中国民族团结进步法生效，跨境管辖条款引发多方反弹
新法将推广普通话、强化国家认同写入法律义务，其域外追责条款被台湾、美国及联合国视为跨国镇压工具。
《民族团结进步促进法》于7月1日正式生效，将推广国家通用语言文字、铸牢中华民族共同体意识纳入法律框架。该法要求各级学校以普通话为基本教学语言，课程须培育对中华民族的认同感，家长有责任引导子女“热爱中国共产党和中国人民”。最具争议的第六十三条规定，境外组织或个人若从事“破坏民族团结进步”或“制造民族分裂”的行为，将依法追究责任。中国司法部副部长胡卫列上周解释，该条款针对的是危害国家安全的违法行为，并非思想管控，且其法律渊源可追溯至宪法第四条及刑法第一百零三条。
北京方面将这部法律定位为维护国家统一、促进民族交往交流交融的制度保障。中国官方媒体及部分分析指出，该法序言强调团结、命运共同体与民族复兴，而非强制同化；域外条款仅将既有刑法效力延伸至境外，并未创设新罪名。中国外交部亦声明，法律保护所有群体的合法权益。然而，联合国人权事务高级专员蒂尔克已公开呼吁撤销该法，警告其可能“加深对语言、教育、宗教、文化、表达及集会自由的限制”。
来自北美、欧洲及亚洲的批评声音聚焦于该法对少数群体权利的潜在侵蚀。美国参议院外交关系委员会两党领袖等九名议员发表声明，对“要求意识形态上服从中共”的条文表达严重关切，并称该法试图将跨国镇压“合法化”。国际特赦组织指出，新法将“强迫同化政策进一步制度化”，迫使少数民族接受以汉族文化为核心的国家定义身份。藏人及维吾尔人团体则认为，该法为在新疆、西藏等地推行的普通话寄宿教育及宗教管控提供了更强法律依据。
台湾当局的反应尤为强烈。总统赖清德称该法为“恶法”，是“红色恐怖”的输出，并宣布将建立预警机制、强化媒体素养教育、与理念相近国家合作反制跨境压迫。台湾国安官员匿名指出，该法模糊的“破坏团结”定义使台湾官员、普通民众、宗教团体、跨国企业及内容创作者等八类群体面临入境大陆时被任意拘留或起诉的风险。大陆委员会警告，北京将以此法“罗织罪名”，扩大对台湾及国际支持者的威胁。目前，该法已进入实施阶段，尚无修改或废止迹象，各方正密切观察其实际执法范围与力度。
| 中国媒体 | +0.70 | aligned |
|---|---|---|
| 大西洋／英语圈媒体 | −0.80 | critical |
| 印度及南亚媒体 | −0.40 | critical |
| 东南亚媒体 | 0.00 | neutral |
China asserts that the law is necessary to protect national unity and combat separatism, extending its jurisdiction to citizens abroad.
By presenting the law as a defensive measure against separatism, using the language of sovereignty and stability, and omitting international criticism.
Omits international criticism and human rights concerns, as well as cases of repression of ethnic minorities.
The West denounces the law as a violation of sovereignty and human rights, an attempt to control ethnic minorities beyond borders.
By framing the law as an abuse of power and a threat to human rights, using testimonies and specific cases of repression.
Omits China's perspective on national security and counter-terrorism, as well as the context of violent separatist movements.
India sees the law as a threat to regional stability and an expansion of China's sphere of influence, warning against unilateralism.
By highlighting bilateral tensions and the perception of a threat to its own sovereignty, using the historical context of border conflicts.
Omits the context of the law as a response to internal separatist movements, and assurances of non-interference in others' affairs.
Southeast Asian countries observe cautiously, concerned about extraterritorial implications but avoiding direct condemnation to maintain diplomatic relations.
By adopting a neutral and factual tone, reporting facts without judgment, so as not to compromise economic and political ties with China.
Omits human rights criticisms and concerns of ethnic minorities, as well as potential tensions with neighboring countries.