Russia and China getting ready to create New World Order

Fifty years after Richard Nixon and Mao Zedong’s historic 1972 handshake, the geopolitical world order is once again reshaping. The world is now watching a growing alliance between Beijing and Moscow.

Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in early February this year on the opening day of the Beijing Winter Olympics.

The meeting could have granted an opportunity for Xi to urge Putin to pursue diplomacy with Ukraine and de-escalate tensions between the two countries. Instead, the Chinese regime appeared to have looked the other way as Russia planned its advances on its neighbor.

Many have described the February 04 meeting as a show of solidarity between the two regimes. The occasion was marked by a lengthy joint statement in which the two countries announced a no limits partnership, in which there were no forbidden areas of cooperation.

The 5,000-word communiqué also expressed opposition to the further enlargement of NATO and called on the North Atlantic Alliance to abandon its ideologized cold war approaches, to respect the sovereignty, security and interests of other countries … and to exercise a fair and objective attitude toward the peaceful development of other States.

Such a detailed statement clearly defined the nature of China and Russia’s emerging relationship, retired Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis told The Epoch Times. It is one wherein Xi and Putin are bent on stifling the West, dismantling NATO, and creating a new world order, he said.

Less than three weeks after the Putin-Xi meeting, Russia began its assault on Ukraine. Maginnis described the communique as a gentlemen’s agreement behind what many would consider very much an alliance. Putin, he added, is hopeful this newly forged alliance will help carry Russia through its invasion.

Behind the scenes, Maginnis suspects that the Xi-Putin rendezvous granted the “geopolitical back up and financial assurances” to Russia to soften the economic blow from Western sanctions. That the Chinese regime has not criticized Moscow for its attack on Ukraine could be a sign of Beijing’s silent support, he added.

“Xi is very likely encouraged by what the West is doing—or more appropriately, not doing,” Maginnis said. Russia has faced universal condemnation from the West, while receiving aid from several countries. Sanctions are also coming in from many directions in an effort to slow the Russian regime’s unprovoked assault.

But what’s most important to the Chinese regime is the fact that the United States is not sending troops to Ukraine, he noted.

In light of the raft of Western sanctions, Maginnis said he suspects “Xi will help launder whatever finances that Putin, the oligarchs, and the Russian government at large needs to keep moving forward.”

As the conflict in Ukraine continues to escalate and the Chinese regime continues its ambitions to seize Taiwan, he said that the United States and NATO have found themselves in a new cold war.

“Xi is seeking a new world order, as evidenced by many of his writings and speeches,” Maginnis said. This new world order, he added, is one that is “far more accepting of an authoritarian regime, rather than the liberal values that formulated the world order post-World War II.”

On the heels of a chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan and its handling of the Russia-Ukraine crisis, some countries are starting to consider the United States a second-rate world power, according to Maginnis. Some of these countries may soon be asking “Who do we want to align ourselves with?” and “Who’s going to really run things in the future?”

Maginnis didn’t consider Putin’s behavior to be “crazy” for invading Ukraine, but said that “Putin is pragmatic, not afraid of pulling the trigger if it’s going to benefit him in the long-term.”

With Russia and China working alongside each other to usurp the West, he said, “Taiwan should be greatly concerned, because it’s true of Xi as well; he would pull the same trigger when he feels like it will benefit him the most.”

Beijing is watching what the United States is doing in Ukraine. One thing to watch, Maginnis said, is whether or not the United States will transport or relocate critical assets out of the Pacific arena to Europe. Secondly, he added that Xi is also watching the effects of the sanctions on Russia’s ability to take on Ukraine.

America’s military presence in the Pacific, combined with the impact of crushing economic sanctions, remains the primary concerns of the Chinese regime as it eyes Taiwan, he said.

Can United States afford to ban export of oil and gas from Russia?

The United States may survive cutting off Russian oil and gas imports over Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, but it would almost certainly strike a massive financial toll.

Political support for banning Russian energy imports is growing in both parties, and the White House said the topic is under discussion — though it said President Joe Biden had not made a decision.  

Oil prices are already skyrocketing, and the Brent crude oil international benchmark hit a 13-year high of US$139 per barrel on fears of a ban after Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US was engaging in an active discussion about the possibility.

Russia is one of the world’s largest oil producers, with a 12% global market share, according to an analysis by JPMorgan.

Prior to the invasion of Ukraine, Russia was exporting about 6.5 million barrels daily, of which 4.3 million barrels per day were going to Europe and the United States. The US was importing about 600,000 to 800,000 barrels from Russia daily — or about 8% of the country’s supply of crude oil and petroleum products.

Cutting off that spigot will lead to higher prices unless more supply comes from somewhere.

It’s possible that the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could decide to increase supply, but there has been no indication from such countries that they will produce and export more oil to replace Russia’s, the JPMorgan analysis warned.

“The Biden team is already calling Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and others, I imagine,” said Morgan Bazilian, Director of the Colorado-based Payne Institute for Public Policy. “But their diplomatic leverage on those countries is limited, and they have shown very little appetite to be influenced by Biden and the US.”

Relations between Saudi Arabia and the Biden administration are decidedly chilled following Democratic criticism of the killing of former Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who is widely believed to have been murdered by Saudi agents.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is the day-to-day ruler of Saudi Arabia, also recently told The Atlantic in an interview, “I do not care whether Biden misunderstood things about him.”

Senior US officials also took a rare trip to Venezuela, another OPEC member, this weekend for talks about potentially easing sanctions on oil exports from that country.

Another option to take the pressure off a ban on Russian oil would be to increase US shale production, although that growth would be limited by the necessary labor and infrastructure demands, according to the JPMorgan analysis.

It is more expensive to produce oil from shale fields in West Texas than Saudi Arabia. The higher international prices could lead to increased production in the US given the economics, though relief at the pump would be a bigger question.

“Saudi Arabia is known for having the cheapest, sweetest crude oil — it takes the least amount of additional refining, very cheap to process, and it's very cheap to get out of the ground,” Gernot Wagner, a climate economist and visiting professor at Columbia Business School, told The Hill. “West Texas crude is a lot harder to get out of the ground.”

It costs less than US$10 per barrel to extract Saudi Arabian oil, whereas digging up West Texas crude costs about US$70 per barrel, according to Wagner.

“So it only really pays to get it out of the ground if the oil price is well above those US$70,” he said.

Bazilian warned that a ramp-up in domestic production would face a variety of hurdles, such as the time it takes to start pumping, financial restrictions imposed by Wall Street and an insufficient workforce.

Another wild card that could help fill the gaping hole left by Russia poses its own set of complications, Iran.

If the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal is restored, it could lead to the waiving of US sanctions, enabling Tehran to ramp up its crude supplies by one million barrels per day over the next two months, the JPMorgan analysis stated.

Bazilian described as deeply flawed the notion that cutting off Russian oil could lead to energy independence.

What would be more sensible, he argued, would be to focus more on energy security — a mix of supply, demand, markets and institutions — while finding a way to entice the US industry in the short to medium term.

“That will be tough for an administration who has climate change as a top tier priority,” Bazilian said. “Of course, that priority is not top tier today.”

Echoing these sentiments, Wagner likened a pivot away from Russian oil sources to a switch from a fast-food hamburger to a highly caloric vegan burger.

“It still produces CO2 emissions,” Wagner said. “It's still going to give you a heart attack. It might even be worse for you right at the end of the day because we don't really know what eating vegan burger does to you.”

And that sense of uncertainty is dominating global energy markets right now — in large part, Wagner explained, because we don’t know what Putin’s going to do next. But from a purely economic perspective, he said, there are certain advantages to cutting off Russian oil altogether.

“You basically rip off the risk premium,” Wagner added. “Suddenly, there's no uncertainty about what Russia will do next because it doesn't matter.”

Biden advisers weigh Saudi Arabia trip for more oil

According to Axios, President Joe Biden’s advisers are discussing a possible visit to Saudi Arabia this spring to help repair relations and convince the Kingdom to pump more oil.

A hat-in-hand trip would illustrate the gravity of the global energy crisis driven by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Biden has chastised Saudi Arabia, and the CIA believes its de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, was involved in the dismemberment of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.

The possibility also shows how Russia's invasion is scrambling world's alliances, forcing the United States to reorder its priorities — and potentially recalibrating its emphasis on human rights.

Biden officials are in Venezuela this weekend to meet with the government of President Nicolás Maduro. Some Republicans and Democrats in Washington suggest Venezuela's oil could replace Russia's, according to the New York Times.

Any visit to the Persian Gulf would come amid a busy presidential travel schedule during the next few months.

Biden will likely take trips to Japan, Spain, Germany and, potentially, Israel, Axios has also learnt.

A White House spokesperson told Axios, “We don’t have any international travel to announce at this time, and a lot of this is premature speculation.”

President Obama visited Saudi Arabia more often than any of his predecessors, a total of four trips, but relations frayed over the wars in Yemen and Syria, as well as differences about how to deal with Iran.

President Trump made restoring the relationship a priority, and boasted about arms sales to the Kingdom.

He questioned the CIA's conclusion bin Salman was involved in Khashoggi's murder and defiantly refused to condemn him. "Maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!” Trump wrote on Twitter.

During the 2020 campaign, Biden called the Kingdom a "pariah," and early in his term, released an unclassified report assessing MBS approved the operation to "capture or kill" Khashoggi.

Bin Salman isn't making it easier on Biden to repair their relations.

He appeared to go out of his way to aggravate the White House during an interview with the Atlantic published last week.

“We don’t have the right to lecture you in America,” he said. “The same goes the other way.”

Sanctions against Russia's oil exports, including a possible ban on importing Russian oil into the US, would both elevate worldwide gas prices and stoke domestic inflation.

Biden officials want to preserve options for the president, including the chance to make amends with the Saudis and persuade them to increase their oil production.

Discussions about a potential visit are still in the early phases and officials cautioned a visit is far from finalized and may not happen.

Russian actions are also factoring into the president's other planned travel.

The invasion has sparked an international refugee crisis and raised worldwide prices, so the president wants to ensure US allies remain united. His in-person attendance at summit meetings also highlights how concern about COVID-19 has waned.

Biden's first trip this year is likely to Japan, potentially in May. He's set to meet with the other leaders of the Quad: Japan, India and Australia.

In June, he's scheduled to attend a G7 meeting in Germany. That will be followed by a NATO summit in Spain.

The European itinerary could also be expanded to include a stop in Israel, where Biden told Prime Minister Naftali Bennett he wanted to visit this spring.

Russia publishes an official list of states unfriendly to it

A list of foreign states that Russia considers as having committed unfriendly actions against Russia, Russian companies and citizens was published on the Russian government's website on Monday. 

The countries, international organizations and territories considered unfriendly include Australia, Albania, Andorra, United Kingdom, including Jersey, Anguilla, British Virgin Islands, Gibraltar, the member states of the European Union, Iceland, Canada, Liechtenstein, Micronesia, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Republic of Korea, San Marino, North Macedonia, Singapore, USA, Taiwan, Ukraine, Montenegro, Switzerland, Japan." Russia lists Taiwan as being part of China.

A complimentary item of legislation from Sunday states that Russian citizens and companies must apply for a special permit to deal with unfriendly foreign entities. 

The list was created as part of a series of laws to follow a Saturday decree by Russian President Vladamir Putin for temporary economic measures to ensure the financial stability of the Russian Federation.

Part of the measures the list was to enforce was the law that allows Russian citizens, companies and state bodies to pay back foreign creditors in rubles. 

While Israel has condemned Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, it was not included on the list. Israel has taken on a mediation role during the conflict, seeing Prime Minister Naftali Bennett flying to Moscow on Saturday to speak with Putin. 

Russia-Ukraine Conflict and Implications for South Asia

According to South Asia Journal, the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine is creating ripples in the global geopolitics. Though, the western media analysis of it as a likely cause for the world war seems far-fetched, the horrors of the limited war, undoubtedly are visible for all to see.

While the role and actions/inactions of major powers Russia, United States, Europe and NATO as a whole are to be seen and analyzed by many, in their respective ways, it would be interesting to make an assessment of implications that it will have on south Asia.

Two major powers in the region, China and India, have found themselves in an unenviable situation. Both have very close politico-strategic relations with Russia but neither wants to take an open stance against Ukraine either, on account of their proximity with US-led Europe.

It is evident that both have failed to openly support the Russian invasion of Ukraine. They have asked for peace and abstained from three crucial UN meetings on the issue, leaving Russia to resorting the UNSC Veto and fend for itself.

China has significant economic stakes in Ukraine. It is the largest trading partner. Ukraine is one of the major stakeholders of Xi Jinping’s ambitious political masterpiece Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project. Both Russia and Ukraine are military suppliers to China as well.

In spite of Chinese political relations with Russia with no upper limit, its reactions in the ongoing conflict indicate that it was caught off-guard.

It could not anticipate Putin’s determination and failed to issue relevant advisory to its citizens in time. While Singapore and Taiwan issued guidelines to their limited number of citizens in Ukraine as early mid-February, the Chinese embassy was found clueless about the impending conflict.

Further, China has more of ideological and strategic affinities with Russia rather economic. The bilateral trade between the two at US$ 147 billion is about 2% of Chinese global trade. Its trade and economic stakes with Europe is much more important. Irrespective of the frequent diplomatic and political skirmishes with the United States, China knows very well that it cannot afford to get into a full-throttle political, economic or diplomatic battle with the US and its European allies.

India has almost 20,000 citizens in Ukraine, mostly students studying medicine there. It has major political, strategic, diplomatic and economic relations with Russia and cannot afford to antagonize it.

A major chunk Indian military supplies, including hardware and spares, along with S-400 air defense system too, come from Russia. Though in recent years, its dependence on Russia has reduced considerably, mainly due to import diversification to countries like the US, Israel, France and also due to indigenous ramping up of production and R&D capabilities in defense.

Russia has on all occasions in the last five decades stood by India, politically and diplomatically, including using the crucial veto in the UNSC once on the Kashmir issue.

Similarly, Ukraine has good working relations with India but has voted openly against India on its nuclear tests in 1998, supported the UNSC sanctions and provided a fair amount of military hardware to Pakistan, to be used against India. But of late, relations between the two are on an upswing and India would not like to jeopardize its relations with either.

A comparative cost-benefit analysis of national interests though certainly outweighs any explicit diplomatic hysteria on the lines, demonstrated by the west against Russia currently.

India is currently indulged in a delicate balancing act. It has expressed its concerns against invasion to Russia at the highest levels privately while appreciating their security concerns. It has also conveyed to the US and major European countries of its need to perceived neutrality.

At the same time, it is working in tandem with both Russian and Ukrainian governments, to ensure safety and evacuation of its citizens, at the earliest.

As for the direct and short-term implications, trade and military supplies for both China and India, are certain to be affected. Both are preparing for a significant disruption in their exports to the two warring nations.

For India, the timely supply of remaining S-400 systems are of critical significance given the uncertain state of its current politico-military relationship with China. The middle kingdom on the other hand, must be watching the outcome of this conflict keenly since it could provide it an opportunity to re-orient its possible invasion of Taiwan strategy in due course of time.

A good number Pakistanis stuck in Ukraine are students. Initially confounded and even putting up a statement of financial limitations, its government now is trying to evacuate its citizens.

India claims that many Pakistani and Turkish citizens have been evacuated from the war zone, by identifying themselves as Indian and hoisting Indian flags on their vehicles since India has strongly demanded the two warring sides, to ensure safety of its citizens who neither side wishes to antagonize.

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan visited Russia the day, Putin ordered his troops into Ukraine. For Pakistan this became a very awkward moment since the west became furious with his meeting with the perceived aggressor, Putin at that very moment.

It is also believed that National Bank of Pakistan became the first casualty with the US imposing a penalty of US$ 55 million on it while politically, the country remains at the receiving end of western fury.

Bangladesh with about 3,000 citizens stuck in Ukraine, too has good working relations with both countries. With Ukraine, its economic relations are growing rapidly and it is also helping Bangladesh in developing infrastructure, steel and ports. Similarly, Russia is politically too important to be disowned and criticized by it.

Nepal too has few citizens left in the war zone that have reportedly been evacuated by the Indian authorities and brought back home.

Maldives, the tiny island nation in the Indian Ocean has started feeling the impact of war since a considerable number of its foreign tourists involve both Russian and Ukrainians.

Though the south Asian region remains a bit far off from the battle raging on yet it has certainly affected countries there.

The Russo-Ukraine war has also resulted in delicate diplomatic balancing by countries around the world and China and India, primarily are on the radar.

The United Nations has not been successful in negotiating ceasefire, which raises another big question mark on the utility of the world body. The efficacy of the US-led NATO too raises doubts, both among its members and non-members. However, to prevent widespread destruction and disorder, the early the war is stopped the better that would be for the world and the humanity.

Is this the preamble of World War III?

A look at the list of countries flooding lethal weapons of enormous magnitude into Ukraine creates jittery feelings as if these countries are getting ready to fight World War III. These arms should be called weapons of mass destruction (WMD), a term coined before attacking Iraq.  

Russia fired shots on Ukraine on February 24. Two days later President Volodymyr Zelensky shared a video saying he needs ammunition, not a ride, referring to the United States’ offer of asylum to the besieged head of state. Since then, 15 countries have sent military hardware to Ukraine.

The majority of arms and supplies from ally nations are being sent via Ukraine’s 310-mile border with Poland, which has become an important lifeline both for supplies and equipment, and refugees looking to flee the conflict.

Some border nations have chosen not to allow military equipment bound for Ukraine to pass through their territory out of fear of Russian retaliation.

On February 28, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said his country won’t allow deadly weapons to be transported through Hungary’s territory, while reiterating the government doesn’t want to be involved in the Russia-Ukraine war. Szijjarto cited security concerns for Hungarian citizens as one of the primary factors in the decision.

Despite supply chain and shipping challenges, millions of dollars of ordnance continue to flow into Ukraine from two continents.

United States

On February 26, US President Joe Biden authorized the State Department to send US$350 million in weapons to Ukraine. Among the list of hardware on the list are Javelin anti-tank weapons, anti-aircraft systems, ammunition, and body armor.

Regarding the Russia-Ukraine war, US Acting Permanent Representative Aud-Frances McKernan said, “The United States reaffirms its unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, extending to its territorial waters.”

McKernan then added, per Biden, neither the United States nor NATO has any desire or intention to engage in a conflict with Russia, clarifying that there is no threat to Moscow from either.

This is the third time Biden has used his presidential drawdown authority to send emergency security assistance, now totaling US$1 billion, from US reserves to Ukraine.

“It is another clear signal that the United States stands with the people of Ukraine as they defend their sovereign, courageous, and proud nation,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said.

Canada

The Canadian government approved an additional US$25 million in military aid to Ukraine on February 27. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the country would send US$7.8 million worth of lethal equipment to the European nation during a press conference back on February 14 in anticipation of a Russian attack.

Regarding the initial shipment, Trudeau said, “The intent of this support from Canada and other partners is to deter further Russian aggression.”

Germany

Chancellor Olaf Sholz announced on February 26 that Germany would deliver 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 Stinger missiles to our friends in Ukraine. Scholz said February 24 marked a watershed in the history of our continent, asserting that Russian President Vladimir Putin is jeopardizing the long-term security of Europe, which he said can’t be achieved in opposition to Russia.

Sweden

In a departure from its decades-long neutrality, the Swedish government approved the shipment of 5,000 anti-tank weapons, 135,000 field rations, 5,000 helmets, and 5,000 pieces of body armor. “My conclusion is now that our security is best served by us supporting Ukraine’s ability to defend itself against Russia,” Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said on February 28. She added this is the first time Sweden has sent weapons to a country at war since the Soviet Union attacked Finland in 1939.

France

On February 26, an army spokesperson said France would send defensive military equipment to Ukraine to aid in the resistance effort against Russia. President Emmanuel Macron said, “It’s not only the Ukrainian people who are bereaved by the war … it’s all the peoples of Europe.”

United Kingdom

Back on January 17, Secretary of Defense for the United Kingdom, Ben Wallace, said the UK would provide self-defense weapons and training to Ukraine amid the build-up of Russian troops near the border. Prime Minister Boris Johnson told Parliament on February 23, “In light of the increasingly threatening behavior from Russia and in line with our previous support, the UK will shortly be providing a further package of military support to Ukraine.” He elaborated that the second military support package included both lethal and non-lethal aid.

Belgium

Responding to a direct request from Kyiv, the nation opted to send 2,000 machine guns to the Ukrainian army and 3,800 tons of fuel on February 26.

Netherlands

As of February 26, the Dutch government said it’s delivering 50 Panzerfaust 3 anti-tank weapons with 400 missiles to Ukraine to help with the resistance effort against Russia. Additionally, 200 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles were promised along with helmets, shard vests, and sniper rifles.

Czech Republic

Formerly occupied by Russian troops during the Soviet era, the Czech government sent 4,000 artillery shells worth US$1.7 million to Ukraine in January. The Czech Ministry of Defense released a statement on February 26 saying it will also ship machine guns, submachine guns, assault rifles, and pistols, together with ammunition at an estimated value of US$8.6 million.

Italy

Joining the growing list of countries providing military aid to Ukraine, on February 28, the Italian cabinet pledged to dispatch Stinger missiles, mortars, and Milan or Panzerfaust anti-tank weapons. Among the items included in the defense package are Browning heavy machine guns, MG-type light machine guns, and counter-IED systems.

Portugal

Upon request from Ukrainian officials, the Portuguese Ministry of Defense announced on February 26 that it will deliver military equipment including vests, night vision goggles, grenades, ammunition, complete portable radios, analog repeaters, and automatic G3 rifles.

Greece

The Balkan nation sent defense equipment and medical supplies on two C-130 aircraft from Athens on February 27 at the request of Ukrainian authorities.

Romania

Another former satellite state of the Soviet Union, Romanian government spokesman Dan Carbunaru said the country would ship ammunition and military equipment on February 27.

Spain

On March 02, Spanish Minister of Defense, Margarita Robles, announced the nation will send defensive equipment to Ukraine. “In this first shipment that will go aboard two planes, we expect to send 1,370 anti-tank grenade launchers, 700,000 rifles, and machine-gun rounds, and light machine guns,” Robles said.

Finland

President Sauli Vainamo Niinisto decided to send an arms support package to Ukraine on February 28. The delivery will include 2,500 assault rifles, 150,000 cartridges, 1,500 single-shot anti-tank weapons, and 70,000 combat ration packages.

United States protests Israeli refusal to back UN resolution condemning Russia

US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield protested to her Israeli counterpart over Israel's refusal to join 87 countries in backing a US-led resolution to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine at the UN Security Council, said Israeli officials.

Israel has attempted to maintain good relations with both Russia and Ukraine during the crisis, and has even offered to serve as a mediator. But that fence-sitting has resulted in criticism from both sides and now from the United States.

The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office and Foreign Ministry had been claiming for weeks that the Biden administration understood Israel's need to calibrate its reaction to the Russian invasion in order to maintain its security coordination with Russia in Syria.

But Israel dragged its feet as the US was gathering co-sponsors for the resolution and did not provide a clear answer before the meeting began. Most close US allies and partners did back the resolution.

After the vote, which Russia vetoed, Thomas-Greenfield passed a message to the Israeli Ambassador, Gilad Erdan stressing the Biden administration’s disappointment.

Eleven (11) Security Council members voted in favor of the resolution, three (China, the United Arab Emirates and India) abstained, and Russia was the lone "no" vote.

An Israeli foreign ministry official said the decision not to accept the US request to co-sponsor the resolution was due to the fact that Israel is not a member of the UN Security Council and it was clear Russia would veto.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid told Israel's Security Cabinet that the US contained the Israeli refusal to join the resolution.

“We speak to the Biden administration in a wide range of channels on various aspects of the Ukrainian issue and the bottom line is that our partners are well aware of our considerations," Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lior Haiat told Axios.

The UN General Assembly was expected to convene as early as Monday to vote on a resolution condemning Russia. Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid told the Cabinet that Israel would vote in favor.