At the Security Council, a fierce confrontation broke out between the United States and Russia face to face, and the United States came prepared, and the Russian side was not afraid of 1 against 13 at all.
On the 24th, the United Nations Security Council voted on a draft resolution on outer space security proposed by Japan and the United States, and the result was that 13 Security Council members, including the United States, voted in favor, the mainland abstained, and Russia used a veto, and the resolution was ultimately not passed. Seeing that its resolution was blocked in the Security Council, the United States immediately attacked Russia, and as a result, the scene of a fierce confrontation between the United States and Russia was once again staged at the Security Council. Perhaps guessing that Russia would block the passage of the resolution, Greenfield, the US permanent representative to the United Nations, also came prepared, citing Russian President Putin's statement that "Moscow has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space" to question the Russian side, and if Putin's statement is true, why did Russia veto the US resolution. Obviously, the US side is "using the spear of the other side and attacking the shield of the other" in a vain attempt to embarrass Russia.
However, what the US side did not expect was that Russia's permanent representative to the United Nations, Nebenzya, was not afraid of this at all, and singled out 13 countries with one to refute the US draft resolution as "absolutely absurd and politicized" to his face, and at the same time clearly pointed out that the resolution did not do enough to ban all types of weapons in outer space, and also used this to ask the US representative, "We want to ban the deployment of any type of weapons in outer space, not just weapons of mass destruction." But the United States does not think so, and why is that?" In other words, the resolution should not only mention "weapons of mass destruction" but "weapons of any kind." It is precisely for this reason that the Russian representative has doubts about the resolution proposed by the United States and does not rule out that the United States is "carrying private goods" in the resolution. That being the case, the Russian side naturally has a reason to veto the resolution with one vote.
Moreover, the United States has been blocking the conclusion of a treaty banning the deployment of weapons in outer space since 2008, and before that, China and Russia had proposed an amendment to the US-Japan draft, advocating the inclusion of such contents as "calling on member states to take measures to prevent the placement of weapons in outer space" and "negotiating and concluding a legally binding multilateral agreement as soon as possible." But the result was that this amendment was vetoed, and the United States was one of the opponents. Obviously, judging from the hegemonic mentality of the United States, the United States has not given up the idea of deploying weapons in outer space, and as for whether it is a "weapon of mass destruction", this does not matter to the United States. The US side specifically mentions "weapons of mass destruction" in the resolution in order to contain other countries, and it is not even ruled out that the United States itself already has the capability to deploy "weapons of mass destruction" in outer space. In this case, it is completely reasonable for the Russian side to veto the resolution.
In response to this fierce confrontation between the United States and Russia, the mainland finally intervened to stabilize the situation. Obviously, the mainland also saw that the United States was "harboring evil intentions," so it abstained from voting, because after all, Russia had already vetoed it, and there was no need for our side to vote against it. In the words of Ambassador Fu Cong, Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations, the draft resolution voted on is not comprehensive and balanced, and does not reflect to the greatest extent the common interests and voices of the 193 Member States on the issue of outer space security. The "incomplete and unbalanced" in this refers to the above-mentioned careful thinking of the United States in "carrying private goods" and deliberately replacing "weapons of mass destruction" with "weapons of mass destruction" in the resolution, so that it can have loopholes to exploit. However, its intentions ultimately failed to succeed. China's position is very clear: if the United States and Japan are truly committed to promoting constructive discussions on outer space security issues in the Security Council, they should pay full attention to the risks of weaponization and arms race in outer space, and should take a clear-cut stand and advocate a ban on the placement of all types of weapons in outer space, including nuclear weapons. Instead of developing and deploying offensive weapons in outer space, while at the same time passively resisting the negotiation of a legal instrument on outer space control.