At a moment when Gaza is being pounded into dust — entire families erased, neighbourhoods flattened, starvation engineered — every gesture at the UN carries the weight of consequence. The expectation among many was simple: China and Russia would vote “yes” as a clear denunciation of Israel’s assault. Their abstention, instead, ignited confusion among supporters of Palestine and premature triumphalism in Washington. But triumphalism is hollow. An abstention is not approval. It is not consent. It is not a licence. It is, in fact, a very different kind of message — one that Washington and Tel Aviv understand far better than their commentators pretend.

The error most observers make is believing the UN stage is the entire theatre. It is not. The real negotiations — the pressure points, the red lines, the threats, the assurances — occur away from microphones. Outcomes are shaped not only by votes but by the silences between them. Beijing and Moscow have long operated in this domain: the arena where power is exercised without proclamation. Their abstention was not an act of indifference. It was an instrument of strategy and a deliberate refusal to give the US the consensus it desperately sought.

Seen from Palestine, symbolism matters, yes — but outcomes matter more. A “yes” vote, while emotionally comforting, can lock a state into a rigid diplomatic posture. Abstention, on the other hand, preserves manoeuvrability. It says to Washington and Tel Aviv: We have not endorsed you. Do not misread us. You do not have the world behind you. China and Russia denied the US the one thing it craves — legitimacy. Without that, Israel stands even more exposed in the court of global opinion.

What the abstention does — quietly but effectively — is protect the unspoken space where future pressure can be applied. It leaves room for intervention, leverage, and disruption when the stakes intensify. It is a signal that the door is not closed, the........

© Middle East Monitor