The result was delete. I think the last rationale is the most succinct one here - as it (and others) have pointed out, unless the article pulled together every occasion on which China was involved in another countries' affairs (which would be a ludicrously long article) this is effectively OR. Black Kite (talk) 01:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This article has various problems. It is encyclopedic; written from a biased and a non Neutral point of view; with unclear criteria of selection; some entries being trivial or normal in any society; highly speculative with more assumptions than proven facts; it has a journalistic sensationalist tone and unreliable sources. If we are talking about foreign affairs Hong Kong and Macau shouldn't be in this article, those entities being part of China, so it is an internal issue and again the tone is biased and speculative with unproven assumptions. Daduxing (talk) 16:32, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]