Ukraine has pushed the United Nations Security Council to convene an emergency meeting on Monday, 12 January, after Russia’s latest mass aerial attack, which included the reported use of an “Oreshnik” intermediate-range ballistic missile against targets in western Ukraine.
Ukraine’s foreign minister, Andrii Sybiha, said the meeting would address what he described as Russia’s “flagrant violations” of the UN Charter. Sybiha called on Council members to show unity in demanding an end to the aggression, protection of civilians and continued support for Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Ukraine’s request was supported by six Security Council members: France, Latvia, Denmark, Greece, Liberia and the United Kingdom. As with previous Council sessions on Ukraine, the diplomatic value lies less in the prospect of binding action—Russia holds a veto—than in framing the strike pattern as an issue of international peace and security.
The immediate trigger was the overnight assault of 9 January. Ukraine’s air force said Russia attacked with 278 aerial means: 36 missiles and 242 drones of different types. Ukrainian officials said Russia fired one intermediate-range ballistic missile from the Kapustin Yar test range in Russia’s Astrakhan region.
Sybiha said the Oreshnik strike hit the Lviv region close to EU and NATO borders and presented it as a direct concern for European security. The geography matters: Lviv oblast borders Poland, placing a high-end missile demonstration close to NATO territory and increasing political sensitivity in European capitals.
Oreshnik’s use was as much political as military. Russia presented the launch as retaliation for an alleged Ukrainian attempt to strike one of President Vladimir Putin’s residences on 29 December—an allegation denied by Ukraine and rejected by US officials.
Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) has published images of fragments recovered in Lviv oblast and said preliminary analysis indicated components consistent with the Oreshnik system.
Valeriy Chaly, former Ukrainian ambassador to Washington (2015–2019) and now head of the board of the Ukrainian Crisis Media Centre, has argued in broadcast commentary that the principal audience for Oreshnik is Europe rather than Ukraine: an attempt to remind European governments that intermediate-range systems compress warning times and are designed to be nuclear-capable. In his assessment, conventional use over Ukraine is primarily demonstrative.
The arms-control backdrop strengthens that reading. The INF Treaty, which banned ground-launched missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometres, collapsed after years of disputes over Russian compliance; NATO issued statements in 2019 backing the US withdrawal and attributing responsibility to Russia. The Oreshnik episode brings those range categories back into the European political conversation during an active war.
Diplomacy is also being shaped by the imminent expiry of New START on 5 February 2026, the last remaining US–Russia strategic nuclear arms treaty. Reuters has reported renewed debate in Washington over whether to let the treaty lapse and what a successor framework—if any—might look like. With verification already degraded in recent years, the prospect of expiry without replacement adds uncertainty to crisis management at a time when Russia is conducting explicit long-range signalling.
Against this, Kyiv is seeking to prevent the Oreshnik episode from becoming leverage for a ceasefire on Russian terms. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has called for a “clear reaction” from the international community, particularly the United States, after the strike wave. For Ukraine, the practical priorities remain air and missile defence, sustained ammunition supply, and continued sanctions enforcement, rather than a pause that leaves Russia’s strike capacity intact.
The negotiation environment is further complicated by US–Russia friction outside Europe. In the past week US forces seized a Venezuela-linked, Russian-flagged oil tanker after a pursuit across the Atlantic as part of Washington’s effort to block Venezuelan oil exports.
Venezuela is exploring steps to restore diplomatic ties with the United States after the US capture of Nicolás Maduro, alongside new White House measures affecting Venezuelan oil revenue held in US accounts.
Whatever their separate logic, these developments tighten the link between sanctions enforcement, maritime risk and Russia’s wider confrontation with Washington—factors that feed into how Moscow and the West calibrate pressure and negotiation.
Monday’s Security Council session will not stop the strikes. It will, however, test whether Russia’s use of an intermediate-range missile near Europe’s border accelerates decisions on air defence and deterrence, and whether it narrows the political space for ceasefire diplomacy in the weeks before New START expires.
