Russia, With Uganda’s Help, Backs UN Resolution Calling Unilateral Sanctions Unlawful

Russia and Uganda have collaborated to back a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution that deems unilateral coercive measures illegal, providing Moscow with a new diplomatic stance against sanctions imposed due to its invasion of Ukraine. The resolution, passed with 27 votes to 16 and four abstentions, prolongs the term of the special rapporteur investigating the detrimental human rights consequences of such actions for three years.

Sponsored by Uganda on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement alongside Russia, the resolution highlights how Moscow can wield influence within the UN, beyond the Security Council where it holds a permanent seat and veto power.

The resolution's preamble asserts that unilateral coercive measures contravene international law, international humanitarian law, and the UN Charter. Meanwhile, its operative provisions renew the rapporteur's mandate and request ongoing institutional support. However, the text itself does not challenge the sanctions against Russia nor determine the legality of individual restrictions.

Instead, it maintains a UN framework focused on the adverse human rights effects of these measures, a role Moscow can leverage when challenging economic pressure. This broad language leaves significant distinctions between sanctions unresolved.

For Russia, the resolution's general condemnation offers a broader argument against measures adopted outside the Security Council, where Moscow can block their authorization due to its veto power. While not explicitly stating that only Security Council-sanctioned sanctions are valid, treating council authorization as necessary would make Russia's sanctions dependent on overcoming its own veto. This dual strategy allows Russia to prevent Security Council action while supporting other UN arguments against external pressure.

Moscow's ability to obstruct UN proceedings extends beyond the Security Council, including its role in selecting the UN secretary-general. The process requires a Security Council recommendation backed by at least nine members and free of a veto from any of the five permanent members, giving Russia the power to block a candidate for the next secretary-general.

Moreover, Article 108 of the UN Charter necessitates a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly and ratification by two-thirds of UN members, including all five permanent Security Council members, to amend the charter. Russia can thus obstruct any amendments aimed at diminishing its privileged position.

The supporters of the sanctions resolution exhibit contrasting voting records on Ukraine. Among the 27 countries backing the resolution, 16 also endorsed the General Assembly's 2023 resolution calling for a just peace and Russia's withdrawal, including Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia, Egypt, Kenya, and the UAE. However, 18 abstained, with Burundi and Sudan voting against, while Brazil, Colombia, Kenya, Kuwait, Qatar, the UAE, and Zambia changed their stance from supporting the 2023 text to abstaining in 2025.

These contrasting votes indicate that expressing condemnation of Russian aggression does not automatically lead to support for economic pressure on Moscow.

Despite Russia's influence, independent scrutiny of Russian abuses within Russia continues, as does the special rapporteur's mandate to investigate human rights abuses in Russia. The resolution supports a broader UN mechanism that Moscow can invoke when contesting economic pressure.