sanctuary

The diplomatic tensions between the US and China are rising over the yet unclear deportment of a vocal dissident. I am not sure what to think about this. I do not know enough about the situation to be able to penetrate broader judgments that span from unwise meddling to enshrining basic human rights.
 It is exceedingly difficult to assay the situation, especially when all parties are not exactly forthcoming. I was encouraged at first that the US State Department seemed to fake left and then indicate that it might not kowtow to other pressures and more practical considerations. I feel sympathy for this activist and his family and their grander cause, which surely touches a billion souls, but at the same time I have to wonder how it might play out if the situation were reversed. Months ago, there was an international outcry over the detention of a provocative artists and many politicians plied their resources into gaining his freedom, but just as countries resign at the futility of opposing American policy—pointedly demands for the sharing of flight manifests and financial transactions with the US Department of Homeland Security at the risk of being labelled a rogue nation or merely going-along-getting-along through secret deals for very public treaties—that would bring down all the wrath that can be mustered on malingers. How would American react to China railing against the detention of a figure like Bradley Manning, the Wikileaks informant who has been tossed in an oubliette somewhere—much less extracting him with an ambassadorial cavalry? What constitutes an internal-affair, and can the determination be made in the face of hypocrisy?