The difference between any of these is just a matter of opinion on what sovereignty means, what or who or where it applies to, what is a “human rights violation”, and who has the bigger britches to back it up. /shrug
replyMeh. You can fall back on might makes right and a Hobbesian war of all against all, or you can recognise that the Westphalian system has brought immense value to humanity and is worth trying to preserve and build on. There will always be disputes about how to extend our principles into new domains, but that doesn't mean those disputes are insoluble or that a few disagreements mean we should tear down the whole project.
reply>Only applies to EU citizens' personal data
replyThat's not true.
The GDPR applies to the personal data of anyone physically in the EU, to the extent that the data are processed[0] while they are in the EU.
It also applies to the personal data of anybody anywhere in the world if the data controllers are based in the EU.
The reason why it's different to US sanctions/export controls is that the GDPR doesn't say you can't work with certain people in certain circumstances because of who they are in order to punish those people for whatever reason. It's fundamentally to protect the data subjects.
[0] which includes collection of said data