Confucius must be turning in his grave. The great philosopher has been resurrected as the Confucius Institutes (CI) in several hundred colleges and universities around the world.
However, as soon as they appeared, and after a mere 10 years, the institutes — the soft power that Beijing’s communist masters have concocted to take on the world — have begun to show signs of failing.
On Jan. 5, Stockholm University announced a decision to close its Confucius Institute on June 30. The Stockholm branch, the first one to open in 2005, will also be the first to close on the heels of similar decisions at the University of Chicago, Pennsylvania State University and several Canadian colleges.
A few years before the 2008 market collapse, many education institutions in the US began to experience budget shortfalls and were unable to field desired programs, including East Asia languages and studies that require Sino-linguists and teaching materials. Sensing a rare opportunity, Beijing offered help through the government agency Hanban, to provide trained Mandarin teachers, course materials and transportation expenses.
In dire need of help, and knowing full well there would be invisible strings attached, North American — the US in particular — European and South American universities lined up and walked right into the irresistible offers: courses of language teaching and serving staff with chopsticks in hand.
Beijing officials thought that those educational planners needed, but did not have, what China had in abundance: money. A Chinese proverb says: “If you have money you can make the devil push your grind stone.” Well by early last year, there were almost 400 Confucius Institutes operating in more than 90 countries.
So what has gone wrong? By all accounts — including an article titled “China U,” by Marshall Sahlins (Nov. 18, 2013, The Nation), a University of Chicago faculty petition (March last year), the American Association of University Professors’ statement (June last year), the Canadian Association of University Teachers’ statement (December 2013), a picture quickly emerges — Confucius Institutes are behaving like state-sponsored propaganda machines that are pulling the strings on staff recruitment, curriculum selection and restricting sensitive political subjects being taught in the Institute.
Beijing’s politburo may weigh each faculty member of its higher education institutes in Chinese yuan, but Beijing’s abacus does not work on the Western campus. Mr Confucius, did you ever wonder why your compatriots never let you rest in peace since your passing thousands of years ago? Furthermore, history teaches us that the world has never been conquered by any single individual.
Kengchi Goah is a senior research fellow at the Taiwan Public Policy Council in the US.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers