Weekly Update #42
December 19

Source: https://data.humdata.org/visualization/ukraine-humanitarian-operation 

Access constraints remain high across all oblasts along the frontline. The presence of non-government controlled areas (NGCAs), which hampers the free movement of civilians and humanitarians, continues to drive these constraints. Shelling and air strikes also cause safety and security concerns and impede the provision of water and electricity.

The biggest shift in access constraints since early September occurred in Kharkiv, where a counteroffensive by Ukrainian forces between 10–13 September removed the presence

of Russian forces from most of the oblast’s territory. In Donetsk, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts, the frontline has remained largely unchanged except for some small Ukrainian advances. On the Kherson and Mykolaiv front, Ukrainian forces have regained some territory in Beryslav raion.

MAIN FINDINGS

The report identified specific oblasts and their levels of humanitarian access.

Luhansk

Access constraints remain very high in Luhansk as most of the oblast, except for a small area in the east, is currently not under the control of the Government of Ukraine. Constraints on civilians’ ability to access assistance and on humanitarians’ capacity to reach the population in need are severe, although detailed information on the specific constraints for both is not available. A relatively low level of ground conflict also characterises the situation in Luhansk compared to other oblasts along the frontline.  Despite the lower level of conflict, Luhansk oblast has the second lowest number of responders operating as part of the international humanitarian response after Kherson.

Zaporizhzhia

The Vasylivka checkpoint is the only regulated crossing point along the frontline for people wishing to travel between Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia GCAs and NGCAs). In Zaporizhzhia, travel from the NGCA towards the GCA significantly slowed down in late September and October because of administrative constraints related to Russia’s claimed annexation of the oblast.

Most of the assistance to the oblast is concentrated in Zaporizhzhia city, with little distribution towards rural areas and communities near the frontlines. Local volunteer groups are the only ones providing assistance to these communities, although access is not always guaranteed because of restrictions by the Ukrainian military.

Kherson

Humanitarian access is possible, including by international responders, to Kherson government-controlled areas. These territories are slowly expanding as a result of the military offensive, which gained control of 90 settlements between 12–26 October. Kherson is the oblast with the lowest number of humanitarian responders within the international cluster system.

The evacuation of civilians by Russian forces from Kherson city further into NGCAs is increasing concerns over forcible population displacement. Disruption of health services: as part of the evacuation, Russian forces have shut down municipal hospitals, taken away equipment, and forced doctors to move to Russia.

Donetsk

Access constraints in Donetsk oblast are still high because of the presence of NGCAs and active ground conflict. Donetsk is the oblast with the second-highest number of reported mine incidents among oblasts along the frontline and had the highest number (37%) of newly recorded damage to civilian infrastructure between September–October throughout Ukraine.

Mykolaiv

Mykolaiv oblast has lower access constraints than the other oblasts along the frontlines as only a small part remains under the control of Russian forces. That said, shelling and air strikes continue to hamper the free movement of civilians and humanitarians, drive additional displacement, and impede the delivery of services, particularly water.

International organisations and government workers centre their operations in Mykolaiv city, while local volunteers are the ones who travel to remote areas and locations more exposed to conflict and shelling. Military checkpoints restrict mobility, especially nearer communities along the frontlines.

Kharkiv

Humanitarian access in Kharkiv has improved since the Government of Ukraine regained control of most of the oblast.  Kharkiv is the oblast with the highest number of access events involving mines in the country, affecting civilian movement, humanitarian operations in newly accessible areas, and the pace of reconstruction. when access was initially restored in Kharkiv oblast, it was only possible in localities along main tarmac roads. Villages and smaller settlements in northeast areas remained very difficult to access.

Active ground conflict prevents the repair of infrastructure and restoration of services in areas closer to the frontlines, where the population continue to live in basements or other shelters given the risk of shelling. People exit their shelters to access aid from distribution points, but to do so, they expose themselves to harm from shelling. 

Key factors in accessing humanitarian aid

• Funding: a lack of money was among the reported factors limiting the operation of Ukrainian NGOs and volunteer groups.

• Local response capacity continues to be strained as volunteers and local staff increasingly become physically and mentally exhausted. Several local responders have reported staffing shortages.

• Population in remote areas: access to services for the population in remote areas continues to be a concern, even in oblasts not experiencing active ground conflict. IDPs in remote areas need to reach urban centres to address administrative problems.

• People Access to information: there continues to be a lack of a centralised information source for people in need of assistance in more remote areas are also more likely to experience gaps in service delivery.

• Security protocols: the escalation in air strikes across the country has led to some local responders integrating additional security protocols in their decision-making. These measures keep their staff and supplies safer but uneven responses.

Details are available in the full report.

Source: https://www.acaps.org/country/ukraine/crisis/conflict 

IOM released results of the 11th round of the General Population Survey of the Ukraine Displacement Report.

As of December 5th, IOM estimates 5.9M IDPs are displaced across Ukraine. This represents a slight decrease compared to 6.5M as of the end of October. Among these, 680,000 have been newly displaced within the last 30 days, however. Most of these new displacement movements took place from locations in the East (43%) and South (25%).

As temperatures in Ukraine reach -10 degrees Celsius, and despite the attacks, which are knocking out power supply and heating systems, data collected show that only 7% are currently considering to leave their location nation-wide. Even in case of prolonged cuts to all key utilities without a timeline for repair, the majority (two out of three Ukrainians) say they would not leave their homes.

At the same time, private resources for survival are becoming scarce, as 43 per cent of all households in Ukraine have completely exhausted their savings. To reduce costs, 63 per cent of respondents have reported that they are rationing their use of gas, electricity, and solid fuel.

Across Ukraine, est. 785,000 IDPs currently plan to integrate in their current location. The largest proportion of IDPs seeking local integration reside in the East (eqv. to 206,000) and West (eqv. to 201,000). Regardless of their ultimate durable solutions preferences, two thirds of IDPs nation-wide anticipate needing to remain in their current location for at least 6 additional months at time of survey. Among IDPs who hope to integrate in their current location, 44 per cent express the need for integration support.

Sources: https://data.humdata.org/visualization/ukraine-humanitarian-operations/?layer=conflict_events 

IOM Internal Displacement Report — General Population Survey Round 11 (25 November - 5 December 2022)

Source: OHCHR Civilian casualties as of 11 December 2022