Russia, China likely to veto Hormuz resolution

The fight here is over a shipping lane, but the stakes are much bigger than ships. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s main energy chokepoints, and the US plus Gulf states are trying to use the UN Security Council to force Iran to stop attacks, mines, and new transit tolls. The problem is that this exact play already ran into a wall once. On April 7, Russia and China vetoed a Bahrain-backed Hormuz resolution, and diplomats now expect they could do it again with the new draft circulated on May 7. (news.un.org) ### What changed this week? Bahrain and the US put a fresh draft in front of the Security Council on May 7. It tells Iran to immediately stop attacks and threats against merchant shipping in the strait, deal with sea mines, and end what the sponsors call illegal tolling. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, and Qatar are backing it too, which matters because this is not just Washington freelancing — it is a coordinated Gulf push. (news.un.org) ### Why is Hormuz such a big deal? Because this is the narrow gate between the Gulf and the open ocean. In peacetime, about one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas moves through it, so even partial disruption hits energy prices fast and ripples into shipping, insurance, and inflation. UN reporting says ship transits through the strait have dropped by more than 90% since the crisis escalated in late February 2026. Th(news.un.org)s into a global economic one. (news.un.org) ### Why do people expect another veto? Because Russia and China already showed their hand. On April 7, both countries vetoed an earlier Hormuz resolution that had already been watered down, while 11 Council members voted yes and Colombia and Pakistan abstained. Russia said the text blamed Iran while ignoring US and Israeli attacks. China said it did not reflect the “root causes” of the conflict in a balanced way. That logic maps neatly onto the new draft too. (news.un.org) ### What is the US actually trying to get? Basically, a UN stamp on freedom of navigation. The May draft would not just condemn Iran in general terms — it would require concrete steps: stop attacks, disclose mine locations, cooperate on mine removal, and support a humanitarian corridor. It also sets up the possibility of the Council coming back for stronger measures if Iran does not comply. That is why the vote matters more than symbolism. (state.gov) ### Why do Russia and China care? Partly geopolitics, partly precedent. Neither government wants the Security Council to become a vehicle for a US-backed pressure campaign against Tehran, especially in a wider conflict where Washington and Israel are already using force. There is also the sovereignty angle — Moscow and Beijing tend to resist resolutions that can become a runway to sanctions or coercive action, even when the text gets softened. (news.un.org) ### Does a veto change anything on the water? Yes — but mostly politically. A veto would not legalize attacks or mines, and it would not stop the US and Gulf states from acting outside the Council. But it would block a unified Security Council message and make any next step look like a coalition move rather than an international mandate. In a crisis like this, that distinction matters because legitimacy is part of deterrence. (news.un.org) ### So what is the real bottom line? This is less a surprise showdown than a repeat test. The US and Gulf states want the UN to bless a harder line on Hormuz. Russia and China seem poised to say no again. If that happens, the shipping crisis does not disappear — it just moves further out of the UN chamber and into raw power politics. (news.un.org)