Threats near Kurakhove and SBU operation in Moscow. Serhiy Zgurets' column

SBU special operation: elimination of Russian general

In the Russian capital, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, head of the radiation, chemical and biological defense troops of the Russian Armed Forces, and his assistant were killed in an explosion. This is the same Kirillov who talked about Ukraine having a nuclear “dirty bomb,” about American biolabs in Ukraine, even about combat mosquitoes. Most importantly, he personally ordered the use of prohibited chemical weapons against Ukrainian forces, with over two thousand documented instances. Additionally, incendiary high-explosive bombs were deployed, an action also under Kirillov's responsibility. All of these actions violate the established rules and customs of warfare.

The day before, the SBU served the Russian general with a notice of suspicion in absentia. The explosion occurred in Moscow near a residential building when men were entering the entrance. A scooter with explosives was detonated. Ukrainian media report that it was a special operation by the SBU, as Kirillov was a war criminal and a completely legitimate target. This is not the only target that has ceased to exist as a professional unit. 

Russia also loses its top weapons designer

I would like to remind you that just 5 days ago, on December 12, Mikhail Shatsky, Deputy Director General and Head of Software at the Russian Mars Design Bureau, was shot dead in Moscow. He was working on guidance systems for cruise missiles. While much attention focused on the Kh-69 missiles, his work actually involved the entire missile family of the Raduga Design Bureau, including the Kh-101, Kh-22, and Kh-32.

Let us recall Okhmatdyt, where the Russian military deliberately targeted a Ukrainian medical facility with a Kh-101 missile. Therefore, targeting these top Russian designers and eliminating high-ranking generals is part of efforts to dismantle the Russian military’s terror capabilities.

Situation on the front line - Kursk region

Over the past day, on December 16, activity on the front line was once again extremely high, with 245 combat clashes, including almost 70 at the Kursk bridgehead. There, Russian forces continue their attempts to force Ukrainian troops out of the bridgehead, which is currently 20 kilometers wide and 30 kilometers deep. Russia is trying to use the support of the North Korean military.

On December 16, we saw many videos showing how North Korean soldiers were being destroyed by Ukrainian cluster munitions, drones and other weapons. And on December 17, the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine and the Special Operations Forces again demonstrated several videos showing how these Russian aggressors' assistants are being destroyed.

Now Russia continues to storm this bridgehead from the west, north and east, trying to push Ukrainian troops back, but I don't think Russian troops will succeed.

Kurakhove direction

The situation in other areas of the front is also complicated. In particular, in the Kurakhove direction, the number of combat clashes remains high. There is one complicated nuance - it is good that Ukrainian troops have left the encirclement south of Kurakhove to Uspenivka. Ukrainian defenders withdrew, although there were some losses, but they were not as significant as they could have been. The Ukrainian military reported that the losses were caused by Russian drone attacks, but in general, the losses are less than they could have been. If the order had been given a little earlier, perhaps this withdrawal would have been much easier.

Another detail of this section of the frontline is that Russian troops keep trying to encircle it. In particular, in the Kurakhove direction, the village of Zelenivka, located on the road between Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia, was captured. This road leads from Kurakhove to Zaporizhzhia. Currently, Russian troops are trying to cut this road from different directions to make it more difficult for Ukrainian defenders to hold Kurakhove.

There are two main threats in this area. The first is the Russian troops' advance from the west of Sontsivka and Stari Terny to the highway. The second is the capture of Zelenivka and the risk of further Russian advance to the highway from the south. We will see how the Ukrainian Defense Forces command reacts to this and how these risks will be mitigated.

Lyman direction

Another area that has become quite active is the situation around Siversk, the Lyman direction. There is a video from the 10th Separate Mountain Assault Brigade, where the fighting continued on December 14, 15 and 16. Russian forces tried to break through in the Siversk area using a significant number of armored vehicles.

As is known, the previous Russian commander in this area was changed because of lies. The new commander is trying to continue the fierce pressure with the use of armored vehicles. We can see how brilliantly and effectively Ukrainian FPV drone operators are working. Thanks to these drones, the Russian manpower was destroyed, as it poured out of the armored vehicles.

Ukrainian arms manufacturers need to change

The use of FPV drones is one of the elements of new types of weapons in the Ukrainian army. It is known that there are at least 200 companies in Ukraine that manufacture drones for various purposes. The most advanced companies that produce drones, reconnaissance drones, long-range drones, and electronic warfare equipment are part of the Technological Forces of Ukraine association. This is an association of Ukrainian private enterprises that a week ago announced a survey among its members to find out whether our leading enterprises have orders from the Ministry of Defense.

Vadym Yunyk, chairman of the supervisory board of the defense-technical company FRDM and president of the Technological Forces of Ukraine association, said that the survey was conducted among 40 companies that deal with drones and various groups of military equipment with a technological component. The results of this survey led to somewhat pessimistic conclusions, as more than 70% of companies do not believe that their production facilities will be fully utilized next year. As of today, companies are operating at 30-35% of their actual capacity, which means that companies are analyzing this year's experience and understanding the prospect of 2025. It is very sad, but we hope that the government will hear our voice and some changes will take place.

The chairman of the supervisory board of FRDM, a defense-technical company, pointed out that no significant changes have been made so far. The issue extends beyond production, as the frontline is also impacted. Supply efforts are fully synchronized with the pace of our manufacturers’ work. Additionally, it’s understood that at the end of the year, a certain amount of funding becomes available, but the state approached producers with a single offer: whether they could deliver anything before the start of spring. However, substantial production before spring is hindered by logistical constraints. The new year affects the logistics channels that supply essential components. Consequently, after the state has received numerous rejections, the funding is redirected to various foreign drone suppliers, which negatively impacts the domestic market. This means that state spending ends up supporting foreign manufacturers instead of bolstering local production.

The president of the Technological Forces of Ukraine association noted that the first thing being discussed is not even three-year contracts for Ukrainian producers, but transitional contracts. That is, the state can enter into such contracts this year, burdening the company for the next year. Multi-year contracts are also very good, but there are nuances, because not all types of weapons can fall under such contracts. For example, this applies to drones, which are constantly being improved in line with changes at the front. Three-year contracts are needed because they are more suitable for more sustainable equipment. In addition, there should be a clear procurement plan so that manufacturers understand how and what they should supply to enterprises.

Yunyk emphasized that producers are ready to meet with officials and discuss ways to make the necessary changes. If nothing changes, the soldier in the trench will continue to feel these waves of supply. In addition, the unpredictability of orders leads to the fact that the state buys a little bit from one manufacturer, a little bit from the second, third, a little bit abroad, and the army has a “zoo” of products that are the same type, but each one has to learn to work with. This needs to be changed, and maybe they will hear us and realize that Ukraine has a great potential for production. If appropriate changes are made, Ukrainian manufacturers will be able to double the production of drones.

Summarizing Vadym's remarks, I would like to say that the Technological Forces of Ukraine Association unites about 40 leading private defense companies, which are currently operating at only one-third of their capacity, not only due to lack of funds but also due to certain bureaucratic procedures. We will continue to monitor this topic and create the preconditions for qualitative procedural changes that can become another factor in accelerating the production of products that are now desperately needed by the Security and Defense Forces of Ukraine.