United Nations: Speech by High Representative Kaja Kallas at the annual UN Security Council session on EU-UN cooperation

PRINT

United Nations: Speech by High Representative Kaja Kallas at the annual UN Security Council session on EU-UN cooperation

13.04.2026 EEAS Press Team

Mister President, Excellencies,

It is an honour to address the UN Security Council again. I would like to thank Bahrain for convening this meeting. I wish you the best for your Presidency.

Every year, the Security Council reviews the European Union's partnership with the United Nations on peace and security.

This is fitting, even if we only look at the financial metrics:

• The EU and our Member States provide 42% of Official Development Assistance but make up only 5% of the global population;
• Our Member States finance a quarter of the UN's regular budget;
• We pay in full and on time.

But the EU has never considered our support for the United Nations purely on how much we spend.

We have been active on peace building. Think about the European Union's missions, some of them like operation IRINI under a direct UN mandate, others in cooperation with the UN, are providing concrete EU support to peace building.

Through Operation ASPIDES we are protecting freedom of navigation in the Red Sea. And we have for years been the singular biggest supporter of peace and security in Somalia through our contributions to UN and African Union peacekeeping efforts.

And as the main donor to the Palestinian Authority and its reform process, also the leading humanitarian donor in Gaza, and our operational commitments through EUBAM Rafah and EUPOL COPPS missions, we are actively promoting the two-state solution and the implementation of the Gaza Peace Plan.

We do all this in support of the United Nations because it is the only international system that stands for peace, represents the global collective interest, and protects international law.

Today we are witnessing the gravest violation and breakdown of international law since Second World War. As a result, peace and security are in demise. This is why the EU's support for the UN now is more vital than ever.

Excellencies,

The breakdown of international law is evident in today's two preeminent global crises - Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine and the war in the Middle East.

Russia is executing one of the most outrageous breaches of international law in United Nations history, by invading a sovereign country and turning its back on its obligations as a Permanent Member of UN Security Council.

The war in the Middle East has caused immense instability and cost far too many lives. It is no longer regional or simply about the security in the region. Its effects ripple worldwide.

Citizens from Europe to Asia are suffering from higher energy prices. Farmers from Africa to South America are facing fertiliser shortages. And the crisis is accelerating structural vulnerabilities in the global system: concentrated energy dependencies, fragile trade corridors, and the asymmetric exposure of emerging economies.

Excellencies,

Russia is also supporting Iran with intelligence and drones. Prolonging the war benefits Russia through higher energy prices, depleted air defence arsenals and diverted attention.

I just returned from my visit to the Gulf region. Their roads, airports, hotels, energy infrastructure, and other civilian infrastructure have been hit by the same tools that wreak havoc in Ukraine.

Together, the crises in Europe and the Middle East represent the clearest sign yet of an abandonment of the old rules, including the UN Charter. A new world is now in the making, characterised by competition and coercive power politics; a world order dominated by a handful of military powers who aim to establish spheres of influence.

How the world responds to this moment says less about the new emerging order than it does about us. Because we have been here before.

We are hearing a lot about multipolarity today. But let's be clear: multipolarity, unrestrained by the UN Charter or international law, multipolarity, guided only by spheres of influence, has never been peaceful, stable, nor conducive to global security and evenly distributed economic development. Ultimately it always ends in devastation.

In the aftermath of the First World War, the world decided to try something different: multilateralism instead of multipolarity. A League of Nations was born.

After the Second World War, important lessons were learnt. We recommitted to multilateralism with an understanding that the international system had to evolve as the world did. It had to have buy-in and legitimacy to work.

Today it seems we are forgetting these lessons and what it takes to make the system work.

Some even question the very utility of multilateralism as an organising principle of international relations.

You will never see Europe taking that path. In fact, the history of the European Union has followed a similar trajectory to the development of the international order. Europe will always choose cooperation over coercion.

Just like the current international order, the European Union is plagued by imperfection. But that does not mean we stop trying to do better.

That is why, when it comes to the international order, Europe can be part of the solution. And this is why, when countries seek reliable, principled partners to bolster alliances, defend international law and move multilateralism forward, increasingly they turn to the European Union. I hear this every single time I meet with foreign leaders.

Excellencies,

International cooperation based on the UN Charter benefits citizens everywhere in the world. That is also why despite its many challenges, the decline in multilateralism has actually put it back on the table: this is today's paradox. Even if the biggest military powers are losing interest everyone else isn't.

The question now is how to transform the ailing multilateral system into one that works for all?

The European Union shares the belief that the United Nations must address the need to prevent wars. For that, we need to be clear about the role of the UN.

Firstly, international law sets legal parameters for the use of force by states, and they could not be clearer: only for self-defence or with a mandate from the Security Council. Rules are being broken today with impunity.

And secondly, conflict prevention is as much about upholding international rights, rules and norms, as it is about addressing root causes of conflict: poverty, inequality, climate change, the lack of transitional justice, to name just a few. The UN works to make a concrete, tangible difference in peoples' lives where countries cannot do it alone. Both strands must remain central to the UN's work.

As the EU has learned through its own history, practical, incremental steps eventually lead to transformative change.

We can and should move forward:

• on specific topics
• in making the rules stick
• and on improving processes.

On specific topics, I bring you two examples.

First, peace mediation, peace building and peace keeping.

There have been many criticisms against the United Nations including the Security Council for failing to resolve conflicts. The record use of the veto in 2024, for example, suggests, that this body struggles to address conflicts as they arise.

On one hand, if the Security Council was functioning as it should, we would not be where we are today. On the other hand, it is a chance for the UN to step up and show that it can deliver. More conflict also requires more mediation. There is already so much we know about what works and what doesn't. The United Nations should oversee a revival of best practices.

For example:

• We know that dialogue led by local communities, minorities and young people makes peace stick.
• We know that including women in negotiations vastly increases the chance of lasting peace
• We also know that involving multilateral structures-the UN-helps overcome national interests.

These principles are not being consistently applied in mediation efforts today, but they must be if the goal is durable peace.

Peacekeeping remains crucial where mediation fails and always requires the broadest international support possible. Since 1948, UN peacekeepers from over 120 countries have protected civilians and saved lives. I am proud to say our Member States are currently the largest collective financial contributor to the UN peacekeeping budget.

The EU is looking at how we can engage further ourselves. Take Lebanon for example, where we are exploring how we could better support the Lebanese Armed Forces, also to complement the UN's presence and the important bilateral efforts by several countries. But the war has to end as soon as possible.

My second example is maritime security.

Our collective security, safety and prosperity are totally intertwined with what happens at sea. Maritime security underpins global communications, energy supply and economic development.

Yet, this domain has become increasingly contested. Whether we are talking about the Baltic, North or Red seas, the numerous straits or the Indo-Pacific, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea/UNCLOS is being undermined deliberately.

International cooperation at sea has not evolved at the same rate as the threats in this domain. We must catch up.

What is happening today in the Strait of Hormuz is the clearest call yet for a strong international coalition on maritime security.

There are many initiatives on the table, but the objectives are simple: safe passage for all shipments via this route. Let me be clear, the EU will continue to reject any arrangement that rules to limit free and safe passage though the straits, in accordance with international law.

I have just returned from a visit to the Middle East. It is clear that a fragile truce hangs in the balance, but it offers a much-needed opportunity to negotiate. The European Union will continue to contribute to all diplomatic efforts to prevent the region from sliding into further chaos. We commend Pakistan for the facilitation of the talks and encourage parties to continue.

Excellencies,

Protecting freedom of navigation is not the only challenge today. Submarine cables and pipelines area already targets for sabotage.

For this reason, we should step up work towards a new multilateral agreement to establish legal certainty and develop the tools to address these threats. When we know what works, we should replicate the successes elsewhere.

Excellencies,

If we pledge to the founding principles of the United Nations, including the UN Charter, and envisage growing the body of international law, then we must agree on how to make the rules stick.

To make the rules stick we must strengthen accountability. International law is only as effective as we are willing to make it.

The need for accountability is why we are helping set up a Tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine. Without the crime of aggression, which is the leadership crime, there would not be any war crimes either. Without leadership accountability, war crimes will persist.

The Security Council bears a special responsibility for making the rules stick, because there can be no security in a world of impunity. This is why I salute the initiatives to curb veto abuse, such as:

• The initiative introduced by Liechtenstein to trigger a General Assembly debate when the veto is used;
• And also the French and Mexican initiative to curtail the use of the veto in the case of atrocity crimes.

When this body fails to deliver on its responsibility for peace and security, we should consider reverting the question to the General Assembly.

Finally on process: our collaboration does not need to be confined to what we have gotten used to over 80 years. Let's think outside the box on how we approach:

• bilateral partnerships,
• alliances,
• regional organisations,
• coalitions of the willing,
• minilateral,
• or plurilateral arrangements.

For instance, we could convene regional organisations around a specific theme of interest. We could think of multilateral partnerships based on particular issues. We could include other stakeholders more systematically, such as business, in tackling common challenges.

All of these are complementary to the multilateral, rules-based order that most states want. None must undermine it. Every iteration should be in line with UN principles or else we risk a United Nations in name only.

If we do more of this, cross regionally and with a critical mass, we could strengthen the system as a whole.

President, Excellencies,

If the first success of the United Nations was its capacity to evolve as the world community did, this is no longer the case.

From the modest representation for rising economies in the Security Council to the role of the General Assembly in holding the most powerful to account, the to-do list is long. Without fairness, there is no hope to make it work again.

But we do remain hopeful. The EU continues to be a firm believer in the United Nations and its capacity for change.

The EU has its own long experience reforming, adjusting and transforming itself. We know that doing so is not a one-shot project. It involves listening, negotiation, political compromises and a healthy dose of humility. We also know what its worth.

Excellencies,

One hundred years from now, historians will look back at this moment and they will ask: What did the United Nations do when the rules-based order was under threat?

Did we cling to the past, defending a system that no longer worked for the many? Or did we have the courage to reform it-to make it stronger, fairer, and more resilient?

Did we stand by as the ruthless rewrote the rules? Or did we stand together and say: No. The law applies to all.

Did we resign ourselves to a world of spheres of influence, where might makes right? Or did we choose cooperation over coercion, justice over impunity, and peace over war?

The answer is in our hands.

As members of this Council, you are entrusted with a responsibility to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. That was the promise of 1945. It must be our mission today.

Let us be the generation that built a stronger, fairer order, one fit for the challenges ahead.

The time of action is now.

Thank you very much.