![unsc point of no return unsc point of no return](https://static.euronews.com/articles/wires/753/09/7530900/1440x810_r4kof5.jpg)
Lavrov often contrasts this law with an alternative that he maintains the West is promoting to expand Western interests and values in a 2018 address, for example, he charged: “Today we can trace a tendency to substitute for international law, as we all know it, some kind of ‘rules-based order.’ That is what a series of our creative Western friends call it.” 2 In speech after speech, both Putin and Lavrov have stressed the importance of upholding international law. In analyzing how Russia goes about promoting its status as a global power at the UN, the concept of international law stands out as Russia’s most important battle line. Russian diplomats are noted for their abilities in drafting highly technical UN documents in English-none more so than Sergey Lavrov, currently Russia’s foreign minister and formerly its permanent representative to the UN from 1994 to 2004. It traditionally cultivates extensive expertise among its mission members, appointing them to UN postings several times over their careers and leaving them in place for long periods. Russia, like the Soviet Union before it, devotes great resources to its missions at the UN, especially New York and Geneva. The concepts underlying Russia’s use of the UN to promote its aspirations form the subject of this paper. Russia’s status as a permanent member of the UN Security Council boosts its claim to be part of a global oligarchy and grants it the power to veto or undermine initiatives that it deems contrary to its interests. 1 The United Nations (UN) is Russia’s most important venue for putting its global aspirations and achievements on display. The central task for Russian foreign policy in the era of President Vladimir Putin has been to regain the undisputed recognition that Russia is a world power like the Soviet Union before it, a status to which Russia feels entitled. Neutral powers that share democratic values are best placed to defend against the legitimation of autocratic governance. The rejection of all external norms has led to the breakdown of the modus vivendi at the UN since the days of the Korean War: deferring issues involving great power interests while engaging elsewhere in peacekeeping, mediation, and humanitarian relief. This concept echoes Russian domestic preoccupations in the era of color revolutions, the Arab Spring, and domestic unrest. In Russian practice, the legitimacy of recognized governments is absolute regardless of their origins, governance, human rights record, or any other external norm. Russia’s defense of Syria demonstrates another concept that flows from sovereignty: legitimacy. Philip Remler is a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. As an example of the former, consider the lengths to which Russia has gone to protect Syria’s use of armed force against its own population, whereas the sovereignty of former Soviet states such as Azerbaijan, Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine must be negotiated. The territory of true sovereigns and those states under Russian protection is sacrosanct and can be defended by force for the others, it is impermissible to regain territory that is “in dispute” by force. The concept of a multipolar oligarchy leads to the Russian concept that true sovereignty is possessed by only a few great powers the sovereignty of states it views as dependent on great powers is limited. At the UN, this plays out among the permanent members of the UNSC as an alliance with China against Western interests. A second concept, multipolarity, asserts that an oligarchic group of states must take collective action on the basis of equality and consensus. This division enables Russia to reject on principle commitments regarding human rights and democratic governance. Russia’s participation in the UN is governed by an interlocking series of concepts, starting with Russia’s definition of international law, narrowly based on the UN Charter and Security Council resolutions, as opposed to a “rules-based order” that Russia defines as expansive and promoting the interests of Western powers. The United Nations (UN) is a positive platform for this aspiration, as Russia, with its UN Security Council (UNSC) veto power, is a privileged member of what it sees as a concert of world powers. The central task for Russian foreign policy in the era of President Vladimir Putin has been to regain recognition that Russia is a world power like the Soviet Union before it.