Can Russia Be Expelled from the UN?

Illegitimate Membership: A Legal Analysis

Under Article 23 of the UN Charter, the status of permanent member of the Security Council with veto power is explicitly assigned to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics — a geopolitical entity that officially ceased to exist as a subject of international law at the end of 1991. When the USSR dissolved, it left behind not one “successor” but fifteen sovereign republics. The historical experience of the dissolution of other federal states — such as the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia — demonstrates the only correct legal algorithm: after the disappearance of the parent state, the newly formed countries must re-apply for membership. This process involves review by the Security Council and mandatory confirmation of status through a vote in the General Assembly.

Instead, the Russian Federation in 1991 chose the path of unprecedented diplomatic manipulation. The entire process of Russia’s “accession” amounted to nothing more than Boris Yeltsin’s letter of December 24, in which Moscow unilaterally declared itself the continuator state of the USSR. The world, in shock from the collapse of a nuclear superpower, silently accepted this, allowing Russia to substitute itself for the will of the international community. As a result, Russia became the only country on the Security Council that did not undergo legitimization through a vote and — most importantly — never ratified the current UN Charter as a new sovereign subject.

Since Russia does not fall under any of the legitimate scenarios — neither the status of a formally recognized successor by all republics (as Ukraine and Georgia never consented to Moscow’s sole dominance in the Security Council), nor the procedure of a new application — its presence in the Security Council chamber casts doubt on the legality of every decision and every veto it has imposed over the past three decades. This is a systemic error in the code of global security that has led to the complete impotence of the UN in protecting state sovereignty.

Ukraine as a Technological and Diplomatic Actor

Continuing this analysis, it is worth noting how Ukraine today is building its own foundation of influence — one that in some ways resembles the strategy of the People’s Republic of China, but rests on qualitatively different foundations. While China for decades invested in the infrastructure and logistics of Global South countries, effectively “buying” votes for future decisions in the General Assembly, Ukraine offers the world a unique and scarce commodity: technological security. Modern Ukrainian weaponry, forged under the pressure of high-intensity warfare, demonstrates unprecedented effectiveness at relatively low cost. This makes Ukraine an attractive partner for new markets seeking effective solutions.

One telling indicator in this context is a recent comment by the CEO of one of Germany’s leading defense companies, who dismissively compared Ukrainian production to the work of “housewives.” Despite its condescending tone, this statement is actually evidence of deep anxiety among Western defense giants. When traditional corporations resort to such rhetoric, it signals only one thing: Ukraine’s defense-industrial complex has ceased to be a “volunteer solution” and has become a genuine threat to their commercial monopoly. Ukraine’s ability to instantly adapt technologies to frontline needs creates competition that the old world turned out to be wholly unprepared for.

Winning the favor of Middle Eastern and African nations through defense and technological cooperation is already transforming Ukraine’s diplomatic capital. Direct contracts and joint weapons production create a network of pragmatic interests in which the voices of these countries grow increasingly aligned with Ukraine’s. In the long term, it is precisely this military-technological weight that will become the decisive instrument for stripping Russia of its illegitimate seat. A world that depends on Ukrainian innovation and security solutions will be far more inclined to support legal changes in the Security Council.

Strategic Agency: Grain, “Diia,” Energy

This interplay between economic necessity and political influence forms the foundation of a new strategy of Ukrainian agency. Ukraine is transforming into a critically important node of global stability — in food security, energy, and digital governance. The role of grain exporter to African nations, reinforced by the “Grain from Ukraine” initiative, has given Ukraine the reputation of guarantor of survival for entire regions. This creates a direct dependency of those governments on the stability of our agricultural sector — a powerful argument in diplomatic negotiations within the UN.

An analogous process is unfolding in the sphere of digitalization. Exporting the experience of the “Diia” application to Estonia, Colombia, and Zambia creates an intellectual dependency on Ukrainian governance standards. When a state builds its digital skeleton on Ukrainian code, it becomes part of our ecosystem. This strips Ukraine of the image of “victim” and replaces it with that of “innovation donor.” Moreover, the energy sector adds strategic weight: Europe’s largest underground gas storage facilities and the status of nuclear energy exporter to Poland, Moldova, and Romania in 2026 make our neighbors direct beneficiaries of our territorial integrity.

The Collapse of Russian Legitimacy and the Chinese Challenge

In parallel, the Russian Federation is dismantling its own legitimacy with its own hands. The aggressive rhetoric of Nebenzya and Lavrov, described in the EU as “historical revisionism,” has definitively discredited Russian diplomacy. Terrorist acts at sea and the blockade of trade routes force even neutral players to distance themselves from the Kremlin. The collapse of Russian influence in Africa — where the withdrawal of “Wagner” is accompanied by uprisings — has exposed Moscow’s weakness. Meanwhile, Middle Eastern countries are increasingly signing security agreements with Kyiv, viewing Ukraine as a genuine guarantor of stability. This alignment of sides is preparing the ground for Russia’s legal removal from the UN as an anachronism that obstructs the rule of law.

Stripping Russia of its seat on the UN Security Council is a step necessary for the resuscitation of the entire international system. It is precisely the abuse of the veto that transformed the organization into a platform for hollow expressions of sympathy. Recognizing Russia as an illegitimate member would nullify its right to block resolutions, opening a path to effective justice. Yet we must understand that the struggle against Russia is only the first stage in the face of a far more sweeping crisis. Russia is rapidly losing sovereignty, becoming a resource appendage of Beijing. Closed-door meetings in the Kremlin already sound alarms over total dependence on China, but Moscow no longer has a way back.

This is where the primary challenge of the future emerges. China masterfully diverts the world’s attention toward crises in Europe or the Strait of Hormuz, while simultaneously preparing the ground for the annexation of Taiwan. If Russia in the UN is an obstacle, China in that same seat could become an impenetrable wall. Its veto power is capable of legitimizing any aggression as an “internal matter.” For Ukraine, this scenario is catastrophic. A conflict in the Taiwan Strait would draw Western resources away from our reconstruction, and a semiconductor deficit would collapse our economy.

The Value Choice and UN Reform

The hardest test will be a choice of values. China, which consumes up to 20% of our grain, will inevitably use this leverage as an ultimatum. We will face a choice: revenue or fidelity to principles and support for Taiwan. Any hesitation will destroy the image of moral leader earned through blood, tears, and sweat. We must be prepared to accept reduced agricultural revenue in order to preserve our agency. This is precisely why UN reform and the expulsion of illegitimate Russia are critical right now: we must build mechanisms to restrain aggressors while Russia is weak. Ukraine must act ahead of the curve, recognizing that the security of Taiwan and the security of Kyiv are two sides of the same medal in the struggle for the world we seek: a world where the right of force can never defeat the force of right.

This essay was prepared as part of the student essay competition “Can Russia Be Expelled from the UN?”, organized by the Pylyp Orlyk Foundation. The competition winners were announced in Kyiv.