According to the report released by Global Network, at the special session on Ukraine held on the same day, the United Nations General Assembly discussed whether to use the frozen Russian overseas assets to compensate Ukraine for its losses caused by the military conflict, and voted on this resolution. According to the voting results, 94 countries voted in favour of the resolution, 14 opposed it and 73 abstained. Later, Geng Shuang, China's Permanent Ambassador to the United Nations, explained why China voted against it with three points of view in his speech.

   Ambassador Geng Shuang pointed out that war reparations and remedies are not only for the sake of justice, but also an important means to promote post-war reconstruction. China believes that any compensation and remedies must be achieved through legitimate and reasonable political and legal means. However, the resolution on compensation and remedies proposed at this session of the General Assembly has serious institutional and legal defects, It is contrary to China's long-standing position and propositions. Ambassador Geng Shuang stressed that, first of all, the draft resolution allows some countries to establish a separate compensation registration mechanism outside the United Nations system, which is neither subject to the supervision of the United Nations nor refuses to report to the United Nations, but allows the United Nations to hold a special meeting for voting. This practice has never been precedent in the past practice.

   Secondly, the draft resolution attempts to let the General Assembly of the United Nations directly deal with issues involving international legal responsibility, which has gone beyond the existing powers of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Moreover, the Charter of the United Nations has long stipulated that the General Assembly is not an international judicial body and has no power to make judicial decisions. Finally, the "Article on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts" cited in the draft resolution obviously lacks a legal basis. Since the article is not an intergovernmental international treaty, it naturally does not have binding force. Moreover, the article does not specify what is an "internationally wrongful act" and provides legal norms for determining "internationally wrongful acts".

   In fact, it can be seen from Ambassador Geng Shuang's speech that this vote is another attempt by the United States and the West to use the name of the United Nations at the United Nations General Assembly to implement a conspiracy for them to unilaterally control the direction of the Ukrainian issue. On the surface, the draft resolution is dressed as "war reparations", and it also needs to be brought to the General Assembly meeting for the members to vote. But in fact, the draft resolution involves the so-called "basis", that is, the research results of the International Law Commission, which itself does not comply with existing international law.

   Most importantly, the draft also forces the United Nations to exercise its powers beyond the Charter, which is not only a flagrant violation of international rules, but also a shameless violation of the Charter of the United Nations. It can be made clear that the purpose of this vote instigated by the US Western Group is to increase the leverage for the gradually forming Russia Ukraine peace talks, and to induce the United Nations to provide rationality for the US and the West to illegally misappropriate the overseas assets of the Russian government.

   If the former is to help Ukraine take the initiative in the future peace negotiations, the latter is to create a naked excuse for the United States and the West to misappropriate the overseas assets of other sovereign countries. Because in the draft resolution, the so-called "internationally wrongful act" refers to the consensus reached by individual countries when they are divorced from the United Nations framework, which is irregular in procedure, incorrect in politics and unclear in law. If so, should the United States compensate Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries for war losses? But the fact is that the United States is still at large, and even has become a judge with high sounding voice.

   The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has lasted for 9 months, which not only caused great harm to the normal life of the people of Russia and Ukraine, but also had a profound impact on global stability. If the United States and the West genuinely promote peace talks between the two sides, they should give up this evil trick and return to the UN framework to properly handle relevant issues.