Despite complaints from some Western governments and NGOs, on Tuesday a representative from China's Ministry of Public Security (MPS) told a briefing of consular officials from 11 countries that the law will enter into force on January 1, 2017, and there will be no transition, or 'grace period' after it takes effect.
The new law forces foreign NGOs to register with the MPS and provincial police departments if they want to operate on the mainland.
If they want to work in China temporarily, the NGOs will have to partner with a Chinese organization, and file their programs with the MPS or the police department in that province.
The law has been criticized by NGOs and Western governments, which believe it a threat to the independent work of NGOs.
Amnesty International said the law "presents a very real threat to the legitimate work of independent NGOs and should immediately be revoked."
The White House said it is "deeply concerned" that the new law "will further narrow space for civil society in China and constrain contact between individuals and organizations in the United States and China."
Chinese officials strongly disagree, and say that the NGO law is intended to strengthen the legal rights of foreign NGO's working in China.
"The formulation of this law will allow foreign NGOs within China to function in a smoother and more orderly manner. The legal rights of foreign NGOs, under the regulations and direction of the law, will be guaranteed more sufficiently and favorably," said Zhang Yong, Deputy Director of the Law Committee of China's National People's Congress.
Alexander Salitsky of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Primakov Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO) told Sputnik that the assertiveness of Beijing is at the root of Western administrations' unhappiness with the new law.
"The West doesn't like the fact that China has already been talking to them as equals for a long time. The Chinese have absolutely no concerns about internal security in connection with the activities of foreign NGOs," Salitsky said.
The analyst said China's bid to regulate and, to an extent, localize the activities of foreign NGOs is an attempt to better connect them to Chinese interests, particularly in the wake of some controversial activities by unregulated foreign NGOs.
For example, the Washington-based National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which claims to "support freedom around the world," has provided $96.52 million since 1983 to at least 103 groups in China. Some of these groups have links to separatist organizations like the World Uyghur Congress and the Tibetan Youth Congress, which the Chinese government condemns as terrorist organizations.
"It (China) is regulating these organizations and their activities. It's a natural desire on the part of a large country, this is a normal process – every country has the right to regulate the stay of foreigners on its territory, this is an axiom of international life," Salitsky said.
"The Chinese authorities quite rightly want to regulate the exchange of information with these organizations. I wouldn't say that China looks less cultured or civilized than Western countries because this approach exists all over the world."
"The Chinese understand completely that such actions might cause a response; there might be some discrimination towards Chinese NGO's or Chinese capital in Western countries. By the way, there are some real signs of this kind of discrimination, for example, with relation to the Confucius Institute. And since China has become such a 'heavyweight' in world politics, it sometimes steps on somebody's toes harder than its toes were stepped on in the first place," Salitsky concluded.
