China Daily Global Edition (USA)
Confusion over Confucius Institutes?
China’s equivalent of Germany’s Goethe Institutes and France’s Alliance Francais has been getting a bad rap. But it all boils down to cultural exchange, perceptions and dollars and cents, as Dong Leshuo reports from Washington.
While a university in one state closes Confucius Institutes, in another state the institute is working with the US Department of Defense on a language program.
That disconnect was one of the issues discussed by educators at a panel in Washington on Tuesday about the importance of higher education exchanges between China and the US over the past 40 years.
The Confucius Institute is a nonprofit public educational organization that works with global universities to promote Chinese language and culture, support local Chinese teaching internationally and facilitate cultural exchanges. The first CI in the US was established at the University of Maryland in 2005.
Despite the progress and recognition that the CI has achieved over the years, it has been accused by some of posing a potential threat to US national security and exerting Chinese influence on American students and faculties.
On March 23, US representatives Michael McCaul and Henry Cuellar sent a letter to universities in Texas hosting Confucius Institutes, urging them to consider terminating their partnerships, calling the institutes “a threat to US national security”.
On April 9, the Texas A&M University system announced its intention to close two Confucius Institutes located at its College Station and Prairie View campuses.
In Arizona, a state not far from Texas, the CI is collaborating with the US Department of Defense (DoD) at Arizona State University in Tempe.
A bit incredulous
The DoD has invested in the CI at Arizona State as it looks for a pipeline to Mandarin-speakers, according to Matt Salmon, former US representative and vice-president for government affairs at Arizona State University.
“I find it a little bit incredulous that there are those who consider teaching Chinese language and culture as posing a security threat. I would say it’s quite ironic. If it does pose a security threat, then the DoD has made a big mistake by funding our program.
“But I think that shows that they are not concerned about it being a threat to national security. It actually enhanced national security by having that kind of ability,” Salmon said.
Salmon suggested that the US and China not walk away from the relationships.
“The answer is not to fold up and get rid of these kinds of programs. To me, the answer is to have more of this so there can be more mutual understanding, more dialogue and more interaction with one another.
“I think that’s always the solution to our problems. I know people have different opinions, but I actually happen to believe you don’t solve anything without dialogue,” he said.
Salmon also responded to the accusations that the CI is eroding academic freedom on American campus.
Arizona State University gets about $200,000 in funding from its Confucius Institute every year. The university’s annual budget is around $3 billion, according to Salmon.
“I can guarantee you that $200,000 is not enough of an enticement for us to give away our academic freedom to build the program that Arizona State University think is the best for those students,” Salmon said.
“I’m a strong believer in these kinds of academic exchanges,” he said. “The more we have these kinds of exchanges, the more we can mutually understand what’s important to one another, the (more the) relationship will progress,” he said.
There are more than 350,000 Chinese students enrolled in the US this academic year, according to the Institute of International Education (IIE).
China now dominates the international education scene in the US, with the most number of students there for the eighth year in a row, according to the IIE’s annual report Open Doors.
Reaching out
John Holden, CEO of the US-China Strong Foundation, disagreed that “the Confucius Institutes maybe are taking over the world of a university”.
“These classrooms are reaching out to communities and are stimulating interests in more advanced studies of China that they (the universities) may be not able to offer themselves,” Holden said.
Harvey Perlman, professor of law and former chancellor at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, shared his story of interacting with Hanban, the Confucius Institutes headquarters in Beijing.
When Perlman first got the contract from Hanban to sign for the CI at his university, there were terms that he believed were peculiar from the standpoint of American law.
“I rewrote it and sent it back. It was accepted. The next year I was in Beijing and met with Madam Xu Lin, head of the Confucius Institute. She said she wanted me to take the contract for Confucius Institute and rewrite it all, so it’s consistent with American values and law,” Perlman said.
Perlman formed a committee of four to five lawyers associated with Confucius Institutes around the country.
“We examined it, we made proposals and they accepted every single one. There are so many misunderstandings here. That’s why these exchange programs are so important,” Perlman said.
“Confucius is not a political organization and does not have a political agenda. Teaching Chinese is no different from our Fulbright Scholarship teaching English in China,” said Perlman.
Panelists all responded to the question of whether the Confucius Institute censors.
“Not on my campus,” said Winston Langley, professor of International Relations, former provost and vicechancellor for academic affairs at the University of Massachusetts-Boston.
“I don’t know how they are in a position to censor. That seems incredible to me,” Perlman said.
“There isn’t a mechanism for them to do so,” said Salmon.
Freedom of speech
“We have to distinguish between what makes us nervous because of China’s growing power and what is really out of the ordinary practice that could have a negative impact on our freedom of speech. A few times CI had stepped over (the line) and they had been closed. In my experience, that’s probably the exception, not the rule,” said Madelyn Ross, associate director of China studies and executive director of SAIS China, Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
Looking to the future of educational exchanges between China and the US, Salmon said that “constructive engagement” is a must.
“We are influenced by the political environment in the US and China. As tensions rise between two countries, it will be more difficult to do exchanges in higher education,” said Perlman. “Higher education is very visible. We are subject to the ups and downs of inter-country relations.”
“You have to live in another planet to understand how important the relationship between China and the US is,” said Salmon. “If we want to have a really positive relationship where we can honestly share our differences, it’s imperative to enhance communication and mutual exchanges.” Guo Fengqing and Yian Ke in Washington contributed to this story.