Issue No 20 (20) 2025 – 15SEP –23SEP2025

Executive Summary

The reporting period of 15–23SEP2025 reflects the entrenched attritional dynamics of the war in Ukraine, with Russia attempting to sustain pressure along multiple axes of advance while Ukraine deepens its campaign of strikes against Russian military-industrial infrastructure. The overall trajectory remains one of incremental tactical shifts rather than decisive breakthroughs, reinforcing the assessment that the conflict is moving toward a protracted stalemate.

On the battlefield, Russian forces pressed ahead in Donetsk and Luhansk, registering incremental territorial gains of roughly 20–30 sq km, particularly around Pokrovsk, Kreminna, and Toretsk. These advances were facilitated by heavy use of Rubikon UAS detachments, mass artillery fire, and glide-bombing operations. Russian units demonstrated an ability to maintain operational tempo across several axes simultaneously, reflecting the ongoing mobilisation of manpower and production of drones and munitions. However, these advances remain tightly bounded: they carry heavy attrition costs, stretch logistics chains, and exacerbate long-term personnel fatigue. Ukrainian counterattacks, reclaiming 10–15 sq km in grey zones, underlined Kyiv’s capacity to stabilise the front and prevent deeper Russian penetrations. Forecasting suggests that Russian forces will continue to probe toward Pokrovsk and Kreminna into late September, but their capacity for decisive gains remains structurally constrained by systemic shortages of trained manpower, equipment wear, and logistical strain.

Ukraine’s deep-strike campaign expanded further during this period. UAV and sabotage operations hit refineries in Saratov, Samara, and Volgograd, reducing throughput by an estimated 2.5–5.6% of Russia’s annual refining capacity, alongside attacks on key rail junctions in Smolensk and Oryol. These operations disrupted fuel distribution and degraded logistics flows, imposing a 10–15% reduction in regional throughput. While these strikes have not directly translated into battlefield reversals, they serve to incrementally erode Russia’s economic resilience and force resource reallocations, particularly in air defence and repair capacity. The tempo of Ukrainian UAV production continues to rise, with the strike rate trending upward toward 150–200 sorties per week, pointing to a sustained capacity for deep operations.

The regional security environment remains volatile, with Russia continuing to probe NATO’s air domain and test Alliance resolve. Notable incidents included the 19SEP incursion of a MiG-31 into Estonian airspace and earlier UAV overflights of Poland and Romania. These events, occurring against the backdrop of Zapad-2025, reinforced NATO’s commitment to reinforcing Baltic and Polish air defences. The conclusion of Zapad-2025 without major incident reduces immediate risks of miscalculation linked to large-scale exercises, but Russia’s reliance on hybrid pressure tactics—airspace violations, UAV incursions, and cyber interference—is expected to persist. Belarus remains a key enabler of these dynamics, hosting elements of Zapad-related drills and facilitating Russian deployments, though its direct contribution was more limited than in previous years.

From a strategic outlook perspective, the war in Ukraine is increasingly aligning with the “Georgia scenario” described in J.P. Morgan’s forecasts, which envisages static frontlines and protracted attrition (estimated 50% probability by year-end). Russia’s capacity to generate pressure will continue to rely on mass drone and missile launches, combined with gradual manpower mobilisation. Ukraine, for its part, is likely to deepen its strike campaign into Russia’s economic heartland, including potential expansion toward Far Eastern refining hubs. NATO’s challenge lies in calibrating deterrence and reassurance, particularly in response to recurrent Russian provocations in the Baltic-Polish theatre.

Key watchpoints for Q3 and beyond include:

  • Russian force generation and resource allocation across overstretched operational axes;
  • Ukraine’s capacity to sustain high-tempo drone attrition rates and replenish strike inventories;
  • Indicators of systemic stress in Russia’s refining sector, particularly outages approaching the 30–35% threshold;
  • NATO’s response posture to repeated violations of Baltic and Polish airspace, which could shape escalation dynamics;
  • Potential horizontal escalation if Ukrainian strikes extend to high-value refineries east of the Urals.