Op-Ed: Saul Anuzis: Why the United Nations must stand firm with Eastern Europe and NATO
Saul Anuzis has a message for the United Nations in his latest op-ed.
The world has entered a new era of great-power state competition, moving away from counterinsurgency and back to traditional warfare. Russia’s continued aggression against Ukraine, China’s widely-cast influence campaigns, and authoritarian regimes across the globe remind us that freedom is fragile.
At the center of this struggle are the nations of Eastern Europe — our NATO allies and partners — who are at the front line in the active defense of democratic values, free markets, and the rule of law.
The United Nations General Assembly has a moral and strategic obligation to remain steadfast in its support of Eastern Europe and NATO. This is not just about Ukraine or Poland or the Baltic States. It is about whether the free world will confront authoritarian expansionism with clarity and resolve or retreat into complacency, which has historically proven itself a vessel for aggressors.
NATO is more than a military alliance; it is the most successful defense pact in history, built on shared democratic values and collective security. The nations of Eastern Europe, many of them once behind the Iron Curtain, made a conscious choice to join NATO because they know the alternative: subjugation by Moscow and instability that reverberates across borders. When NATO is strong, the world is more stable.
The central mission of the alliance, as stated in its principle of collective defense, in Article 5, is to ensure that member nations do not have to respond to acts of aggression independently. It has deterred Russian expansion into the Baltics, strengthened democratic reforms in Central Europe, and reassured allies from the Black Sea to the Arctic Circle that they are not alone.
For the United Nations, supporting NATO is not about picking sides in a regional conflict — it is about upholding the UN Charter itself, especially the core commitments to collective security, international cooperation, and the promotion of peace and stability through adherence to international law it purports to champion. That Charter affirms the right of nations to sovereignty, territorial integrity, and self-defense. NATO’s mission is in perfect alignment with these principles.
The nations of Eastern Europe carry a disproportionate share of the burden in this geopolitical struggle. Lithuania and Latvia guard NATO’s eastern flank, Poland is hosting millions of Ukrainian refugees, and Romania and Bulgaria strengthen Black Sea security. These countries are doing more than their fair share. They invest in defense, they uphold democratic norms, and they serve as a bulwark against authoritarianism.
The General Assembly has repeatedly voted to condemn Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, and those votes matter. They isolate Moscow diplomatically, strengthen the resolve and morale of NATO members, and reassure vulnerable countries that the world has not forgotten them… but words are not enough. Eastern Europe needs consistent political, humanitarian, and economic support from the UN community: coordination on refugee resettlement, ensuring accountability for war crimes, and supporting infrastructure and reconstruction efforts in Ukraine and beyond.
Critics sometimes argue that NATO is a military alliance outside the UN framework, and therefore the General Assembly should remain “neutral.” But neutrality in the face of naked aggression is not impartiality — it is complicity. The UNGA cannot claim to stand for peace while ignoring the brutal reality that Russia’s invasion is the greatest violation of international law in decades.
If the UN fails to support Eastern Europe, it risks rendering itself further irrelevant. What credibility would remain if the institution designed to prevent wars allowed a permanent Security Council member to redraw borders by force without consequence? Supporting NATO and Eastern Europe defends the international order the UN was created to uphold, especially as the UNGA struggles to restore its credibility.
History provides sobering lessons. When democracies turned a blind eye to aggression in the 1930s, the cost was a world war. When the West tolerated Soviet domination of Eastern Europe after World War II, the cost was decades of repression, economic stagnation, and Cold War confrontation. Today, if the UN wavers in its support for Eastern Europe, the cost will be borne not only by Ukrainians, Poles, and Estonians, but by democracies everywhere. A weakened NATO would embolden authoritarian regimes.
China is watching closely, calculating its own moves in the South China Sea and Taiwan based on the West’s response to Ukraine. Iran and North Korea draw lessons as well. Retreat in Eastern Europe would invite chaos worldwide.
The United Nations General Assembly must therefore remain united in condemning Russian aggression, in supporting NATO allies, and in strengthening Eastern Europe. This is not just Europe’s fight: it is a global fight and one in which the United States can help usher resolve and logistical support. When international law is trampled in one region, it erodes trust everywhere. Support for Eastern Europe should come through continued diplomatic isolation of aggressors, coordinated humanitarian aid, backing NATO’s defensive posture to ensure deterrence, assistance with economic stabilization, and a clear affirmation that the sovereignty of Eastern European nations is non-negotiable.
The United Nations was founded in the ashes of global war to ensure that future generations would be spared such devastation. That mission is being tested. Eastern Europe and NATO stand on the front line of freedom, democracy, and peace. They have earned unwavering support. The General Assembly must stand with them — not only because it is strategically wise, but because it is morally right.
To falter now would be to betray the very principles the United Nations claims to defend. To remain committed is to send a powerful message: aggression will not be tolerated, sovereignty will be respected, and freedom will prevail. The world is watching. And history will judge whether the United Nations rose to this moment or shrank from it.
Saul Anuzis, the President of the International Institute and the 60 Plus Association, is a veteran political strategist and Republican leader from Michigan. He served as Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party (2005–2009), was a Member of the Republican National Committee (2005–2012), and twice ran for RNC Chairman. He continues to work internationally on democracy, free markets, and civic participation.