China Explains Its Abstention in UN Gaza Vote

By Friends of Socialist China – Nov 19, 2025

On November 17, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) adopted Resolution 2803 (2025), which sets out proposed post-war arrangements for the Palestinian territory of Gaza. The resolution was adopted with 13 votes in favour and no votes against. China and Russia abstained from the vote. As permanent members of the Security Council, a negative vote by either country would have vetoed the resolution.

Following the vote, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong made an explanatory statement. He began by stating that:

“Gaza, brutalised by two years of war, is a land of ruins in dire need of rebuilding. Over two million people continue to live in deprivation and struggle in displacement. China supports the Security Council in taking all necessary actions to achieve a lasting ceasefire, relieve the humanitarian disaster, and launch post-war reconstruction to rekindle the hope of peace and development for the people in Gaza.”

However, he added: “Regrettably, the draft resolution that was just voted on is lacking in many respects and is deeply worrisome” and went on to set out four points in this regard:

• The draft resolution is vague and unclear on many critical elements. The penholder requests the Council to authorise the establishment of a Board of Peace and international stabilisation force, which will play a key role in the post-war governance in Gaza. It should have explained in details their structure, composition, terms of reference, and criteria of participation, among others… However, the draft resolution contains skimpy details on these critical elements.

• The draft resolution does not demonstrate the fundamental principle of Palestinians governing Palestine. Gaza belongs to the Palestinian people, not to anyone else. Any post-war arrangements must respect the will of the Palestinian people… The draft resolution outlines post-war governance arrangements for Gaza, but it seems that Palestine is barely visible in it, and the Palestinian sovereignty and ownership are not fully reflected.

• The draft resolution does not ensure the effective participation of the UN and its Security Council… The UN has ample experience and capacities in post-conflict recovery and economic reconstruction and should therefore play a vital role in Gaza’s post-war governance. However, no such arrangement is made in the draft resolution.

• The draft resolution is not a product of full consultations among Council members. Less than two weeks after introducing the draft resolution, the penholder rushed the Council into making a critical decision on the future and destiny of Gaza. Council members responsibly engaged in the consultations, raising a lot of constructive questions and suggestions, but most of them were not taken on board.

However: “Notwithstanding the above-mentioned many issues in the draft resolution and China’s major concerns about it, considering the fragile and severe situation in Gaza, the imperative of maintaining the ceasefire, and the positions of the regional countries and Palestine, China abstained in the vote. It must also be noted that our concerns and worries remain… The Palestinian question lies at the heart of the Middle East issues. It is a matter about international equity and justice… China has always firmly supported the just cause of the Palestinian people in restoring their legitimate national rights. We stand ready to work with the international community to make unremitting efforts for a comprehensive, just, and lasting solution to the Palestinian question.”

China’s failure to exercise its veto on this occasion has understandably disappointed many in the Palestinian solidarity movement internationally. However, as Fu Cong intimates above, however reluctantly, the resolution and the plan it reflects had the support of numerous important Arab and Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, the State of Palestine, Türkiye, Pakistan and Indonesia. Whatever criticisms might be levelled at the governments of these countries (and there are doubtless many), China, or any other socialist country, has to deal with the governments that actually exist, not those that we might wish existed. It should further be noted that four Muslim or majority Muslim states currently serve as non-permanent UNSC members, namely Algeria (arguably the only Arab country still generally adhering to anti-imperialist, independent positions in terms of its internationally recognised government), Pakistan, Somalia and Sierra Leone. All of them voted in favour of the resolution. For China, or Russia, to have exercised the veto would only have weakened their position vis-à-vis the Arab and Islamic nations and correspondingly further strengthened that of the United States. For 70 years since the Asian-African Conference in Bandung, China has worked tirelessly to build and maintain a global united front of newly independent and developing countries, despite the painful and difficult compromises this sometimes entails. Moreover, a Chinese or Russian veto on this occasion would have done nothing to materially deter the United States or Israel from proceeding with their plans. It would simply have removed even the most basic level of international oversight, constraint and accountability.

We reprint below the full text of Ambassador Fu Cong’s remarks. They were originally published on the website of China’s Permanent Mission to the UN.

The full text of the resolution, with an introductory commentary by Middle East Eye, may be read here.

Palestinians Reject US–Backed UN Plan: ‘A New Form of Occupation’