Liberty and Democracy in East Asia

In East Asia, liberty and democracy is still a key issue. That means we still largely lack them. A couple of countries are still openly under one-party rule, while even some more are virtually so. In this world, noninterventionism sounds rather supporting authoritarian regimes than guarding peoples from outer attacks. How would liberal and democratic East Asia look like? East Asia is a multi-religious, multi-cultural, multi-lingual, and, of course, nonclassless society. In one word, East Asia is divers. And a divers society needs pluralistic social system. Taking China's greatness into consideration, divers and pluralistic East Asia needs divers and pluralistic China. Should China be splitted into small Chinas? Not necessarily. Or dictatorial small Chinas might be much worse than one big democratic China. The term "self-determination" implies the independence of occupied or unrepresented people, while it can also mean the personal independence on her/his lifecourse. They not always go in coordination. Especially during the last 2 centuries, nation states prospered, and the former national self-determination was given the priority. Nationalism was strong. Is the latter individual self-determination secured, once the former national self-determination was achieved? As the problem of FGM clearly shows, respect for certain cultures does not always mean respect for every individual member of the cultures. To coordinate both the national self-determination and the individual self-determination, "the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives"(Universal Declaration of Human Rights, http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm) is the key. Regarding the importance of human rights, it must be very easy for pro-self-determination people to agree with the importance, and to unite to achieve the goal. Not really, especially in the international politics. Why not? From the end of the last century, American ruling parties started talking about democracy and human rights to justify their foreign policies. Some leftists accused them of interventionism. The leftists lost the passion to speak and act against dectatorship or authoritarian regime as well as the credibility to do so. They are not free from the spell of noninterventionism.