Note: The video above is different than my co-host’s, as this one has added graphics.
In a pivotal moment at the United Nations Security Council, Russia and China chose to abstain on resolution 2803, authorizing an “international stabilization force” in Gaza, a decision that effectively handed both a political victory and the fate of Gaza to the Trump administration and Zionist Israel. The decision exposed a hard truth: the emerging multipolar order is not a force for liberation, but a new front for vulture capitalism and geopolitical horse-trading. Ultimately, behind Russia and China’s UN abstention lies a web of deals on Syria, Ukraine, and global trade, proving that for the world’s major powers, Palestinian sovereignty and perhaps that of other smaller, weaker states, is always on the negotiating table—even if they’re allies.
For us, this was not a surprise but a confirmation of a grim reality we have long been analyzing. The move laid bare that the foreign policy of the supposed fighters of Western hegemony, is not driven by anti-imperialist principle, but rather by pragmatic economic expansion and capital-driven, global trade interests. This abstention has effectively shattered the illusion for many that a multipolar world order would be a more equitable one, revealing instead that it may simply mean more players competing for influence at the table, with little regard for human rights or international law as it pertains to the less powerful “Global South”.
The Legal and Moral Failure
The abstention instead of using a needed veto power, stands as a profound abdication of legal and moral responsibility. As permanent members of the UN Security Council, Russia and China have the veto power that carries the weight of upholding the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, and the Genocide Convention. By abstaining, they effectively said “yes” to a resolution that legitimizes a path forward dictated by the very forces who orchestrated and continue to perpetuate a widely-acknowledged genocide. My colleague, Vanessa Beeley, used a stark analogy to illustrate the point: it is like allowing a rapist into your home, watching the crime occur, and merely complaining about it afterward, rather than using your power to block the door in the first place. This failure to act is a betrayal of the principles these nations claim to champion, an entire diversion from their very rhetoric demonstrated at the UNSC.
The Geopolitical Horse-Trading: Syria, Ukraine, and Economic Corridors
Beyond the moral argument, which is not even what we are leading with, but rather urging a transparency in others to put things as they are, rather than decorating them with altruistic motives that do not belong to these two powerful states, there are also other factors.
We dissected the likely geopolitical horse-trading that motivated the abstention. As the UN vote came after and before a series of rapid-fire diplomatic and military maneuvers. Just days before the vote, Russian President Vladimir Putin called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and a Russian military delegation toured southern Syria, an area occupied by Israeli forces. Following the abstention, Netanyahu made a triumphant visit to the same region. Based on the past movements fro this entire year and even since 2024, we analyze that many a negotiation between eastern and western players have been at play.
For example, Russia’s return to Syria to secure its strategic bases and economic interests had to be approved by Israel and Washington. In fact, this was already in play when Israel lobbied the U.S. congress to allow Russia to maintain its bases in Syria in an effort to counter Turkey’s influence in the region. Similarly, China’s sudden recognition of the HTS-led regime in Syria—despite its history of harboring Uyghur extremists—appears as a move to secure reconstruction contracts and a commitment for the return of Uyghur fighters, all having to be brokered through the new US-Israeli-backed power in Damascus.
The Flawed Defense: “It’s an Arab Problem” and 5D Chess
In response to widespread criticism of the abstention, it’s needed to identify and dismantle several common defenses. One particularly troubling argument we highlighted was the ethnically-charged notion that the genocide in Gaza is “an Arab problem” that Russia and China have no obligation to solve.
Not only is this is an orientalist cop-out that ignores the structure of global power, where many Arab states are politically captured by the US and Israel, including the captured Palestinian Authority (PA), and Zionist-U.S.-controlled Qatar, Saudi Arabia, etc, which does not absolve major powers of their responsibility under international law. No one, including the resistance was relying on any of them to be act as sovereign defenders of Palestine, because they are not. It is HAMAS that is representative of Palestinians, and they unilaterally did not stutter in their rejection of this proposal.
Other defenses suggest that Russia and China are playing “5D chess, ” which 0 evidence as to having done this before, or that a veto would have changed nothing and it was meaningless, well which it? The veto made it LEGAL for Trump and Zionist Israel to do with Gaza as they please. “But do you think they would suddently respect international law?” No, we don’t, but do they now? No. And if the veto was not important, why not simply do it? They cannot answer this. Even a symbolic veto would have maintained a shred of integrity in the international system and denied the resolution the legitimacy that Donald Trump promptly thanked them on social media for providing.
The Broader Implications: A World of Vulture Capitalism, Not Liberation
In the last few months since staring this series we have reached a sobering conclusion, one which many are still in denial about, involving the true nature of the emerging world order.
The actions of Russia and China in Gaza, Sudan—where China supplies weapons to both sides of a conflict—and elsewhere, demonstrate that their primary driver is not anti-imperialism but capital accumulation and competition with the West. “Multipolarity,” in this light, does not mean liberation for the Global South, but merely more “vulture capitalists” at the table, competing to plunder the resources of vulnerable nations. That is fine, as to a degree we cannot fault nations for trying to expand their economic interests. We understand that this is what they have decided to do but that does not excuse the means nor should they be painted then as beacons od superiority and moral character.
The reality is this “new” system, offers no real protection for countries in Latin America or Africa facing regime change operations, as they lay full of minerals and vast natural resources capitalist vultures are seething for, and all of this paves the way for a future defined by resource and water wars, all while the powerful nations, old and new, negotiate their shares behind closed doors. In essence, we are entering the next stage of industrialization, known as the 4th Industrial Revolution, where minerals, water, and all resources will be scavenged to use for tech, AI, and surveillance. And there are very few nations that are not going in this direction of capture—China and Russia very much are on their way.
This abstention destroyed the faith that any major global power is willing to live up to the humanitarian principles they rhetorically support. The emotional outbursts are not coming from those of us trying to look at this honestly and transparently, but from those clinging onto false prophets, fake ideals, and outdated ideologies. Poeple must stop projecting ideals of moral virtue onto nations like Russia and China and to see their actions for what they are: the pragmatic pursuits of self-interest in a competitive global system.
The hope that remains lies not with these powers, but with the grassroots pushback from ordinary people online and the continued Resistance of the oppressed peoples themselves, especially those in the mostly affected regions like Gaza, who were never under any illusion that their liberation would be handed to them by a sympathetic power.
