Thursday, June 23, 2022

June 22: ISW Russian Offensive Campaign

RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, JUNE 22

Jun 22, 2022 - Press ISW

Download the PDF

Karolina Hird, Mason Clark, George Barros, and Grace Mappes

June 22, 5:45 pm ET

Click here to see ISW's interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.

Reinforced Russian air-defense systems in eastern Ukraine are increasingly limiting the effectiveness of Ukrainian drones, undermining a key Ukrainian capability in the war. Foreign Policy’s Jack Detsch quoted several anonymous Ukrainian officials and military personnel that Ukrainian forces have largely halted the use of Turkish Bayraktar drones, which were used to great effect earlier in the war, due to improvements in Russian air-defense capabilities.[1] Ukrainian officials are reportedly increasingly concerned that US-provided Gray Eagle strike drones will also be shot down by reinforced Russian air defense over the Donbas.[2] Ukrainian forces have reportedly scaled back air operations to 20 to 30 sorties per day and are facing a deficit of available aircraft for active pilots. Russian forces are likely prioritizing deploying air defenses to eastern Ukraine to nullify Ukrainian operations and to protect the artillery systems Russian forces are reliant on to make advances. However, the Ukrainian air force and armed drones remain active elsewhere, inflicting several successful strikes on targets in Kherson Oblast in the last week.

Members of the Russian military community continue to comment on the shortcomings of Russian force generation capabilities, which are having tangible impacts on the morale and discipline of Russians fighting in Ukraine. Russian milblogger Yuri Kotyenok claimed that Russian troops lack the numbers and strength for success in combat in Ukraine.[3] Kotyenok accused Russian leadership of deploying new and under-trained recruits and called for replenishment of forces with well-trained recruits with ground infantry experience—though the Russian military is unlikely to be able to quickly generate such a force, as ISW has previously assessed. Despite growing calls for increased recruitment from nationalist figures, Russian leadership continues to carry out coercive partial mobilization efforts that are only producing limited numbers of replacements while negatively impacting the morale and discipline of forcibly mobilized personnel. Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) claimed that Russian authorities in Luhansk are arranging gas leaks in apartment buildings to force men who are hiding from mobilization into the streets.[4] The Ukrainian Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) additionally reported that Russian soldiers in occupied Tokmak, Zaporizhia Oblast, are appealing to local Ukrainian doctors to issue them certificates alleging medical inability to continue military service.[5]

Ukrainian forces conducted a drone strike (likely with a loitering munition, though this cannot be confirmed) on a Russian oil refinery in Novoshakhtinsk, Rostov Oblast, on June 22.[6] Russian Telegram channel Voenyi Osvedomitel claimed that the strike, which targeted Russian infrastructure within 15 km of the Ukrainian border, originated from Donetsk Oblast.[7] Ukrainian forces have not targeted Russian infrastructure for several weeks, and this strike is likely an attempt to disrupt Russian logistics and fuel supply to Russian operations in eastern Ukraine.

Key Takeaways

  • Russian forces continued to make gains to the south of Lysychansk and will likely reach the city in the coming days, although they are unlikely to quickly capture the Severodonetsk-Lysychansk area.
  • Russian forces continued offensive operations towards Slovyansk and made minor advances.
  • Russian forces intensified efforts to interdict Ukrainian lines of communication along the T1302 Bakhmut-Lysychansk highway in order to support Russian operations towards Lysychansk.
  • Russian forces focused on defensive operations along the Southern Axis and may have made marginal gains within Mykolaiv Oblast.
  • Russian authorities are continuing measures to facilitate the economic integration of occupied areas.

We do not report in detail on Russian war crimes because those activities are well-covered in Western media and do not directly affect the military operations we are assessing and forecasting. We will continue to evaluate and report on the effects of these criminal activities on the Ukrainian military and population and specifically on combat in Ukrainian urban areas. We utterly condemn these Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict, Geneva Conventions, and humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.

  • Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine (comprised of one subordinate and three supporting efforts);
  • Subordinate Main Effort—Encirclement of Ukrainian troops in the cauldron between Izyum and Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts
  • Supporting Effort 1—Kharkiv City;
  • Supporting Effort 2—Southern Axis;
  • Activities in Russian-occupied Areas

Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine

Subordinate Main Effort—Southern Kharkiv, Donetsk, Luhansk Oblasts (Russian objective: Encircle Ukrainian forces in Eastern Ukraine and capture the entirety of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)

Russian forces continued efforts to push north toward Lysychansk along the west bank of the Siverskyi Donets River and made measured gains south of Lysychansk on June 22. Head of Luhansk Oblast Administration Serhiy Haidai stated that Russian troops are consolidating their positions in Toshkivka, Ustynivka, Pidlisne, and Myrna Dolyna, and are attacking Bila Hora, directly on the southeastern outskirts of Lysychansk.[8] Russian Telegram channel Rybar claimed that Russian forces took control of Rai-Oleksandrivka and Loskutivka, both 10 km south of Lysychansk.[9] Haidai additionally stated that Russian forces are trying to fix in place Ukrainian units in Borivske and Voronove (both within 5 km southeast of Severodonetsk) and are firing on Ukrainian positions in Synetskyi and Pavlohrad (western suburbs of Severodonetsk along the eastern bank of the Siverskyi Donets River).[10] Haidiai’s claim suggests that Ukrainian forces still control the area to the southwest of Severodonetsk along the eastern bank of the Siverskyi Donets River and are therefore not entirely encircled in the Severodonetsk-Lysychansk area. Russian forces continued street fights within Severodonetsk, presumably for control of the industrial zone.[11] Russian forces are moving to complete the encirclement of Ukrainian positions in Zolote and Hirske but likely have not captured these settlements as of June 22.[12]

Russian forces continued offensive operations towards Slovyansk from the southeast of Izyum and west of Lyman on June 22.[13] Spokesperson for the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense Oleksandr Motuzyanyk stated that unspecified elements of the Russian 1st Guards Tank Army, the 20th, 29th, and 35th Combined Arms Armies, 68th Army Corps, and unspecified Airborne Forces (VDV) are operating in the direction of Slovyansk.[14] Russian forces are reportedly fighting in the forests around Krasnopillya, about 20 km northwest of Slovyansk.[15]  Mayor of Slovyansk Vadym Lyakh stated that Russian forces directly shelled a micro-district of Slovyansk, which is the first attack directly on Slovyansk since early June.[16] Russian forces additionally shelled Ukrainian positions west of Lyman around Pryshyb, Sydorove, and Majaky.[17]

Russian forces continued efforts to interdict Ukrainian lines of communication east of Bakhmut along the T1302 Bakhmut-Lysychansk highway but did not make any confirmed advances on June 22.[18] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces are re-grouping around Bakhmut to strengthen their offensive capabilities in the area.[19] Russian forces reportedly conducted an unsuccessful assault near the Vuhledar Power Plant in Svitlodarsk, which suggests that Russian forces may drive up the E40 highway to the northwest in order to gain access to the T3102 and support operations against the Severodonetsk-Lysychansk highway.[20] Russian forces additionally conducted an airstrike on Verkhnyokamyanka (see image in-line with text below), a settlement directly on the T1302 within 10 kilometers southwest of Lysychansk, in a likely effort to interdict Ukrainian movements towards Lysychansk.[21] Russian forces will likely continue to regroup and intensify operations in the area between Bakhmut and Lysychansk to advance toward Lysychansk from an additional axis, sever Ukrainian supply lines, and attempt to consolidate control of the entire Severodonetsk-Lysychansk area in the coming days.

[Source: NASA FIRMS Data from June 22 of fire activity in the Lysychansk area]

Supporting Effort #1—Kharkiv City (Russian objective: Withdraw forces to the north and defend ground lines of communication (GLOCs) to Izyum)

There were no significant changes in northern Kharkiv Oblast on June 22. Russian forces continued to focus on preventing Ukrainian advances toward the international border and shelled Kharkiv City and surrounding settlements.[22]

Supporting Effort #2—Southern Axis (Objective: Defend Kherson and Zaporizhia Oblasts against Ukrainian counterattacks)

Russian forces continued to focus on defensive operations along the Southern Axis and may have secured marginal gains in Mykolaiv Oblast, north of Kherson City, on June 22.[23] Russian Telegram channel Rybar claimed that Russian forces took control of Novopetrivka, Burkhanivka, and Kalynivka, three settlements within 25 km of the Kherson-Mykolaiv Oblast border.[24] Spokesperson for the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense Oleksandr Motuzyanyk stated that unspecified elements of the Russian 8th and 49th Combined Arms Armies, 22nd Army Corps, and unspecified Airborne Forces (VDV) are operating between Mykolaiv and Kherson Oblasts to prevent further Ukrainian counterattacks toward Kherson City.[25] Deputy Head of Ukraine’s Presidential Office Kyrylo Tymoshenko stated that Ukrainian forces have recaptured Kiselivka and are now within 15 km of Kherson City, indicating that Russian forces are facing substantial pressure to defend their occupied frontiers against Ukrainian counterattacks.[26]

Ukrainian partisan activity continues to complicate Russian occupation efforts along the Southern Axis. Both the Ukrainian Resistance Center and Kremlin-run RIA Novosti reported that unidentified Ukrainian individuals, likely partisans, conducted an IED attack that injured the Russian-appointed head of Chornobaivka.[27]

Russian forces conducted missile and artillery strikes against various areas in Kherson, Mykolaiv, Dnipropetrovsk, and Zaporizhia Oblasts on June 22.[28] Motuzyanyk stated that Russian forces are conducting missile strikes on Odesa with Kh-35 Bal and K-300P Bastion-P anti-ship missiles, indicating Russian forces have likely exhausted their supply of appropriate missile systems and are resorting to firing on land targets with anti-ship missiles (which can still be effective but are less accurate than purpose-built land-attack systems).[29]

Activity in Russian-occupied Areas (Russian objective: consolidate administrative control of occupied areas; set conditions for potential annexation into the Russian Federation or some other future political arrangement of Moscow’s choosing)

Russian occupation authorities continued economic integration efforts in occupied areas on June 22. Ukraine’s Zaporizhia Oblast Military Administration stated that Russian forces are preparing the Berdyansk Commerical Port for grain exports and are using trains to move grain from Melitopol to Russia.[30] Prime Minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) Vitaly Khotsenko additionally met with Governor of Russia’s Amur Oblast Vasily Orlov to secure patronage for infrastructure and agricultural development of the settlement of Amvrosiivka.[31]

June 23, 2022: Johns Hopkins COVID 19 Situation Report

COVID-19 Situation Report

Editor: Alyson Browett, MPH

Contributors: Clint Haines, MS; Noelle Huhn, MSPH; Natasha Kaushal, MSPH; Amanda Kobokovich, MPH; Christina Potter, MSPH; Matthew Shearer, MPH; Marc Trotochaud, MSPH; and, Rachel A. Vahey, MHS.

CALL FOR PAPERS There is an opportunity to integrate Global Catastrophic Biological Risks (GCBRs) into pandemic preparedness policy and practice. In 2023, Health Security will devote a supplement to GCBRs. We encourage submissions of original research articles, case studies, and commentaries that discuss lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic response and/or key policy and technology advances that could prevent or better prepare for a future, potentially more severe, globally catastrophic infectious disease pandemic. The deadline is October 3, 2022. For more information: https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/journal/call-for-papers/index.html

MONKEYPOX OUTBREAKS UPDATE Read our latest update from June 15 on the monkeypox outbreaks and visit our monkeypox resource page. We will continue to analyze the situation and provide updates, as needed. If you would like to receive these updates, please sign up here.

EPI UPDATE The WHO COVID-19 Dashboard reports 538 million cumulative cases and 6.32 million deaths worldwide as of June 22.* The global weekly incidence remained relatively stable (-0.68%) from the previous week, when incidence was up nearly 8% after 3 weeks of decline. Global weekly mortality decreased as well, down 11% from the previous week. At the regional level, Europe (+17%), Southeast Asia (+46%), and the Eastern Mediterranean (+52%) experienced increases, while the other 3 regions had decreasing trends.

*The WHO COVID-19 dashboard indicates that there is a delay in reporting for the African Region, so the current totals may not be complete.

UNITED STATES

The US CDC is reporting 86.4 million cumulative cases of COVID-19 and 1,009,444 deaths. The average daily incidence has plateaued over the past several weeks, holding relatively steady at approximately 100-110,000 new cases per day. The current 7-day average is 99,365 new cases per day. Likewise, the average daily mortality has held relatively steady at approximately 250-300 deaths per day since late May.* Notably, the current 7-day average is 248, the lowest level since July 13, 2021.

*Changes in state-level reporting may affect the accuracy of recently reported data, particularly over weekends. In an effort to reflect the longer-term trends, the numbers reported here may not correspond to the most recent dates.

Both new hospital admissions (+1.5% over the past week) and current hospitalizations (+1.1%) continue to increase, although they appear to have stabilized over the past week. Considering the plateau in daily incidence, it is possible that hospitalizations could also remain elevated, rather than peaking and then declining.

Community transmission in the US continues to be driven by the BA.2.12.1 sublineage of Omicron (56%), but BA.5 (23.5%) and BA.4 (11.4%) are now outpacing BA.2 (9.1%). The prevalence of BA.4 and BA.5 now appears to be increasing more rapidly than BA.2.12.1. These 4 sublineages of the Omicron variant represent all new SARS-CoV-2 infections in the US.

PEDIATRIC VACCINES Taking the recommendation of its advisory committee, the US FDA on June 17 authorized pediatric formulations of both the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for children as young as 6 months old. The following day, US CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky endorsed the agency’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Protection (ACIP)’s recommendation that all children younger than age 5 get vaccinated against COVID-19. US President Joe Biden visited a vaccine clinic in Washington, DC, on June 21 to mark the rollout of the last major phase of vaccinations in the nation, with virtually all individuals now eligible to receive at least 1 of 3 authorized or approved SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. In his remarks, President Biden said the availability of vaccines for the youngest children marks a “monumental step forward” and provides “some peace of mind” for parents who have been waiting 18 months since the first vaccines were authorized for adults. There are about 19 million children aged 6 months to 5 years in the US.

The Biden administration has said 10 million doses are available for distribution to states and healthcare providers, but only 2.5 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and 1.3 million doses of the Moderna vaccine have been ordered to date. While some parents have expressed excitement and relief at the vaccines’ availability, it remains unclear how many will vaccinate their young kids. Only 29% of 5-11 year-olds are fully vaccinated, while 59% of those aged 12-17 years are fully vaccinated. Some parents already are facing challenges securing an appointment to get their children vaccinated, despite a federal operational plan released and implemented earlier this month. While neighborhood pharmacies and pharmaceutical chains are included in this phase of the vaccination campaign, many are expecting families to go to primary care physicians and pediatricians because of trust, familiarity, and relationships that may not exist at the pharmacy. Additionally, some parents are weighing the differences between the 2-dose Moderna and 3-dose Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines for children.

The FDA also authorized Moderna’s vaccine for children and adolescents ages 6-17 last week. The CDC’s ACIP is meeting today to discuss clinical considerations and recommendations for the vaccine in that age group. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is already available for adolescents and older children.

ANTIBODY ESCAPE A correspondence letter in the New England Journal of Medicine published June 22 by authors from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston provides new evidence that Omicron subvariants, including BA.4 and BA.5, are showing substantial escape from neutralizing antibodies provided by vaccination or infection. The authors evaluated neutralizing antibody titers against against the original wildtype SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, and BA.4 or BA.5 among 27 participants vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine who had no indications of prior infection and 27 participants with recent infection with the BA.1 or BA.2 subvariants a median of 29 days earlier (range: 2-113 days), a majority of whom were vaccinated. Among vaccinated but never infected participants, neutralizing antibody titers compared to wild-type SARS-CoV-2 were lower by “a factor of 6.4 against BA.1, by a factor of 7.0 against BA.2, by a factor of 14.1 against BA.2.12.1, and by a factor of 21.0 against BA.4 or BA.5.” Participants with a prior history of infection with BA.1 or BA.2 showed similar trends with neutralizing antibody titers compared to wild-type SARS-CoV-2 lowered by “a factor of 6.4 against BA.1, by a factor of 5.8 against BA.2, by a factor of 9.6 against BA.2.12.1, and by a factor of 18.7 against BA.4 or BA.5.” The authors asserted that these findings indicate that the Omicron variants continue to feature further neutralization escape, which may lead to increased infection among populations with prior immunity against the virus. Findings in a recent Lancet Infectious Diseases correspondence provided similar evidence of substantial escape from neutralizing antibodies against Omicron variants among individuals vaccinated with the Sinopharm vaccine, with only partial recovery after a booster shot of the same vaccine.

SARS-COV-2 REINFECTION The newest Omicron subvariants of BA.4 and BA.5 are driving increases in new SARS-CoV-2 infections in several regions, with many people experiencing reinfections despite immunity from prior infection or vaccination (1+ shots). These subvariants appear to be able to evade antibodies more easily than their predecessors, possibly due to new and different spike proteins. Though global COVID-19-associated mortality appears to be decreasing, a new preprint study posted on Research Square cautions that reinfections pose an increased risk of hospitalization (HR 2.98), all-cause mortality (HR 2.14), and sequelae in pulmonary and other organ systems. The risk of these adverse outcomes—including those impacting the heart, blood, kidneys, lungs, and brain—were most pronounced in the acute phase of infection but persisted throughout the 6-month follow up. Additionally, for every reinfection (1, 2, 3+) there was a stepwise increase in risk for all sequelae evaluated, including hospitalization. Although not yet peer-reviewed, the study serves as a signal that the COVID-19 pandemic remains a threat to the health of the world’s population, and individuals must continue to take precautions to prevent infection.

MODERNA BIVALENT BOOSTER Moderna announced June 22 that it plans to seek regulatory approval for an updated booster vaccine, mRNA-1273.214, after new clinical data on the bivalent candidate showed success against newer Omicron variants. The announcement comes in anticipation of fall booster shots, with the company saying it could ship doses as early as August. Moderna found that mRNA-1273.214 increased neutralizing titers against BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron subvariants among all participants (95% CI: 5.0, 5.9). Neutralizing titers increased by 6.3-fold (95% CI: 5.7, 6.9) among specifically seronegative patients. However, the boost to neutralizing titers for BA.4 and BA.5 was not quite as high as the boost in neutralizing titers against the original Omicron variant, BA.1, or the Delta variant. Moderna noted that a peer-reviewed manuscript describing clinical trial data should be available soon.

Scientists are hopeful that this new booster, as well as others under investigation, will aid in improving protection against a potential surge in the fall. However, both Moderna and BioNTech leadership expressed concern that regulatory processes needed to update boosters could cause delays, hoping that future updates to the most recent strains can be done without clinical trials. In a separate announcement, Moderna said it will establish a new research and manufacturing center in the UK, allowing that country to gain access to mRNA platform-based vaccines.

COVID-19 REBOUND Following a US CDC health advisory issued last month warning about the potential for recurrence of COVID-19 or “COVID-19 rebound” following treatment with the antiviral Paxlovid, several new studies suggest potential causes of the occurrence and support initial studies’ findings that rebound happens in only a small proportion of patients. A study published June 20 in Clinical Infectious Diseases examined the experience of one patient with rebound following Paxlovid treatment. The researchers, from the University of California San Diego School of Medicine, isolated the SARS-CoV-2 BA.2 variant from the patient with symptom relapse and sampled their plasma to test for viral immunity. They found the isolate had not developed drug resistance, nor did the patient have impaired immunity, leading them to hypothesize the rebound likely was the result of insufficient exposure to the drug.

Another study (preprint), posted to medRxiv and conducted by US NIH researchers, examined clinical, virologic, and immune measurements of 7 patients with COVID-19 rebound, 6 who had taken Paxlovid and 1 without previous treatment. Again, the researchers found no evidence of drug resistance, viral mutation, or impaired immune response. Instead, they found the rebounds were associated with elevated SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody and cellular immune responses, possibly due to the body trying to clear residual viral antigens possibly shed from dying infected cells. Both studies were very small and may not be generalizable to all COVID-19 rebound cases; additional larger studies are needed to confirm their findings. On June 21, the US CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) published a study examining 5,287 Paxlovid-treated patients aged 12 years and older, finding less than 1% experienced COVID-19-related hospitalization or emergency room visits 5-15 days after treatment was dispensed.

PANDEMIC INEQUALITY The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically impacted people’s health, income, and various social risk factors, worsening existing inequalities and exposing others. Nature uses 6 graphs to explore the pandemic’s effects. The graphs express various data sets examining specific issues globally, in low- and middle-income countries, and in the US, UK, and Brazil. Notably, by the end of this year, 75 million more people will be pushed into poverty—living on less than US$1.90 per day—than was expected before the pandemic, derailing gains made prior to 2020 and highlighting the need for increased efforts to get the world back on track toward the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

US NATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM A bipartisan commission of health leaders this week released a set of recommendations to overhaul public health in the US, with the aim of creating a “national public health system” to protect and improve health, advance health equity, and effectively respond to emergencies. The authors call for changes that could address current health challenges—including rising maternal mortality, overdoses, and diabetes—and avoid a repeat of what it called a “splintered” response to COVID-19 that led to widely disparate outcomes nationwide. The Commonwealth Fund Commission on a National Public Health System proposal outlines actions for the US Congress; the administration of US President Joe Biden; and state, local, tribal, and territorial governments to create a coordinated and collaborative national public health system.