6

Recently, the US Senate passed a bill about the situation in Hong Kong.

Some core points from the bill:

  • impose sanctions on Chinese officials
  • review the special autonomous status it grants Hong Kong in trade considerations. For now US treats China and HK differently while trading.
  • many words about commiting a freedom by the US

The third point is less concrete and in fact, common in US foreign claims - so it is harmless. But first two are definitely not. First two points look like an attempt to spread US laws to foreign countries.

Can it formally be treated as foreign interference into China's inner dealings?

|improve this question
  • That link requires signing in to nytimes to read. Can you summarize the important parts in your question please? – AHamilton Nov 22 at 11:24
  • @AHamilton, I'll make a try and give some abstract. – user2501323 Nov 22 at 11:28
  • 2
    I think you can read 10 or so free articles a month on the NY Times’ web pages. – Jan Nov 22 at 12:13
  • 2
    @JustMe Probably not. My browsers clean cookies at the end of a setting and thus my free articles at the Süddeutsche reset but the NYT’s don’t. I believe they’re more sophisticated. – Jan Nov 22 at 17:28
  • 3
    The EU should have implemented similar sanctions against the U.S. Too bad most of the EU states are U.S puppet states. – dan-klasson Nov 22 at 22:39
22

Yes the Senate bill can be framed as an attempt by the U.S. to influence China. Whether that is a bad thing or not depends on your own beliefs. The U.S. commonly uses trade restrictions and sanctions to attempt to bring about change in other nations that it believes are acting against the interests of the U.S.. Iran continually faces sanctions for their support of terror abroad and attempt to develop nuclear weapons. Russia also faced sanctions for annexing the Crimean peninsula.

Countries try to influence each other all the time and through all different sorts of methods. Most countries accept it to a reasonable degree, China has become particularly more aggressive in spreading pro-China sentiment. There have been many people claim China is overplaying their hand, and backlash has been long overdue. China can claim this is an attempt to influence their inner dealings, but that doesn't really change anything for them unless they want to escalate tensions with the U.S. The U.S. interferes with pretty much every other country and has as they see fit since the end of WWII.

|improve this answer
  • That is a VERY measured answer, thank you. – user2501323 Nov 22 at 14:10
  • 1
    It'd be nice to use the word "supposedly" or "so-called" when making a reference to a one-sided view. Iran is supporting various groups that oppose U.S. influence and expansion - and that's why they are being sanctioned. Also there is zero proof of Iran actually attempting to build nuclear weapons. It is a claim that has been vehemently denied by hundreds of Iranian officials and scientists of various ranks. – Mossi Nov 23 at 0:11
  • 1
    I would add a note that hiding a country's involvement is much less accepted. – Bobson Nov 24 at 18:09
9

Yes, in the same way that any action or inaction of a foreign government can be treated as "foreign interference".

No, it's ordinary diplomacy.

|improve this answer
  • 1
    @Mossi Foreign interference exists, and is the normal state of affairs. Nations tend to interfere with allies in different ways to enemies. – Caleth Nov 23 at 0:20
  • My original comment: "So you are saying that basically foreign interference does not exist and any attempt by a government to force another government/nation to do as it desires is just normal diplomacy?" I deleted my comment after assuming it was going to lead to a tiring, long-winded, political back-n-forth but looks like all is well! Nevertheless, this Bill is a lever to pressure, influence, and interfere with the way China deals with their neighbours (and with the U.S.). – Mossi Nov 23 at 1:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .