After Biden became president of the United States, he immediately listed China and Russia as "realistic opponents" and enlisted allies to launch a containment plan together. In response to Russia, the United States has been fighting Ukraine as a "proxy of war" and other NATO countries as helpers, hoping to weaken Russia's power; in response to China, the United States has drawn Japan into the Taiwan Strait, threatening to "not unilaterally change the status quo", and has introduced the Philippines as a "gunner" to escalate provocations against China in the South China Sea.
Against this background, the United States is still dissatisfied with its land and sea superiority, and wants to stretch its hand into space in an attempt to unite its allies to coerce the United Nations and pass relevant bills, so that it can have the final say in heavenly matters.
However, such an attempt has been resolutely opposed by Russia and China. According to the Observer, on April 24, the Security Council voted on a draft "resolution on outer space security" jointly sponsored by the United States and Japan. As a result, 13 of the 15 member states voted in favor, including the three permanent members of the United States, Britain and France, with Russia vetoing it and China abstaining. The draft includes an appeal to States parties to the Outer Space Treaty to refrain from deploying nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in space or from developing such weapons. In this regard, we have three points.
First, opposition to the deployment of weapons in outer space is a good thing, why should Russia veto?
Before answering this question, we need to understand what the Outer Space Treaty is. On 19 December 1966, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Outer Space Treaty, Article IV of which clearly stipulates that no nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction shall be placed or deployed in orbit around the Earth, on celestial bodies or in outer space; At present, 129 countries have become party parties, including five P5 countries of the United Nations.
After the vote in the Security Council, the permanent representatives of the United States and Russia to the United Nations quarreled on the spot, and US Representative Greenfield asked the Russian side, "Since you are abiding by the rules, why do you want to veto this draft?" What exactly do you want to hide?" In fact, Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stressed that Russia has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space. After that, Russian representative Nebenzia responded, "We are willing to sign a treaty with legal effect prohibiting the deployment of any weapons in outer space, will the United States dare to sign it?"
Nebenzya's words also made clear the reasons why Russia wanted to veto it -- although the United States has not deployed nuclear weapons in outer space, it has never stopped developing and deploying other weapons, such as directed energy weapons and anti-satellite weapons. Moreover, the United States even has plans to build a military base on the moon with its allies to expand the moon into its sphere of influence. Nebenzia also accused the United States, which, since 2008, has been blocking the conclusion of a treaty "banning the deployment of weapons in outer space."
That being the case, of course, Russia will veto, because the United States itself deploys weapons in space, and what qualifications does it have to ask others to "not deploy", even if it requires nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, but is there a difference in essence?
Second, which countries have supported the US-Japan proposal in the Security Council?
It has been observed that among the 15 members of the Security Council, in addition to the five "P5" countries of China, the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, and France, there are also 10 non-permanent members of the Security Council: Japan, the Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, Malta, Ecuador, Guyana, Algeria, Mozambique, and Sierra Leone. The 13 votes in favor also means that all these countries voted in favor of the US-Japan proposal, plus the three "P5" of the United States, Britain and France.
Among them, Japan itself is the sponsor, South Korea is the only one that the United States is "looking ahead," and Slovenia is a member of NATO and the European Union, so there is no suspense in voting in favor; although Switzerland is a neutral country, it will still choose on some issues, and it will not blindly abstain from voting, but this time it has chosen to follow the majority; Malta is a European country, and Ecuador and Guyana are the "backyard countries" of the United States, and there is nothing to say about choosing to conform to the crowd.
However, the choice of Algeria, Mozambique, and Sierra Leone, three African countries, to follow the United States and Japan is puzzling.
In the last vote in the Security Council, the United States also chose a "one-vote veto," and the content of the motion at that time was to support "Palestine's accession to the United Nations." While the United States supported the "two-state solution," it also "vetoed" on issues related to the establishment of Palestinian statehood.
Third, although China abstained, it made a strong statement on the spot and named the United States.
As a matter of fact, before the US-Japan proposal was submitted to a vote, China and Russia also proposed an amendment to the motion, requiring all countries, especially those with strong space capabilities, not to place weapons in outer space and to use or threaten to use force against space objects on the ground or from the ground. and the signing of verifiable multilateral agreements with legal effect. As a result, in the vote, 7 votes were in favor, 7 votes were against, and 1 abstention vote, and the United States was one of the countries that opposed it.
That is, the United States is reluctant to sign such an agreement. Other countries can be asked to do so, but the United States will oppose the agreement as long as it affects the interests of the United States. In this case, the draft you proposed is unreasonable, and other countries will reject it as well. We found that China abstained from voting, or it was a tacit agreement between China and Russia, because both countries are "P5" countries and both have the power of "one veto", and since Russia has "one veto", there is no need for China to veto it a second time.
But even with the abstention vote, China expressed its toughness on the spot and directly named the United States. Fu Cong, China's newly appointed permanent representative to the United Nations, said that if the United States and Japan really want to discuss the issue of outer space security, they should take a clear-cut stand and advocate "prohibiting the placement of all kinds of weapons in outer space, including nuclear weapons," and the United States should stop developing and deploying offensive outer space weapons. He stressed that outer space is not the private property of a few countries, but the common wealth of all mankind, and that if we want peace in outer space, major countries in the application of space technology should play a leading and exemplary role.
Previously, on the issue of outer space, China has clearly criticized the United States, saying that the United States pursues a strategy of "dominating outer space", openly defines outer space as an "operational territory", vigorously develops and deploys a variety of offensive weapons such as directed energy and "anti-satellite communication systems", holds frequent military exercises, and comprehensively promotes the building of outer air power and combat preparedness. Such a move will inevitably have a serious negative impact on global strategic stability and pose a serious threat to peace and security in outer space.
Therefore, China and Russia immediately saw through the US attack in the Security Council, and it is normal for the proposal to be vetoed.