There is growing concern that overseas Chinese students are being used by Beijing to promote its position on university campuses in the West.
Although Chinese authorities deny such allegations, the trend seems to be growing, as indicated by a Chinese student’s campaign against a Tibetan student who was last month elected president of the students’ union at the University of Toronto’s Scarborough campus in Canada.
In the same month, Chinese students at McMaster University tried to interrupt a Uighur woman’s talk, filmed her presentation and reported it to the Chinese consulate in Toronto.
There is enough smoke to suggest that these students acted in coordination with Chinese authorities in Canada through the Chinese Students and Scholars Association (CSSA).
There have also been instances in which overseas Chinese students have mobilized against people denounced by Beijing, including the Dalai Lama, or organized patriotic rallies during the visit of Chinese leaders to countries where they could face protests from Tibetans, Uighurs or Falun Gong members.
Chinese embassies encourage Chinese students to pursue its foreign policy agendas, often with monetary incentives.
The main organ responsible for recruiting people to further Beijing’s political interests is the United Front Work Department (UFWD), which became more powerful under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
In an official document in 2015, the UFWD identified 12 different social groups that could be recruited for its missions. Overseas Chinese students are included on the list. Most Chinese embassies have dedicated UFWD officials who deal with the overseas Chinese community and students.
In a report on China’s rising influence at US campuses, the role of Chinese authorities in the political activities of Chinese students has been established.
While I was studying in London in 2017, China sent a delegation to speak about development in Tibet. The day before their talks at Westminster University, my Chinese friend received a message from a Chinese embassy official.
The message told him that some Tibetans were going to attend the talk and instructed him to defend China’s position.
He not only refused to comply, but also asked the official to respect his integrity.
There are several reasons for Beijing to galvanize students to push its political agenda on foreign university campuses.
Although China’s physical control over regions such as Tibet and Xinjiang is robust, its official narratives about the liberation and development of these areas is never readily accepted by international groups.
Beijing wants to change that by bringing its narrative to the corridors of world’s premier universities. For that it needs to use Chinese students, because its officials cannot interfere directly in what happens in the classrooms of foreign universities.
This strategy seems to come from Sun Tzu’s The Art of War (孫子兵法), which says “kill with a borrowed knife.”
It means to defeat an opponent by using a third party and without being directly involved.
The deployment of students for political purposes as seemingly non-official, non-state actors is strategically effective and politically safe, as Beijing can easily deny it.
However, as Chinese influence at international universities grows in scale and intensity, skepticism and scrutiny regarding the activities of the Confucius Institutes and CSSA also increases.
While a rising China is impatient about selling its stories and consolidating its narratives, a certain degree of civility would likely score better than nationalistic offensives.
The idea of seemingly spontaneous patriotic outbursts from Chinese students in the face of criticism against their government is slowly but steadily giving way to a more alarming view of Chinese interference in educational centers.
If this view gains ground, it would undermine China’s soft power and risk the likelihood that people of Chinese origin will be stereotyped as potential threats or thieves.
Although it is easy for Chinese authorities to rebut such views as racial prejudice or an anti-China mentality, playing the victim will not solve the problem.
While it is imperative to prevent the unhealthy influence of an authoritarian China to protect academic freedom and free speech, caution is also needed so that not all Chinese students are swept under the same carpet.
Like my friend, there are also Chinese students who might refuse to do Beijing’s bidding, even if it means incurring some personal costs.
Common sense indicates that China should recalibrate some of its propaganda strategies. However, Beijing’s behavior is unlikely to change, as it seems more interested in countering the rise and existence of other narratives, and cementing its own position.
The increase in censorship and self-censorship from Hollywood to Cambridge encourages China to act more aggressively.
Therefore, it is time that infringements on free speech and academic freedom at university campuses are stopped. The increasing pushback against Confucius Institutes in some democratic countries could be a step in the right direction.
Palden Sonam is a China Research Programme researcher at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies in Delhi, India.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS