Both Russia and China have said pretty clearly that they condemn the unjustified aggression against Iran and support its right to defend itself. We also know that they are both almost certainly providing material and intelligence support.
Resolutions like this are more performative than anything else, and their reluctance to use their veto is easily explained by the fact that Russia and China also have and want to maintain good relations with the Gulf Arab states.
And would it have changed anything at all, substantively, if they vetoed it? I don’t like it either but that was probably their reasoning. It doesn’t mean they support the resolution.
I also think sometimes people tend to overstate the importance of these resolutions.
And i think we’ve had the discussion before about how, at least in China’s case, they have a record of using their veto power extremely sparingly due to how they see the veto as drawing them into a larger commitment which they seldom want to make.
With Russia preoccupied with its own war, Iran waited to see whether its only other ally capable of going toe to toe with the US, China, would come to its aid. The answer came quickly. Two days into the war, during a regular news conference at the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, business continued as normal, as if the US and Israel had not just attacked one of China’s comprehensive strategic partners. When it became clear that China would remain silent, an Iranian journalist protested. Only then did the ministry spokesperson, Mao Ning, reluctantly condemn the US-Israeli assault.
In the days that followed, China became a vocal critic of the attacks. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi argued, “Might does not make right,” warning that the attacks proved that “the world has regressed to the law of the jungle.” Yet for all his strong words, Wang stopped short of explicitly naming the US or Israel as the aggressor, even if there was little doubt which countries he meant. Furthermore, China offered Iran little substantive assistance beyond rhetoric.
While China contacted several Middle Eastern countries and sent a special envoy on a diplomatic tour of the region, a move that helped prevent Iran’s neighbours, many caught in the crossfire, from joining the fray, it made no attempt to directly confront the US, the country ultimately responsible for the war, let alone send Iran military aid.
China’s response remained muted even when Iran, in a bid to provoke international intervention, closed the Strait of Hormuz, a vital maritime corridor through which 40 percent of China’s imported oil passes each day. Faced with a direct threat to its economic lifeline, Beijing’s only response was to call for all parties to cease hostilities and return to the negotiating table. Its priorities were clear.
Yes. Al-Jazeera has a history of trying to stir up anti-China sentiment. You would know this if you followed their reporting on China for a few years. They are also not exactly pro-Iran and have a vested interest in driving a wedge between the two.
Both Russia and China have said pretty clearly that they condemn the unjustified aggression against Iran and support its right to defend itself. We also know that they are both almost certainly providing material and intelligence support.
Resolutions like this are more performative than anything else, and their reluctance to use their veto is easily explained by the fact that Russia and China also have and want to maintain good relations with the Gulf Arab states.
And would it have changed anything at all, substantively, if they vetoed it? I don’t like it either but that was probably their reasoning. It doesn’t mean they support the resolution.
I also think sometimes people tend to overstate the importance of these resolutions.
And i think we’ve had the discussion before about how, at least in China’s case, they have a record of using their veto power extremely sparingly due to how they see the veto as drawing them into a larger commitment which they seldom want to make.
Really? When?
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/opinions/2026/3/19/chinas-silence-on-iran-reveals-its-true-priorities
China immediately condemned the attack on Iran:
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202603/01/WS69a42333a310d6866eb3af12.html
They have since called for peace and de-escalation but never once condemned Iran for defending itself.
Russia of course condemned the attack on Iran. They also explicitly stated that they support Iran’s right to self-defense:
https://tass.com/politics/2100609?ysclid=mmzgz1rpsg854907143
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2026/03/17/765471/Russia-US-Israeli-attack-on-Iran-unreasonable-treacherous
Considering that AJ is Qatari state media i don’t think they are exactly an unbiased source on this.
You think Qatari state media would be disavowing China for not supporting Iran enough?
Yes. Al-Jazeera has a history of trying to stir up anti-China sentiment. You would know this if you followed their reporting on China for a few years. They are also not exactly pro-Iran and have a vested interest in driving a wedge between the two.
I’m not really familiar with Al-jazeera’s stance towards China, and their relationship with Iran, so I’ll defer to you on this.