How do small EU member states approach the Council Presidency: is the Presidency a silencer or an amplifier of national interests? Moreover, what challenges and opportunities do a small state face in the Presidency? In this comparative case study, I analysed the approach, challenges and opportunities of three member states in relation to the chairmanship: Denmark, an old and experienced member state and its Presidency in 2012; Latvia, a relatively new member state and first time Presidency in 2015; and finally Estonia, another new member, and its upcoming first time Presidency in 2018. My main findings indicate that the Presidency functions as a silencer for first time holders of the Presidency; and as an amplifier for Denmark, which efficiently used cognitive power resources to tilt the Presidency agenda in its favour, while remaining an honest broker. The Presidency offers many opportunities, among which the most important is the transformation of the public administration. Moreover, to showcase the EU to the incumbent state, and vice versa, is important for the integration process. It is also essential for the identity formation of small states to prove their capacity within the union. Finally, I established that a close relationship with the Commission is an important leadership quality and power resource for small states. For small states, the Presidency represents a challenge for the public administration, while unforeseeable events can entirely change the course of the Presidency. Furthermore, the domestic as well as the European political landscape can negatively influence the decision-making.