If the United Nations was less west-dominated in character, then I would be 100% for outside orgs controlled by it applying external pressures on nation policy for the same reason that I am 100% in favor of a national government applying pressure on a conservative region within its borders to enact a progressive policy. It is only because the UN is dominated by international capital and regularly uses humanitarian language to justify its awful actions that I can agree with your logic here.

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 6 points 3 weeks ago

It's not about the UN, it's about the primary contradiction.

China's sees imperialism vs anti-imperialism is the primary contradiction in the world, and that the imperial core countries will never have revolutions until they no longer materially benefit from the resources they take from the periphery.

China's position on sovereignty will strengthen the periphery countries until they are strong enough to resist imperialism, at which point the imperial core will lose their resources. When this happens the core countries will not accept the loss of profit, they will pursue it elsewhere and the only place to pursue it will be to cannibalise the core. This cannibalisation will result in the conditions for revolution in core countries.

China is maintaining complete consistency on their sovereignty position because it's supposed to lead to the conditions necessary for communism to win.