I think there is some poor wording being used ignoring nuances of the English language and how different people speak it. One point that hits hard for me is the way its being framed as "policy" rather than "principles". Policy is too strong a word for its something that is beholden with political obligations that shifts the WMF away from the core pillars. For many jurisdictions the term policy is going to translate into activism, advocacy, even into the realm of labelling all Wikimedians as lobbyists, or trouble makers.
Whereas if we take as a principle it sets this as an expectation of our community and our internal activities, it does not cross that line into areas which cause concern, dissent, and fear within governments, GLAMs, government agencies with whom we need to work. It also limits the risk to communities who are charitable organisations, and individuals that want to contribute without the fear of being labelled as a subversive.
Its one thing to consider what we do and put guides in place its another for the WMF to step into areas, or push our contributors into positions that have implications beyond sharing knowledge.