China and Russia urge withdrawal, U.S. pushes for Iran-related resolution at UN
According to Reuters, on May 7 local time, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Michael Waltz urged countries to support a resolution proposed by the U.S. at the UN, calling on Iran to cease attacks and mine-laying activities in the Strait of Hormuz. However, diplomatic sources anticipate that China and Russia are likely to veto the resolution, as both expressed strong opposition during this week’s discussions—Russia demanded withdrawal or rewriting, while China deemed the text biased.
Notably, a similar U.S.-proposed resolution was previously rejected by China and Russia last month. China’s representative emphasized that unauthorized military actions must not be legitimized, force must not be given a green light, and tensions must not be further inflamed or exacerbated, thus risking escalation of conflict.
The draft resolution condemns Iran for allegedly violating the current ceasefire agreement and its so-called actions and threats aimed at closing, obstructing, or impeding freedom of navigation through the strait.
The draft demands that Iran immediately cease attacks, disclose all mine locations, and refrain from obstructing demining operations.
A previous version of the draft seen by Reuters avoided explicit language authorizing the use of force but still invoked Chapter VII of the UN Charter, allowing the Security Council to take measures ranging from sanctions to military action.
Reporting analysis suggests that the U.S.-backed draft aims to pave the way for legitimizing potential military action against Iran. Currently, the U.S. and Iran are negotiating a temporary ceasefire, and President Trump is scheduled to visit China next week, with Iran expected to be a key topic in upcoming U.S.-China talks.
On May 7, Waltz, alongside diplomats from several Gulf states supporting the new draft, held a press conference where he pressured nations, stating that any country “trying to veto this resolution” would be “setting a very, very dangerous precedent.”
He also claimed: “We must ask ourselves honestly—if a country chooses to oppose such a simple proposition, do they truly want peace?”
The new text was drafted by the U.S. and Bahrain and has garnered support from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar.
Bahrain’s UN ambassador, Jamal Fares Al-Ruwaie, said Bahrain looks forward to “constructive cooperation with all Security Council members in the coming days to finalize the text.”
Iran’s UN envoy Amir Saeed Iravani criticized the resolution as “seriously flawed, one-sided, and politically motivated.” Referencing the U.S. military’s blockade of Iranian vessels, he stated: “The United States has no legal, political, or moral standing to portray itself as a defender of freedom of navigation or maritime security.”
Diplomatic sources revealed that during closed-door meetings this week, China and Russia strongly opposed the resolution, making it highly likely they will veto it.
Although China and Russia have not yet formally declared their positions, one diplomat noted that Russia has called for the withdrawal or complete rewriting of the draft; the same source added that China views the text as biased and criticized its invocation of Chapter VII of the UN Charter—the provision authorizing the Security Council to implement a range of measures, including sanctions and even military action.
U.S. Secretary of State Rubio said on May 5 that the U.S. had introduced a new UN resolution, which represents a test of the UN’s effectiveness, and urged China and Russia not to exercise their veto power.
Earlier, informed diplomats said Washington hopes to conclude negotiations swiftly, aiming to circulate the final draft by Friday (May 8 local time) and hold voting early next week—but Russia and China are still considering alternative drafts.
As Waltz urged support for the draft, sources and officials reported that the U.S. and Iran are moving closer to reaching a temporary ceasefire agreement. Tehran is currently reviewing a proposal that would halt hostilities while deferring the most contentious core issues.
CNN reported on May 6 that the U.S. government appears to be shifting its negotiation strategy—streamlining the agenda by focusing first on simpler issues and leaving the most acute ones for later stages.
Meanwhile, tensions in the Strait of Hormuz remain unresolved.
On May 7, President Trump posted on his social media platform, Truth Social, claiming that three U.S. destroyers successfully exited the Strait of Hormuz after being attacked, asserting that the U.S. ships sustained no damage, but the Iranian attackers suffered “significant damage.” He warned that if Iran fails to reach an agreement soon, the U.S. will carry out “stronger and more intense” strikes in the future.
Meison Kafafi, senior advisor at the Atlantic Council think tank, pointed out that whether the strait can be “unblocked” does not depend on the U.S. military—“given the current situation, Iran is better able to bear pressure.” Professor Nicholas Grossman from the University of Illinois concluded that although Trump repeatedly claims Iran has “no chance,” under the backdrop of global energy supply pressures, time is on Iran’s side.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1864579992911884/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.