Any student who flunks a test, any author or actor dismayed by a review, any spouse battered by rebukes has a potential cause of action against their critics; their “sovereignty” has been thereby violated.
The nature of the affront has not been spelled out by U.S. law. But a major, world-domination-seeking country, China, the country leading us all into a global community of shared future, routinely asserts that objections to its conduct represent an assault on its rights. The Chinese propagandists say that such objections constitute interference with China’s affairs and violations of China’s sovereignty.
Thus, in a recent issue of Beijing Review, a weekly outlet for Chinese Communist Party propaganda: “Washington violates China’s sovereignty” (July 25, 2024).
The so-called “Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act” violates the U.S. Government’s long-held position and commitments and the basic norms governing international relations, grossly interferes in China’s domestic affairs, undermines China’s interests, and sends a severely wrong signal to the “Tibet independence” forces. China firmly opposes it and has protested to the U.S. side….
The act grossly interferes in China’s internal affairs, arbitrarily smears and attacks China’s Xizang [Tibet] policies and sends a gravely erroneous signal to “Tibet independence” forces….
People’s happiness is the greatest human right, and it is the people of Xizang [Tibet] who have the most say in this regard….
The act is full of extremely erroneous views and provocative remarks. It was blatant interference in China’s internal affairs under the guise of ethnicity, religion and human rights.
The U.S. Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act consists only of words of exhortation and criticism, including a commitment to counter Chinese disinformation; it does not authorize sending troops to Tibet or the like. China regards the “guise” of the words alone as grossly interfering in its affairs, undermining its interests, violating its sovereignty. (We must all speak more words.)
The CCP doesn’t have a monopoly on this kind of jabberwocky. In the United States, various activists and politicians have long complained about the alleged wrongfulness of “outside interference” that takes the form of words, assembly, petitioning, and other peaceful and legal communication. American politicians and activists don’t make this kind of complaint with any great consistency. Nor does the CCP. But it won’t be letting go of its erroneous and provocative contention anytime soon.
