US trade friction hitting academia: experts
▶ Chinese overseas students contributing to American economy
Cornell University has suspended partnership programs with Renmin University of China (RUC) in an incident that Chinese scholars say is an example of China-US trade friction spilling over into academic exchanges between the two countries.
Senior leaders of Renmin University of China are contemplating an official response, an employee at the media and publicity department of the school office told the Global Times by phone on Tuesday.
The incident has spurred heated discussions among students and news outlets on social media.
Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations (ILR) has suspended two academic exchanges and a research program “over concerns of academic freedom,” said Eli Friedman, a professor at the school, via his Twitter account on Monday.
ILR has exchange and research programs with Renmin Business School and RUC’s school of labor and human resources.
The decision to terminate the exchanges and program was supported by the vice provost of Cornell and the dean of ILR, Friedman said.
Chinese analysts warned that China-US trade friction has started to damage social and cultural exchanges between the two countries.
Terminating academic partnerships is not new, Wang Yiwei, director of Renmin University of China’s Institute of International Affairs, told the Global Times on Tuesday.
“It signals the US is also attempting to contain China in academic and cultural fields,” Wang said.
Tao Wenzhao, a research fellow with the Institute of American Studies of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences called for a rational and restrained reaction to the disputes.
“China and the US have cooperated on a wide range of fields and they definitely will not end because of the trade disputes,” Tao said, adding that although some programs have been hit by trade tensions.
Enmity spurred by tariffs and politics has no place in academia, he said.
More than 378,000 Chinese students are studying in the US, or 30 percent of the country’s international students.
Eight out of 10 are enrolled in higher education, according to the US Department of Homeland Security.
Overseas students contribute to the US economy through higher tuition fees and living expenses mainly paid from their home countries.
NAFSA, a nonprofit organization dedicated to international education and exchanges, estimates that each international student contributed $34,000 to the US economy last year.
China is the world’s largest source of students studying outside their home country, with 523,700 enrolled in overseas programs last year, Chinese financial magazine Caixin reported.
That number, combined with the total spending figure from payments giant UnionPay, translates to annual spending of over 700,000 yuan ($100,489) per student, it said.
“US trade hostility is likely to influence students’ choice of where they will study abroad,” said Xiong Bingqi, deputy director of the 21st Century Education Research Institute.
A Forbes report said the US is “moving in a less welcoming direction” while Canada, the UK and Australia are lowering policy barriers for students. More Chinese students will return home after completing their studies,” Xiong said.
According to a report from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), China has sent thousands of scientists affiliated with armed forces to the US and other Western universities, building a web of research collaboration that could boost Beijing’s military technology development. The report also says that many of the scientists hid their military affiliations.
The report is obviously catering to the West’s anxiety over China’s rise. It is coordinating with the US strategy of suppressing China’s development, adding fuel to Washington’s undisguised restrictions on China-US technological and educational exchanges and playing up the US appeal for more countries’ participation.
The report is ridiculous and contradicts itself. It analyzes the foreign exchanges of the National University of Defense Technology’s teachers and researchers, saying that Wang Zhenguo, head of the department of postgraduate studies, has co-authored 18 papers with foreign scientists. But can Wang hide his identity? As for the fact Wang coauthored papers with foreign scientists, there is no reason to claim they have a higher scientific level than Wang and that China gained an advantage.
Many US and Australian think tanks and recent media actions have reversed Chinese people’s understanding of their so-called academic freedom and objective news reporting. Their degree of politicization and ideology has surprised Chinese people.
China’s rise has brought some Australian political, academic and media elites a sense of crisis and has made them lose their reason. They believe that China’s progress in industry and technology is abnormal, and that China can’t make it without stealing.
But if Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea and Japan – regions and countries that share a similar culture with the Chinese mainland – can achieve technological progress, why can’t the Chinese mainland make it without stealing?
Openness is a characteristic of the 21st century. The fundamental reason for China’s huge progress is the Chinese people’s diligence and the accumulated strength of China.
China’s investment in basic education and scientific research is growing rapidly. Just look at young Chinese students’ achievements at the International Mathematical Olympiad, the number of Chinese undergraduates and postgraduates, and the number of China’s theses and patents every year, people will understand how much technological progress China has accumulated.
Pride and prejudice are confusing some Western elites’ minds. They are trying to prove a ridiculous assumption that China’s development can be contained and Western people would sacrifice their own interests and face all kinds of uncertainties to achieve the purpose. China’s population is more than that of all the Western countries, and China owns one of the most complete industrial sectors in the world. The huge market in China is coveted by many Western enterprises.
The report author obviously doesn’t understand the technological development of China’s military industry. Many traditional military industry technological research institutes also engage in technological research for civil use. But the report ignored this.
As one of the US allies in the Asia Pacific, Australia has received more attention from Washington as the US intensifies its strategy toward China. Some Australian elites are actively facilitating the US’ strategy.
That is why Canberra, which has no conflicts with Beijing, has come to the forefront of resisting China’s alleged infiltration.