Nebenzya’s Prophecy: “Complete Control” and the US Agenda

In the diplomatic parlance of the UN Security Council, the words of Russian Ambassador Vasily Nebenzya on Monday were akin to a prophecy of doom for the new Gaza resolution. As Russia abstained from the vote, Nebenzya warned that the council was ceding “complete control” of the situation to the United States. This critique cuts to the heart of the resolution, which is drafted by the US, based on President Trump’s 20-point plan, and establishes a “Board of Peace” chaired by Trump himself. To Russia, this is not a UN peacekeeping mission; it is an American franchise operation flying a UN flag.
The resolution’s structure supports Nebenzya’s assertion. The “International Stabilization Force” is authorized to carry out a mission—disarmament—that aligns perfectly with US and Israeli security doctrine. The “pathway to statehood” was included to satisfy the Palestinian Authority and avoid a veto, but the operational levers remain in US hands. The “Board of Peace” effectively bypasses existing UN structures for reconstruction, centralizing decision-making under the US President. This consolidation of power is what triggered the Russian and Chinese abstentions.
However, possessing “complete control” also means possessing complete responsibility. The US, represented by Ambassador Mike Waltz, embraced the plan as a “historic” opportunity to “dismantle Hamas’ grip” and build a “prosperous” Gaza. By taking the reins so publicly, the US has tied its credibility to the success of a plan that is already being rejected by the combatants. Israel’s rebuke of the statehood clause and Hamas’s vow that it “will not disarm” mean that the US is now in control of a deadlock.
The prophecy of “ceding control” also implies a weakening of the UN itself. By allowing a specific member state to dictate the terms and the management of a major conflict resolution effort, the Security Council risks becoming a rubber stamp for great power interests. Russia’s abstention was a way to register this protest without obstructing the immediate desire for a ceasefire or resolution, essentially giving the US enough rope to hang itself diplomatically.
As the “Board of Peace” begins its work and the stabilization force attempts to form, Nebenzya’s warning will loom large. If the plan succeeds, the US will claim a major victory. But if it descends into the “international guardianship” conflict that Hamas threatens, or stalls due to Israeli intransigence, the world will remember that the UN ceded control, and the failure belongs solely to Washington.