September 3, 2025

Hudson Institute: Ukraine tactical success belie its manpower shortage 

Hudson Institute

Ukraine Military Situation Report | September 3

Below Hudson Senior Fellow Can Kasapoğlu offers a military situation report about the Russia-Ukraine War.

Executive Summary

— Battlefield assessment: Ukraine’s elite units achieved tactical successes in the vital Pokrovsk sector. But Kyiv still faces a severe manpower disadvantage.

— Ukraine’s long-range strike campaign: Ukrainian drones hit a Russian S-400 air defense site, causing alarm among pro-Moscow observers.

— Russia targets Western assets in Ukraine: Russia sought to deter Ukraine’s supporters by striking the United Kingdom and European Union embassies and a drone factory owned by Turkish firm Baykar.

1. Battlefield Assessment

Last week the Russian military continued its high-tempo combat operations across the battlespace. Toretsk, Kupiansk, and Novopavlivka saw heightened combat activity, while Russian forces also targeted Lyman, a key rail hub. But once again the embattled Ukrainian garrison town of Pokrovsk, in Donetsk Oblast, bore the brunt of Russia’s assault.

Open-source visual intelligence highlighted the resilience of the Ukrainian military, which conducted rapid tactical counterattacks in Pokrovsk to disrupt the Russian offensive. In at least two skirmishes, elements from Ukraine’s 425th Assault Regiment, which includes Ukraine’s first motorcycle operations units and specializes in blitz assaults and rear-area operations, engaged Russian units. This elite regiment, nicknamed Skala, has already captured the village of Udachne, just west of Pokrovsk. Meanwhile other Ukrainian units conducted successful counteroffensive actions in the nearby village of Novoekonomichne, while the elite 93rd Brigade fought near Dobropillya to maintain Ukraine’s lines of communication to the Pokrovsk garrison.

Despite these tactical successes, Ukraine continues to face challenges at the strategic level thanks to Russia’s advantages in force-on-force and force-to-terrain ratios. Last week declassified intelligence from the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence revealed that Russia has been redirecting formations from Kharkiv, Sumy, and other sectors to fight in Donetsk.

Ukrainian forces, meanwhile, continued to conduct long-range strikes deep behind Russian lines. The drone warfare element of the Ukrainian intelligence service struck a Russian S-400 strategic air defense site and a helicopter grouping in occupied Crimea. Russian Telegram channels expressed a chorus of concern about Ukraine’s successful targeting of Russia’s radar architecture. The Ukrainian Air Force also conducted brief sorties that exposed other gaps in Russia’s air defenses.

2. Russia Targets Western Assets in Ukraine

On August 28 Russia launched drone and missile attacks against multiple high-profile targets in Ukraine, including the diplomatic missions of the United Kingdom and the European Union in Kyiv and a drone plant operated by Turkish arms manufacturer Baykar. The strikes, which killed multiple Ukrainian civilians, were among Russia’s largest salvos since the outset of its full-scale invasion.

The strike package included North Korean KN-23 tactical ballistic missiles and Iran-designed Shahed drones. In total, Russia launched 629 munitions, mostly missiles and drones, at Ukraine. Ukraine’s air defenses have performed well throughout the war. But they could not fully intercept such an overwhelming aerial assault.

By targeting assets that belong to some of Ukraine’s main supporters, the Kremlin likely wishes to discourage further military aid. Both the EU and the UK summoned Russian envoys to protest the deliberate strikes on their diplomatic buildings and personnel. Yet the only way to effectively deter further Russian bombardments is to ensure Ukraine has the offensive weapons necessary to impose retaliatory costs on Moscow.

Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.