Commentary: China's anti-terrorism legislation no excuse for U.S. agitation

The enactment of an anti-terrorism law by China represents a development in the right direction for a country that has been a victim of violent terror attacks, especially at a time when the international community is facing an unprecedented wave of terror threats.

The legislation, adopted by China's top legislature Sunday afternoon and aimed at creating a legal framework for China in its dealing with terrorism both at home and abroad, is by no means an excuse for a foreign country to make unwarranted distasteful criticism against China.

Prior to the adoption of the law, the United States expressed "serious concerns" about the law, saying it would "do more harm than good" to the threat of terrorism.

It is a known fact that throwing dirt on China at every opportunity is a favored game for someone in the United States. However, it is probably unknown to many how the United States -- the presumed global leader against terrorism -- came up with such a sensational and irresponsible conclusion regarding the Chinese legislation.

The proclaimed U.S. concern revolves around two points, with the first being Chinese government's requirement for technology firms to provide encryption keys and other sensitive data in case of terror probes, and the second being tighter regulation on media when reporting terrorism-related news events.

Washington argues that the technical requirements would lead to breach of privacy and infringement upon intellectual property rights for U.S. firms. The argument, however, is a typical example of ignoring the elephant in the room -- Only in this case, there are two elephants.

Nowadays, the Internet is increasingly used by terror groups to spread their extremist ideas, recruit fighters, channel fund and plot attacks. One of the shooters in a recent carnage in south California is found to be radicalized via the Internet.

Many countries including the United States have written into law technology firms' duty to cooperate in terror-related surveillance or probe.

Meanwhile, although it is a common practice to oblige firms to help fight terrorism, the United States appears to have gone way further by abusing the so-called "backdoor access" to make itself the world master of eavesdropping: It does not only spy on common U.S. citizens but also prominent foreign leaders.

As for the U.S. concern over possible restrictions on personal freedom, anyone with a sober mind sees the necessity to sacrifice a small portion of personal rights if it's what it takes to preserve the ultimate personal rights to life.

And the U.S. worries about a media clampdown under the new law is nothing but a far-fetched notion, since China has hosted scores of foreign media organizations and their reporters have access to even the highest government offices for years.

The various restrictions on media imposed by the new law only intends to prevent copy-cat crimes, protect frontline anti-terror workers and keep society from the harm of hearsay.

To admit it or not, it is the United States iself that has created grounds breeding terrorism -- when its military involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria has actually turned these countries into breeding grounds for terrorism.

In short, the U.S. criticism against China's anti-terrorism legislation is but yet another case of Washington's application of double standards in dealing with issues of terrorism.

Instead of making seemingly righteous comments on China's anti-terrorism legislation, Washington should spend more time reflecting on its counter-terrorism strategies and policies so as to make positive contributions to the global campaign against terrorism. Endi