
2. Infrastructure Targeting (T+0 to T+24 HRS): Based on confirmed UAV reconnaissance (Kharkiv), RF will execute follow-on deep strikes against critical infrastructure in the Kharkiv or Poltava regions to degrade UAF defensive logistics and maximize civilian cognitive impact.
3. IO Escalation (T+0 to T+12 HRS): RF will intensify messaging around diplomatic fragmentation and the "DMZ Sovereignty" narrative to maximize pressure on Western leaders during the diplomatic meeting window.

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

1. Operational Collapse & Deep Interdiction Failure: Failure to interdict the GRAU cargo combines with a successful, deep RF penetration of Konstantinovka (P2 Gap closure), forcing a rapid, disorganized withdrawal from the SKDA and allowing RF forces to consolidate a major operational victory in Donetsk Oblast.
2. Diplomatic Isolation: RF IO campaign successfully leverages political ambiguity, resulting in conditional or delayed aid commitments from key Western partners, forcing UAF to accept unfavorable battlefield-frozen lines.

5.3. Timeline Estimates and Decision Points

---

6. INTELLIGENCE GAPS AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

---

7. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS