November 5, 2025

Institute for the Study of War: Ukraine claims 1,500 Russians killed in Pokrovsk offensive last month

Institute for the Study of War

Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to try to blame US President Donald Trump for the nuclear arms modernization and buildup program that Russia began years ago. Putin held an award ceremony on November 4 for the developers of the new Burevestnik missile and Poseidon unmanned underwater vehicle, in which he continued to laud the weapons’ purported technical capabilities.[1] Putin held a Russian Security Council meeting on November 5 in which Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, Chief of the General Staff Army General Valery Gerasimov, Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) Head Sergei Naryshkin, Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu, and Federal Security Service (FSB) Head Alexander Bortnikov offered their assessments of US President Donald Trump’s statements since October 29 that the United States would start testing its nuclear weapons.[2] Belousov advised Putin to begin preparation for “full-scale” nuclear testing immediately, and Putin called for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), Ministry of Defense (MoD), special services, and relevant civilian agencies to submit proposals on the possible start of nuclear weapons tests. The Kremlin officials continued to interpret that Trump’s recent statements meant that the United States would begin testing nuclear warheads. Trump did not specify if the United States would test nuclear warheads or the delivery systems, however, and US Energy Secretary Chris Wright stated on November 2 that Trump is likely referring to tests of delivery systems.[3] Russia has violated the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) and likely restarted low-yield nuclear tests in 2019 in violation of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).[4] Russia’s latest weapons developments fundamentally do not change the nuclear balance between the United States and Russia, even if the technical details that Putin is touting are true — as the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) recently noted.[5]

Russia’s grinding advances in the Pokrovsk direction continue to absorb significant Russian losses. The Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) reported on November 5 that SBU units operating in the Pokrovsk direction killed over 1,500 Russian servicemembers and destroyed 20 tanks, 62 armored fighting vehicles (AFVs), and 532 transport vehicles in October 2025.[6] The SBU’s numbers only account for casualties inflicted by SBU forces, and total Russian losses in the area are likely much higher. Geolocated footage published on November 5 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced in western Rodynske (north of Pokrovsk).[7] Russian milbloggers claimed on November 4 and 5 that Russian forces advanced within northeastern Pokrovsk, southeast of Hryshyne (northwest of Pokrovsk), and southwest of Sukhetske (north of Pokrovsk).[8] A servicemember of a Ukrainian brigade operating in the Pokrovsk direction stated on November 5 that Russian forces are concentrating their efforts against Ukrainian forces in southern Pokrovsk and are wearing civilian clothes as part of deception tactics — considered perfidy under international law.[9] ISW has recently observed multiple reports of Russian forces committing acts of perfidy in the Pokrovsk direction as Russian forces have leveraged infiltration tactics to penetrate the town between Ukrainian positions.[10]

The Russian military command has committed significant portions of the 2nd, 41st, and 51st combined arms armies (CAA) to the Pokrovsk direction, indicating its prioritization of the seizure of the pocket.[11]  Elements of the Russian 35th and 74th Motorized Rifle Brigades (both of the 41st CAA, Central Military District [CMD]) and the 1441st Motorized Rifle Regiment (reportedly of the 2nd CAA, CMD) are reportedly operating in western Pokrovsk; and elements of the 30th Motorized Rifle Brigade (2nd CAA), the 506th and 589th motorized rifle regiments (both of the 27th Motorized Rifle Division, 2nd CAA), and the 1452nd Motorized Rifle Regiment (reportedly of the 41st CAA) are reportedly operating in eastern Pokrovsk.[12] Elements of the 9th Motorized Rifle Brigade (51st CAA, formerly 1st Donetsk People’s Republic Army Corps [DNR AC], Southern Military District [SMD]) and the 506th Motorized Rifle Regiment are reportedly operating in Rodynske; elements of the 5th Motorized Rifle Brigade (51st CAA) are reportedly operating in Myrnohrad (east of Pokrovsk); elements of the 1435th Motorized Rifle Regiment (reportedly of the 2nd CAA) are reportedly operating in Zvirove (southwest of Pokrovsk); and elements of the 1437th Motorized Rifle Regiment (reportedly of the 2nd CAA) are reportedly operating in Udachne (southwest of Pokrovsk).[13] Russian forces in the Pokrovsk direction have been taking some of the highest losses on the battlefield in recent months, and the 21-month campaign to seize Pokrovsk has likely degraded these three CAAs.[14] The servicemember noted that Russian forces rarely employ mechanized vehicles in the Pokrovsk direction, apart from near Myrnohrad. ISW recently observed reporting of Russian mechanized assaults near Myrnohrad on October 13 and 22.[15]

North Korea is reportedly deploying additional troops to support roles in the Russian rear. South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency, citing South Korean parliamentarians who received a briefing from South Korea’s National Intelligence Service (NIS), reported on November 4 that North Korea deployed roughly 5,000 military engineering troops to Russia, likely to restore infrastructure.[16] South Korean intelligence reportedly assessed that North Korea is training and selecting personnel in preparation for additional troop deployments to Russia. The NIS reportedly stated that there are currently about 10,000 North Korean troops near the Russo-Ukrainian border performing “security duties,” and another 1,000 are clearing mines. ISW continues to assess that it is unclear whether North Korean troops will deploy for combat operations to Ukrainian territory, which would mark a significant inflection, but that North Korean troops operating in Russian border areas would free up Russian forces to deploy to the battlefield.[17] ISW previously observed reports that North Korean military personnel and “technical advisers” were operating in occupied Donetsk Oblast, and it is unclear if Russia plans to deploy the North Korean troops to restore infrastructure in Russia or occupied Ukraine.[18]

Russian forces continue to commit war crimes against Ukrainian civilians. Ukrainian Deputy Prosecutor General Andriy Leshchenko reported on November 4that Russian forces have committed over 190,000 war crimes since the beginning of the full-scale invasion and that Russia is conducting a “planned state policy” of crimes against the Ukrainian people.[25] Ukrainian Department of Counteracting Crimes Committed in Armed Conflict Head Yuriy Rud reported that Russian forces have conducted over 5,100 drone strikes against civilians so far in 2025 — twice the total number in all of 2024. A spokesperson of a Ukrainian brigade reported on November 5 that Ukrainian intelligence officers assessed that the November 3 Russian drone strike that killed two Ukrainian civilians in the Borova direction likely occurred as the civilians were evacuating from Kruhlyakivka (northeast of Borova).[26] Kupyanksyi Raion Police Department Head Kyrylo Schcherbinsky reported that the civilians were walking from Kruhlyakivka toward occupied Berestove (east of Kruhlyakivka) and that the direction of the drone strike indicated that Russian forces were responsible. The watermark of the footage showing the strike showed the insignia of the Russian 96th Separate Reconnaissance Brigade (1st Guards Tank Army [GTA], Moscow Military District [MMD]).[27] ISW has long assessed that the Russian military command is endorsing and sometimes ordering war crimes on the battlefield.[28]

Authorities reported unidentified drone incursions near the Brussels and Liege airports in Belgium on the evening of November 4. Belgian authorities closed the Brussels Airport due to an unidentified drone.[29] Authorities reopened the Brussels Airport approximately two hours later but closed the airport again after subsequent drone sightings. Belgian authorities also closed the Liege Airport due to unidentified drone sightings.[30] Belgian officials reported that there were three unidentified drones flying over the Kleine Brogel Air Base from October 31 to November 2.[31] Belgian Defense Minister Theo Francken stated that the repeated drone overflights are “in line with the hybrid techniques seen in other countries” and that the actors organized them “in a very structured way.”[32] Belgian authorities have not officially attributed these latest drone sightings to a specific actor as of this writing. The repeated unidentified drone incursions near Belgian critical infrastructure come against the backdrop of Russia’s intensifying “Phase Zero” campaign to destabilize Europe, undermine NATO’s cohesion, and set the political and psychological conditions for a potential Russian war against NATO.[33]

Key Takeaways

  1. Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to try to blame US President Donald Trump for the nuclear arms modernization and buildup program that Russia began years ago.
  2. Russia’s grinding advances in the Pokrovsk direction continue to absorb significant Russian losses.
  3. North Korea is reportedly deploying additional troops to support roles in the Russian rear.
  4. The Kremlin continues to set conditions to deploy active reservists to combat in Ukraine.
  5. Russian forces continue to commit war crimes against Ukrainian civilians.
  6. Authorities reported unidentified drone incursions near the Brussels and Liege airports in Belgium on the evening of November 4.
  7. Russian forces advanced in northern Sumy Oblast, in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area, and near Vovchansk, Pokrovsk, and Velykomykhailivka. Ukrainian forces advanced in the Dobropillya tactical area.
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.