UN Re-Emerges As a Rubber Stamp

Since last January, when the President of a permanent member of the UN trampled over every principle of the UN Charter such as sovereign equality, territorial integrity and non-interference in internal affairs of member states, the UN retreated into oblivion. Wars raged, ceasefires were declared and high- level negotiations were held far from the UN premises and the UN Secretary General was not to be found anywhere. He was declared persona non grata by only one state, but the other 192 states did not look for him to bring a dangerous situation to the attention of the UN Security Council.

President Donald Trump asserted more than ever before that he would make America great again by rearranging the globe according to his own blurred vision and there was no challenge. He tried to fulfil his promise to end all wars by annexing territories, declaring President Zelensky a modestly successful comedian and a dictator. In three weeks, he turned US-Russia relations topsy turvy after decades and made a hero of the aggressor and made the victim, who was supported by the US and Europe to prevent Russia from occupying Ukrainian territory and steal its resources into a clown. The world had never seen such a transformation at such short notice.

Still, no one called for a meeting of the UN Security Council, nor did the UN Secretary General engage in preventive diplomacy. Suddenly on February 24, 2025, the US presented a draft resolution in the Security Council on the occasion of the third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine that takes a neutral position on the conflict as President Trump wishes to end the war swiftly.  It received 10 votes in favour, while the remaining five members, including France and Britain abstained.

The short resolution mourns the loss of life in the “Russia-Ukraine conflict”, reiterates the UN’s purpose is to maintain international peace and security and peacefully settle disputes, and urges a swift end to the conflict and a lasting peace.

“This resolution puts us on the path to peace. It is a first step, but a crucial one, one of which we should all be proud. Now we must use it to build a peaceful future for Ukraine, Russia and the international community,” acting US Ambassador to the UN, Dorothy Shea, told the Council.

Earlier, the UN General Assembly rejected a US-drafted resolution, which was amended to state that the conflict stemmed from a “full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation.”

The General Assembly also adopted a European-backed Ukrainian resolution demanding the immediate withdrawal of Russian troops and condemning Moscow’s aggression as a violation of the UN Charter.

In a striking shift under President Donald Trump, the United States voted with Russia against a European resolution on Ukraine. The final vote stood at 93-18, with 65 abstentions–signalling a decline in support for Ukraine, as previous assembly votes had seen over 140 nations condemn Russia’s actions and call for an immediate withdrawal.

India abstained from voting on this resolution.

The Assembly then considered the US resolution, which acknowledged “the tragic loss of life throughout the Russia-Ukraine conflict” and called for a swift end to hostilities and a lasting peace. However, it notably omitted any reference to Moscow’s aggression.

In an unexpected move, France proposed three amendments, backed by multiple European nations, explicitly stating that the war resulted from Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. These amendments reaffirmed the Assembly’s support for Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence, unity, and territorial integrity while calling for peace in line with the UN Charter. Russia also introduced an amendment urging consideration of the “root causes” of the conflict.

All the amendments were approved, and the resolution was ultimately adopted with a vote of 93-8, with 73 abstentions. Ukraine voted in favour, the US abstained, and Russia opposed it.

The UN resolutions came amid rising tensions between the US and Ukraine after Trump unexpectedly launched negotiations with Russia to hasten a resolution to the conflict, leaving European leaders and Ukraine excluded from last week’s preliminary talks held in Riyadh.

The fact that all the parties felt that the matter should be brought before the UN even after deals were made and labels were exchanged between the aggressor and the victim established that international security is the responsibility of the UN and its blessings were necessary to provide legitimacy to the decisions. But the UN did nothing to shape the new world order dictated by Washington. If the primacy of the US was not established beforehand, the different positions taken by most member states would have been different and a couple of vetoes would have stopped the Security Council resolution from going forward. The re-emergence of the UN even as a rubber stamp is seen as a welcome development.

The future of the UN still hangs on a slender thread as the US boycott of WHO may prove infectious ad gobble up the UN itself. The crises of the 21^st century like 9/11, the economic meltdown, Covid 19, Ukraine and Gaza were dealt with outside the UN basically because of the fundamental flaw of the UN, the veto. Instead of reformed multilateralism, we are increasingly relying on bilateralism and even unilateralism. Even during the Cold War, it was possible for the UN to find formulae for peace even if they were not implemented. The traditional UN role of setting of standards to identify aberrations and to deal with them had a certain moral impact on the behaviour of nations. Setting aside diplomatic norms and seeking approval in the end will destroy the very fundamentals of the UN. It is often forgotten that the logic of the veto given to the winners of the war did not mean that it was a trophy, but a responsibility to keep the peace. But once the permanent members begin to use the veto to shield themselves against their own evil deeds, the whole rationale of the veto will be lost and the UN will become a rubber stamp at best.

Donald TrumpRussia-Ukraine conflictUnited NationsUNSCveto powerWeb ExclusiveWHO