This is a case where I don't really think machine translation does it justice, but taking the translation at its word:

Hamdan : The Palestinian factions, including Hamas, have in recent days exerted great efforts in political communications to secure a resolution that would define the international force’s main mission as protecting the Palestinian people from aggression and preventing genocide from being repeated, and that such forces be deployed along the lines of contact around Gaza, between the Strip and the territories occupied in 1948. We conducted contacts with most members of the Security Council—both permanent and non-permanent members. We also communicated with the Arab and Islamic groups about this matter and submitted a detailed memorandum responding to this resolution or proposal at the time, clarifying its danger to the Palestinian cause and its negative repercussions on the international system and international law. We hope that what we and other factions have submitted will be reflected in the Council’s corridors before the vote, and that its impact will appear in a resolution that does justice to the Palestinian people and protects them from occupation and the genocide the Zionist entity has committed over the past two years.

We have a few key problems here. The resolution that was drafted obviously does not protect the Palestinian people from aggression, and the alternative drafted by Russia and China is not being accepted by the western powers. Despite China and Russia's efforts to change the resolution, including alternate proposals, the resolution that was decided by the western powers was what was voted on.

Secondly, Hamas requested that they hoped what they and other factions submitted would be considered in the vote, and that is exactly what happened. The PA supported the resolution, and yet China and Russia did not vote to pass it. Instead, countries like Algeria voted for it alongside the US.

Third, is the protection from genocide line. The US opened the talks with threats of heightened genocide should the resolution be vetoed. This isn't an empty threat. The US made it clear, either they will bomb the shit out of Palestine, or they will proceed with the plan. Returning to point 1, the alternatives presented by China and Russia were denied, and the draft was rushed.

In short, a veto would have resulted in escalated conflict, a vote for would have resulted in full acceptance and a commitment to the colonial project, and an abstention would have resulted in the resolution passing but with the express disapproval of China and Russia, alongside their soon to come alternative propositions. China and Russia maintain the position of the two state solution and China in particular has stated that Palestine must be governed by Palestinians, and is willing to step in and make that happen if consensus among those in charge of Palestine is reached.

There was no easy, correct answer given the requests from MENA countries and PA, and the threats of the US to escalate the genocide after a hard fought ceasefire, however weak, was reached.

Numerous bad responses full of either lies or justifications for Chinese imperialism.

This is why you are being labeled a wrecker. China abstaining and trying to abide by both the PLO and resistance groups, who I might add already agreed on the PLO as the national authority for international representation, is not imperialism. You might say that it's weak anti-imperialism, but it is by no means imperialism proper.

Secondly, arguing on the internet is all we can do, other than organize in real life to undermine western support for Israel. My hope is that I can convince you to reframe your analysis from "China is imperialist and therefore must be destroyed" into "China is being insufficiently anti-imperialist." It sounds like you believe the latter, but you call them imperialist, giving liberals ammo rather than providing actual leftist critique.

China isn't standing behind the resolution with pride, because it disagrees with the resolution. Since you value words greatly, read their full statement.

We both know that this sham imperialist UN force will in no way stabilize the region. The only way to stabilize it is by removing the destabilizzing force. Which is done with armed resistance.

Agreed. So does China.

Good. It’s not a misattribution. China is endorsing a the genocide of Palestinians as a bargaining chip for their own gain. They got Nexperia back the very next day.

This is conspiracy theory nonsense and you have nothing to back it up other than that it aligns with how you presently feel.

Nothing you have said shows in any way that China is serious about the Palestinian cause.

The 2024 Beijing Declaration reconciled Hamas and Fatah, and created a unified resistance in Palestine, along with support from China and an understanding that Palestinian statehood is a necessity and disarmament an impossibility.

They are increasing trade with Israel and building out Israeli infrastructure, even building colonist settlements in the West Bank.

This is bad, I agree! They are also working with resistance groups and trying to form a Palestinian state. I would say this is an example of China being insufficiently anti-imperialist, not equal to the US and EU who have been arming the IDF.

Unless you have a very compelling reply which isn’t just an excuse why it’s okay when China does imperialism, this will be my last response here or I will respond with a Twitter post which says basically the same thing.

You haven't given any examples of China doing imperialism. You've given good reasons to critique China for not being sufficiently anti-imperialist. The reason the distinction is important is because the assumption that China is imperialist means it cannot be reformed, and must be destroyed, whereas if China is insufficiently anti-imperialist, corrective action must be taken. The very fact that you say that it's good that the hordes of Zenz lovers are China bashing and using it for the purposes of arguing that China should be destroyed rather than principled leftist critique that they need to be doing better is exactly the problem. You're fueling the narrative that China is incapable of doing better.

Go ahead, send another shitty, unrelated twitter post. I hope at the very least you understand the difference between being insufficiently anti-imperialist and being actively imperialist, and that fueling the latter narrative while believing the former just backfires and gives the Kamala brigade the upper hand in saying the US is a more moral alternative.