Moscow and Beijing Bury the Multipolarity Project

The beautiful dream of Putin and Xi as knights of a just world order in the fight against the evil empire has come to an end.

Stefan H. Heuer, M.A.
March 17, 2026

On March 11, the UN Security Council adopted the fatal Resolution 2817 (2026). The UN press release states:

“Security Council Adopts Resolution 2817 (2026) Condemning Iran’s ‘Egregious Attacks’ against Neighbours as Middle East Violence Rapidly Escalates. The Security Council today adopted a resolution condemning Iran’s ‘egregious attacks’ against its regional neighbours amid rapidly spiraling violence in the Middle East, while rejecting a second draft tabled by the Russian Federation.

The 15-member Council adopted resolution 2817 (2026) (to be issued as S/RES/2817(2026)) by a vote of 13 in favour to none against, with 2 abstentions (China, Russian Federation). It comes as the war, which began with Israeli and United States airstrikes against Iran on 28 February, nears its two-week mark and has spread to nearly a dozen nations across the already fragile Middle East region“.

The Security Council adopted the motion tabled by Bahrain with 13 votes in favor and two abstentions. The adopted resolution reads:

“The Security Council

1. Reiterates its strong support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan;
2. Condemns in the strongest terms the egregious attacks by the Islamic Republic of Iran against the territories of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan and determines that such acts constitute a breach of international law and a serious threat to international peace and security;
3. Further condemns that residential areas were attacked, that civilian objects have been targeted and that the attacks resulted in civilian casualties and damage of civilian buildings; and expresses solidarity with these countries and their people;
4. Demands the immediate cessation of all attacks by the Islamic Republic of Iran against Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan;
5. Demands that the Islamic Republic of Iran immediately and unconditionally cease from any provocation or threats to neighboring States, including the use of proxies;
6. Calls upon the Islamic Republic of Iran to comply fully with its obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, particularly regarding the protection of civilians and civilian objects in armed conflict;
7. Reaffirms the exercise of navigational rights and freedoms by merchant and commercial vessels, in accordance with international law, must be respected, particularly around critical maritime routes, and takes note of the right of Member States, in accordance with international law, to defend their vessels from attacks and provocations, including those that undermine navigational rights and freedoms;
8. Condemns any actions or threats by the Islamic Republic of Iran aimed at closing, obstructing, or otherwise interfering with international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, or threatening maritime security in the Bab Al Mandab; affirms that any attempt to impede lawful transit passage or freedom of navigation in these international waterways constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security; and calls upon Iran to refrain immediately from any actions or threats in accordance with international law;
9. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter”.

The Right to Self-Defense and “False Flags”

In response to the illegal attack by Israel and the United States, Iran has attacked facilities of the US military apparatus in neighboring Arab countries, military installations, and likely also civilian targets in the Arab Gulf states. The affected Arab countries host US military installations that are used either for attacks against Iran or to thwart Iranian self-defense efforts against Israel, such as the staggered radar and air defense systems of the US and Great Britain. Iran has attacked these, citing its right to self-defense derived from Article 51 of the UN Charter.

The Arab despotisms in the Persian Gulf, which have tolerated US bases on their soil for decades and willfully submitted themselves to US hegemony, in principle, are legitimate war aims. Whether shelling hotels is covered by international law and, moreover, militarily expedient, is a matter for debate elsewhere.

The alleged Iranian attack on Oman, a country with which Tehran maintains close relations, falls outside this framework, and others besides me interpret this (and possibly other) attacks as Israeli operations.

Israel has a genuine interest in inciting the Arabs against Iran. That would spare them some effort and increase the pressure on Iran. I’m not saying this will happen; I’m only saying that in war, deception becomes a method.

Diplomacy Driven by Interests

What does this mean for the Iran resolution? Resolutions are proposed by the members of the UN Security Council. The proponent of the resolution determines its truthfulness, or the degree of distorting propaganda lies. This means that resolutions can present a situation entirely neutrally and based on facts, or they can fabricate outright lies, for instance, to just cover a one-sided story. It is then up to the entirety of the Security Council members to accept or reject the truth or the lie presented in the proposed resolution.

Thus, resolutions are both a means and a result of the diplomacy of the members of the UN Security Council. Diplomacy is driven by interests. Given its wording, the interest of Bahrain and its supporters in this resolution should be quite clear.

Security Council resolutions are legally binding under international law and can be enforced through sanctions, up to and including military action.

Iraq, among others, has felt the full force of the Security Council’s brutal sanctions regime, while Israel is effectively protected from sanctions by the US veto. The grotesque scale of violations of International Law, Human Rights, the Geneva Convention, etc. by the USA itself has never, to my knowledge, led to sanctions or military force against this country.

The Failure of the Veto

When one or more members introduce a resolution proposal to the Security Council, all members can confirm the proposal by voting in favor or abstaining. That means, abstention does not prevent a resolution from being adopted. Each permanent member—the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the USA, the United Kingdom, and France—can veto a resolution, and a single veto is sufficient.

One would assume that such a one-sided resolution as the one cited against Iran would encounter resistance, especially since the actual reasons for the war situation have been completely ignored.

On the contrary, Iran is being accused of bearing primary responsibility for the escalating situation, a claim that cannot be substantiated by the facts. As a reminder: During the negotiations between the US and Iran, Israel launched its unprovoked war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which Israel’s lapdog, the militarily superior US, quickly joined. On the very first day, Israel and the US deliberately attacked civilian targets and murdered civilians; the most prominent (but unfortunately not the only) example is the girls’ school.

We don’t need to delve into the US lies that Iran attacked the school itself (Trump even claimed it was with a US Tomahawk missile, which Iran doesn’t even possess!): Lies, deception, and ambush have been the hallmarks of this plundering nation since its founding. And Israel has been murdering and plundering with complete impunity for 78 years under the auspices of the very UN that once supposedly sought to prevent war. The Jewish state, therefore, no longer even needs propaganda to conceal its illegitimate existence and its criminal actions.

Remembering Libya: 2011 vs. 2026

Well, the West’s lies and distortions need no further mention here, but the behavior of Russia and China certainly does.

Do we still remember Libya? In 2011, Libya was ravaged by a terrorist war orchestrated and supported by the U.S., EU states (especially France), and Arab despotisms, performed by proxies, which foreshadowed the Syrian scenario by a few months. Supposedly, the people of Libya rose against the alleged dictator Gaddafi, and supposedly—what a coincidence! – At precisely that moment, a flood of sand-coloured Toyota pickups mounted with heavy machine guns had rained down upon the valiant “rebels” (NATO’s term for their Al-Qaeda proxy forces), so that they could now attack the Libyan army when they weren’t busy murdering civilians.

The NATO states secured the adoption of UNSC Resolution 1973, which authorized military action against Libya. Fifteen years lie between Resolution 2817 and Resolution 1973:

• On March 11, 2026, Russia and China, by abstaining (in effect: agreeing!) on Resolution 2817, threw Iran under the bus.
• On March 17, 2011, Russia and China, by abstaining (in effect: agreeing!) on Resolution 1973, abandoned Libya, which was then under attack by the Empire.

Resolution 1973 established a no-fly zone over Libya, which prevented the Libyan Air Force from defending Libya’s territorial integrity and the Libyan people against NATO bombings and NATO terrorists on the ground. NATO then bombed civilian and, in exceptional cases, military infrastructure with absolutely no risk, disrupted the magnificent irrigation system in the desert, and brought destruction and death to Libya. The right to protect and defend its territorial sovereignty, which the U.S. puppet state of Bahrain claims for itself in its draft resolution today, did not apply to Libya in 2011, nor subsequently to Syria, Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen, Venezuela, and now Iran.

The “Appeasement” Mission

It is striking how equal rights apply selectively, contingent on the global hegemon’s whims.

Now, I’d like to preempt those Putin groupies who—mission: appeasement!—will claim that the UNSC resolution against Iran cannot be compared to the one against Libya, because the use of force, unlike against Libya, has not even been decided in the case of Iran.

Well, dear Kremlin mouthpieces, wait and see what the conspirators will cook up next; Libya wasn’t slaughtered in one Security Council meeting either. On Iran, point 9 of the resolution already expresses the possibility of further steps. And if necessary, the usual experts in deception will provide the necessary images and talking points through a false flag operation (like in Bahrain?).

On March 11, a veto would have been completely harmless for Russia and China. Both preferred to allow the resolution to pass by abstaining. Since Russia and China are already standing idly by without any need to do so, surely they won’t be the ones to stand in the way of the evil empire just when the “international community”—whipped into a frenzy by fake images (or otherwise motivated)—is crying out for blood?.

The Cost of Abandonment

Precisely because Iran—based on the information available so far—is defending itself against the U.S.-Israeli murderous campaign in a manner that is both legally sound and strategically astute, and because its self-defense measures are already driving up the costs of war for the aggressor states, the pressure on the coalition of terrorist states to bring the war to a victorious conclusion is growing ever greater. The danger of an Israeli or a combined U.S.-Israeli use of nuclear weapons has not been averted by Russia and China’s voting behavior; on the contrary.

It remains to be noted that Russia and China have abandoned Iran. The signal sent to the world is disastrous. The evil empire, running amok in its blood-curdling delusion of power, is not prevented by a veto from misusing the UN as a façade for its war. Russia and China, which constantly advocate for strengthening the UN, are its accomplices—and in doing so, they themselves damage the UN.

Against this backdrop, it will surely be a great comfort to Cuba that Moscow is now pledging its support for Havana in its defensive struggle against Trump’s aggressive plans.

Russia and China could have vetoed Resolution 2817. Similarly, in 2011, they could have spared Libya from destruction by NATO under the guise of a UN resolution. In both cases, Russia and China chose to distance themselves from the matter by abstaining.

A Spectacle of Passivity

For two and a half decades, the Russian bear and the Chinese dragon have been sitting on the fence like sparrows, watching the US-Israel-NATO terror circus pass by. Innocently, they chirp their little song to the tasteless spectacle and then act as if nothing had happened.

Well, dear Russians, the plans for your country cooked up by the US are already known: the destruction and division of the evil empire into 41 dependent client states (“North Eurasia 2030”; see: https://www.freenationsrf.org/en) is a done deal.

Perhaps it is time to end your despicable role as the US’s water carrier and effectively defend national interests. Because Uncle Sam is coming for you too: via Ukraine, via the Caucasus and Central Asia – and via the Arctic (hence the aim to get Greenland and Canada). The falling empire cannot afford not to plunder your natural resources.

And you, China? Do you want to end up standing all alone?

Or do you both believe that through passivity and even support—as is now happening again at the UN—you can appease this man-eating, country-destroying behemoth?. In that case, would Libya, Syria, Venezuela, and Iran (and eventually Cuba) be something like your sacrifices?

I’m just an ordinary old man, but I don’t think this plan will work out.

The Myth of Multipolarity

People in the Global South might not care about the fates of Russia and China any more than those in the West do, were it not for the constant sweet sounds of the so-called “multipolarity” coming from their direction. We are constantly being led to believe—especially from Moscow—that Russia and China are determined champions of the end of the unipolar world order, that is, the Pax Americana (which is actually not American at all, but Jewish).

Yet the actions that were supposed to follow these fine words speak a very different language, namely that of renunciation, betrayal, apathy, and trickery. We will all have to bear the consequences, not the agents of the cabal, Putin and Xi.

The “Berliner Zeitung”, one of the very few remaining newspapers in the Federal Republic of Germany that still takes journalism seriously, writes:
“The aggressors are being spared. This undermines international law”.

In this regard, the “Berliner Zeitung” hits the nail on the head: The resolution against Iran exposes both the UN as a supporter of the mass-murdering brigades of Israel and the US (along with their vassals) and the constant talk by UN officials of “international law” as a sham.

The so-called efforts of the “international community” toward peace and international law are, at best, a hollow gesture; realistically, however, they serve as a cover for the worst acts of war and genocide since the beginning of recorded history, committed by those terrorist nations that are leaving a trail of blood across our entire planet. The UN has never stood in their way, while more than a dozen nations have been destroyed by these terrorist nations without the protection of the UN.

Sovereignty of the Peoples

Meanwhile, Iran has so far defended itself extremely effectively and courageously. As Reuters correctly notes, the decision on the end of this U.S.-Israeli war of aggression does not lie in Washington or Tel Aviv, but in Tehran: “Iran is sending a message that there is no safe harbour in this conflict and that Washington will not control the terms of escalation”.

Perhaps the key to a truly multipolar world order does not lie in Moscow and Beijing after all?

Perhaps, rather than with the puppets of the global cabal, it lies with us, the peoples and nations?

Perhaps it is time to retire the dream of multipolarism among the great powers and return to the sovereignty of the peoples and nations?

In any case, we can confidently bury the fairy tale of Putin and Xi as saviors of the world. In fact, they already buried it themselves on March 11, 2026, in the UN Security Council.

Stefan H. Heuer, M.A.
Historian, born in 1964, has worked as a lecturer in adult education and, among others, in Human resources development for a US-American company in Germany.

---

Syria News serves as a vital archive and a source of independent journalism, frequently used for research and as a historical record. To preserve this crucial resource and continue our work, we rely on reader support.
Your donation directly maintains the platform and upholds a space for truth.

You can also donate with Cryptocurrencies through our donate page.
Thank you in advance.

---