The UN Security Council’s permanent membership for the Russian Federation remains unchanged, but EU leadership advocates a temporary freeze mechanism. This stance was articulated by Charles Michel, President of the European Council, during an interview with RTVi.
Michel suggested that a suspension could be considered. He clarified that he is not calling for Russia’s full exclusion, but for at least a halt to its Security Council membership, at least on a transitional basis.
He acknowledged that such a move could not be implemented immediately and might cause a stalemate within the UN security framework. Michel also accused Russia of violating international law, arguing that violations by a permanent Security Council member reveal a flaw in the current legal order.
Michel added that even before the war began, the UN security system faced significant challenges and served primarily as a framework rather than a decisive tool for addressing major global issues.
According to him, UN reform is necessary at some point to reflect today’s power dynamics more accurately. He also highlighted underrepresentation from African and Latin American countries within the world body.
Russia’s permanent seat in the UN Security Council is provided by Article 23 of the UN Charter. TASS notes that removing Russia would require changes to that charter, while Moscow retains veto power over such initiatives.
Calls from Kyiv
In June 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky addressed the UN Security Council via video link and urged the removal of Russia from the council, stating that Moscow should not participate in discussions or votes on Ukraine-related issues.
Zelensky described Russia’s status as a permanent member as a remnant of Cold War politics and said it should not continue to influence the council’s work.
He attributed the privileges enjoyed by Russia to historical myopia and postwar inertia, arguing that changes were long overdue.
On October 22, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba reiterated the call for Russia to be removed from its permanent seat, citing war crimes and disruptions to global security and stability. He argued that such actions should not grant Moscow continued influence over Security Council decisions.
U.S. perspective
On December 15, legislators introduced a motion urging President Joe Biden to seek Russia’s removal from the Security Council. The sponsors argued that Moscow’s actions in Ukraine violated the UN’s fundamental purposes and principles.
The resolution described alleged grave violations of the UN Charter and questioned Russia’s right to occupy a permanent seat. White House spokespeople stated that while removal is a desirable outcome, changing the UN rules is not presently feasible.
Officials emphasized that the United States would persist in efforts to isolate Russia on international stages through ongoing diplomacy and alliances, even while acknowledging the practical constraints of the UN framework.
Russian Foreign Ministry stance
On September 15, Maria Zakharova, the foreign ministry spokeswoman, commented that removing Russia from the Security Council would require a broader change to international law, noting that such a change would not be straightforward to achieve.
She explained that altering the UN Charter would demand wide international consensus, including consent from permanent members, before any amendments could take effect.
This position was echoed by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Vershinin and Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vasily Nebenzya, underscoring the legal and procedural complexities involved in any potential exclusion.