Baltic leaders blast UN Security Council as powerless with Russia veto
Estonia and Lithuania urge reform as Moscow uses its veto and incursions near NATO territory test alliance unity, amid questions about the UN’s credibility on security.
Baltic foreign ministers on Thursday condemned the United Nations Security Council as powerless to respond to Russia’s aggression, saying Moscow uses its permanent seat and veto power to shield itself from accountability while waging war in Ukraine and probing NATO defenses at Europe’s doorstep. The remarks came as Tallinn and Vilnius pressed for major reforms to the body and argued that the UN’s 80-year milestone should be accompanied by a credible mechanism to deter aggression.
In interviews with Fox News Digital, Estonia’s Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna and Lithuania’s Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys urged a reset of the UN’s functioning framework and described the council’s 80th anniversary as hollow without a demonstration of ability to deliver accountability. The conversations followed an emergency meeting of the Security Council addressing the recent incursions into NATO airspace and the broader challenge of Russian assertiveness near European borders. Over the past week, three Russian MiG jets equipped with missiles flew into Estonian airspace for about 12 minutes, coming within roughly 15 miles of the parliament building. In the week prior, 19 Russian drones crossed into Polish airspace. The council did not vote on a resolution to condemn the incursions, because Russia would veto any binding action. The discussions underscored long-standing frustrations among Western allies about the council’s deadlock on Ukraine and related provocations.
Tsahkna said he was skeptical that reform would come soon, noting that the council’s tools depend on consensus or the absence of a veto by any permanent member. He pointed to Russia’s behavior as evidence that the Security Council is unable to deter or punish aggression, and he argued for expanding NATO’s presence and capabilities in the Baltic region as part of a broader defense strategy. Budrys echoed the view that the UN’s credibility has eroded, arguing that without credible deterrence, the institution loses its purpose and legitimacy. The Lithuanian minister also called for turning Baltic air policing into a true air defense system with clearer engagement rules and more NATO troops and capabilities, while stressing that what happens in Europe could set a precedent for other regions if unchecked.
Russia’s representatives at the UN dismissed the reports of the incursions as groundless, framing Western assertions as “Russophobic hysteria” coming from Tallinn. Dmitry Polyanskiy, Russia’s First Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations, argued that the charges lacked proof. Still, the Security Council’s stalemate persisted, illustrating the most persistent challenge to UN action: a permanent member of the council being the party accused of aggression.
This dynamic has left nations seeking recourse in the UN General Assembly, where resolutions can carry political weight but are not legally binding. Analysts say that, while the General Assembly can condemn actions and express political support, it cannot compel state behavior in the same way that a Security Council resolution can. The discussions also highlighted how Russia’s behavior—ranging from drone incursions near NATO members to more aggressive rhetoric—has become a litmus test for Western unity and deterrence.
Budrys warned that Russia’s moves are part of a deliberate campaign to test the alliance’s unity and resolve. He called for stronger rules of engagement and a more assertive posture in the Baltic region, underscoring that the issue is not only about the frontline states but about global security architecture. “If Russia can change borders by force without consequence in Europe, it will set a dangerous precedent,” he said. Tsahkna added that while allied solidarity at the UN is meaningful, action is required to match the rhetoric of unity, especially as Moscow demonstrates willingness to push the envelope when faced with limited responses.
This episode reflects a broader debate about how European security should be structured in the face of a revisionist Russia. The Security Council’s paralysis—born from the veto power of its five permanent members, including Russia—has prompted calls for reforms and alternative approaches to deter and punish aggression. Observers say that any meaningful reform would require consensus among the council’s long-standing members, a high threshold given current geopolitical fault lines. In the interim, NATO’s deterrence posture, allied defense commitments, and regional readiness in the Baltic states appear to be the primary channels through which there is any immediate impact on European security.
The Baltic ministers stressed that solidarity among allies remains strong, but they argued that credible action is essential to translate that solidarity into policy and protection for member states and partners. They emphasized that the world will be watching how the Security Council responds to Russia’s moves, and that inaction would be interpreted as tacit approval of border changes by force.
As the war in Ukraine enters its second year and Russia continues to push at Europe’s perimeters, the Baltic leaders’ remarks signal a broader demand for robust and credible international mechanisms to deter aggression, uphold sovereignty, and preserve the security architecture that has underpinned European stability since the end of World War II.
