Russia Takes Presidency of United Nations Security Council

Ukraine President Zelenskyy after speaking with UN leaders in March. Photo Sergei Supinsky, AFP/France24.

On April 1, the Russian Federation took hold of the presidency over the United Nations (UN) Security Council. The leadership of the UN Security Council rotates between member states, of which Russia is also a permanent member, based on the alphabetical order of members’ names in English. This comes at a time when Russia is still involved in its year-old assault on Ukraine, turning what would normally be a standard procedure into an event heralded by raised calls for Security Council reform, as well as questions about the competence and integrity of the UN.

Ukraine’s leadership, along with those of several other Eastern and Central European countries, have been some of the most vocal critics of the UN. In a speech on Saturday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy addressed Russia’s assumption of the role, calling the news “absurd and destructive.” Pointing out the contradiction that Russia was allowed to chair the Security Council while denying Ukraine’s security, he added “It's hard to imagine anything that proves more the total bankruptcy of such institutions.” Zelenskyy’s opinion appears to be the consensus among the Ukrainian government. Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba called it “the world’s worst April Fool’s Joke.” 

Jan Lipavský, the Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic, tweeted Sunday of his support for a UN Security Council reform and warned that Russia “violates the UN Charter and threatens the security of the whole world with its barbaric behavior.”

Calls for reforming the UN Security Council have occurred for decades. One of the most prominent sources of criticism involves the hierarchical status of its members. Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and China are permanent members—other countries may serve for up to two years at a time—and each have the power to unilaterally veto any resolution. 

In November the UN held debates on reform which allowed other countries to voice their grievances over the veto issue, as well as the lack of equal representation from different regions or development-statuses. Russia’s contradiction—a country whose actions in Ukraine and elsewhere violate the fundamental goals of the institution which gives it power—was a key example for those calling for reform.

The UN headquarters building is located in New York. Photo: Haiyun Jiang/NYT.

The UN, as well as the Security Council, were created in the aftermath of the Second World War by the major players among the Allies, basing its leadership structure on the power dynamics of the 1940s. The purpose of the international organization was to avoid similar conflicts in the future. But for the leaders of many UN member states, the security challenges of the present day are of a different nature, and the old structure is too outdated to ensure international peace going forward. 

Russia’s war in Ukraine may be a prime example. Indeed, the Security Council is responsible for handling specific conflicts and deploying peacekeeping missions. Despite clear support from the General Assembly and the Secretary-General, the players with power are in a gridlock when it comes to Ukraine. They appear likely to stay in this gridlock until either the Security Council is reformed, or the war ends without the involvement of the UN.