Editor's note: Kong Qingjiang is the dean of the School of International Law, China University of Political Science and Law. The article reflects the author's views, and not necessarily those of CGTN.

It seems to many the world is becoming more and more perplexing. Soldiers of a Western country were found to have committed what could only be described as atrocities in a central Asian country during what is acclaimed as a just war against terrorism.

More than 39 civilians and disarmed war prisoners were unlawfully killed, regardless of their rights under the Geneva Convention and other international humanitarian law.

Amid the sporadic news reports about these atrocities, the spokesperson of China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs Zhao Lijian, came out to tweet about the war crime, suggesting that the involved country, namely Australia, should take the responsibility.

Unfortunately, the tweet, which was nothing but a rightful expression against war crimes, was regarded as "repugnant" by Australian Prime Minister Morrison, who even demanded an apology from the Chinese government.

It has shocked many in China, who have to ask themselves: Does the prime minister in his furious response intend to deny the crimes of his soldiers? After all, the spokesman's tweet followed a report on an investigation that found the special forces of Australia had committed at least 39 unlawful killings in Afghanistan. Does PM Morrison want to say that the Chinese spokesman exaggerated his soldiers' crimes? He should know that a crime is a crime.

Does he want to convey the message to China, "It is none of your business"? Perhaps. But the way I see it is that the Chinese spokesman's tweet exposed his country's gross human rights violations, and that's why Morrison was extremely offended.

What is equally alarming, if not more, is that quite a number of Western governments have showed their support for Morrison and his country. Were they not well informed of the heinous killings of the civilians and war prisoners in Afghanistan? It is difficult to understand why they voiced their support in unison for Australia, but did not condemn the killings.

After all they are the elites of their respective societies. They know that killing innocents is a crime. Then, why? The only plausible explanation is that they have become blind to the atrocities of their own or their peers in the Western world.

But wait. The prime minster has apparently forgotten that he and his counterparts from time to time have stuck their noses in others' affairs. In light of this, his logic seems clearer: he and his Western counterparts have all the rights to criticize other countries, but the latter has no right to do so towards the Western counties. It is useful to remind them that such a logic is not acceptable for the rest of the world. It might also be helpful to remind the prime minster's counterparts in the West, who are busy taking sides, that being blind to the facts will add no credence to the values they advocate such as human rights protection.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)