ChinaBrief Volume XIV s Issue 19 s October 10, 2014 VOLUME XIV s ISSUE 19 s OCTOBER 10, 2014 In This Issue: IN A FORTNIGHT By Nathan Beauchamp-Mustafaga 1 CHINA’S EXPANDING ROLE IN THE SOUTH SUDANESE CIVIL WAR By Zhou Hang 4 Jiang Zemin (right) played an AN OVERIVEIW OF CHINESE FIGHTERS IN SYRIA AND IRAQ influential role in the behind- China By Brief Jacob Zenn 7 the-scene politics leading up Volume 14, Issue 19 to the 18th Party Congress. CHINA’S SILK ROAD STRATEGY: A FOOTHOLD IN THE SUEZ, BUT LOOKING TO (Credit: Xinhua) OctoberISRAEL 10, 2014 By Emma Scott 10 China Brief is a bi-weekly jour- ELDER NETWORKS IN PRC POLITICS: PART 1 nal of information and analysis covering Greater China in Eur- By John Dotson 14 asia. China Brief is a publication of The Jamestown Foundation, a private non-profit organization In a Fortnight based in Washington D.C. and is edited by Nathan Beauchamp- A SPOILED ANNIVERSARY: CHINA REACTS TO CONFUCIUS Mustafaga. INSTITUTE CONTROVERSY The opinions expressed in China Brief are solely those By: Nathan Beauchamp-Mustafaga of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of n September 27, Chinese President Xi Jinping celebrated “Confucius Institute The Jamestown Foundation. ODay,” commemorating the 10-year anniversary of the first Institute’s founding in November 2004, in South Korea. Yet this self-congratulatory atmosphere was clouded by increasing criticism of the Confucius Institute program in the United States, which hosts the largest number of Institutes worldwide. The Chinese media’s reaction has cast this criticism as politically motivated by insecurities stemming from the United States’ decline, as well as a hypocritical double standard of cultural For comments and questions exchange—even linking the issue to conspiracies about U.S. involvement in the about China Brief, please con- ongoing Hong Kong protests. tact us at < beauchamp@jamestown. Celebrating 10 Years of Getting to Know Us Better org > 1111 16th St. NW, Suite 320 The Chinese media extensively covered the 10-year anniversary throughout the Washington, DC 20036 month of September, culminating in a People’s Daily front page article featuring Tel: 202.483.8888 President Xi’s congratulatory remarks that “Confucius Institutes belong to Fax: 202.483.8337 TO SUBSCRIBE TO CHINA BRIEF, VISIT http://www.jamestown.org/chinabrief/ 1 ChinaBrief Volume XIV s Issue 19 s October 10, 2014 China and the world” (People’s Daily, September 28). it would end cooperation with the Institutes at the end of As Xi proudly recounted, there are now 456 Institutes the year, saying, “several of our goals are not consistent in 123 countries worldwide, along with 713 Confucius with those of the [Institutes]” (Penn State, October 1). Classrooms (the primary school equivalent), which These announcements follow years of criticism from have taught a combined total of approximately 850,000 university faculties and concerned parents in the United students. This includes 16 more Institutes and eight new States and the rest of the world. countries added just this year. United States Has Lost Its Confidence Despite the Institutes’ heritage as part of former president Hu Jintao’s campaign to develop and project The Chinese media’s reaction was alternatively surprised, Chinese soft power abroad, President Xi has taken up the incensed and conspiratorial. The main response to the mantle as a proud sponsor. During his trip to Europe this announcements came on October 6, when the Global March, he visited a Confucius Institute in Germany, and Times published a diatribe against American cultural Xi attended a signing ceremony to establish an Institute imperialism. Wang Dehua—who in September decried in Brazil during his tour of South America this July the Japanese cartoon character Doraemon—explained (Guangming Daily, March 30; Hanban, July 25). During that the “closures,” timed during China’s National Day his visit to the Institute in Germany, Xi reflected upon holiday, were a “strong signal of U.S. resistance to Chinese the Institutes’ raison d’etre: “Some people are biased culture, and the background is that the United States is against China, and this is mainly out of unfamiliarity, declining and China is rising” (Global Times, September estrangement and misunderstanding” (Guangming Daily, 26; Global Times, October 6). Rejecting perceived U.S. March 30). While President Xi has not made a direct concerns over the “Confucius Institutes [serving] as the link between the Institutes’ soft power agenda and his Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) propaganda branch, “China Dream” initiative, Vice Premier Liu Yandong told with the purpose of spreading the CCP’s ideology and an anniversary event, “Nowadays, Confucius [Institutes thus violating academic freedom,” Wang accused the have] become the ‘soul high-speed railway’ connecting United States of a double standard by conflating academic peoples of different countries and a colorful tie linking the freedom with more general freedoms: “In fact, American Chinese Dream and people’s dreams in other countries” culture can freely enter other countries, but other nations’ (CCTV, September 27). cultures cannot freely enter the United States” (Global Times, October 6). U.S. Host Institutions Reconsider Cooperation Wang’s response was likely so bombastic because of the Several U.S. universities and academic organizations have tense atmosphere surrounding the Hong Kong protests stepped away from their affiliation with or support of and the necessary increase in xenophobic content for the the Institutes since this summer. In June, the American nationalistic Global Times. Wang claimed that the “ban” Association of University Professors (AAUP) released a on Confucius Institutes was because a part of the U.S. report calling for “universities [to] cease their involvement intelligentsia “lacks confidence in their culture and their in Confucius Institutes” (AAUP, June). The AAUP stated system,” as, when compared to China’s long history, that host universities had “sacrificed the integrity of the “the United States’ pirate culture is only 200 years old university and its academic staff,” since the Institutes […] and they feel ashamed and scared!” Addressing the “advance a state agenda in the recruitment and control protests in Hong Kong, Wang said that the Hong Kong- of academic staff, in the choice of curriculum, and in America Center at the Chinese University of Hong Kong the restriction of debate.” On September 25, just two was actually a U.S. consulate-backed training base for the days before its own planned celebration for “Confucius Occupy Central protesters. Institute Day,” the University of Chicago said it had decided to “suspend negotiations for the renewal of the U.S. Criticism is Political agreement for a second term of the Confucius Institute” (University of Chicago, September 25). Lastly, on October While the Chinese media’s response to the universities 1, Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) announced was sensationalist but limited, its response to the AAUP’s 2 ChinaBrief Volume XIV s Issue 19 s October 10, 2014 June call for ending all cooperation was much wider Learning From “Growing Pains” and more focused at reassuring a domestic audience. The People’s Daily published first with an article featuring Meanwhile, the Chinese media has also attempted to interviews with directors of Institutes in nine countries, take the criticism in stride. A 2012 People’s Daily article all contending that their Institutes never had issues with recounted the Institutes’ “unavoidable growing pains” as academic freedom and that the AAUP’s accusations part of the process of addressing misconceptions and were “wholly wrong,” “preposterous and laughable” and obstacles, since “some Western countries see Confucius “stemmed from political motives” (People’s Daily, June 20). Institutes as political vassals” (People’s Daily, December 19, The article further described the purpose of the Institutes 2012). While the Chinese media has yet to address the core as promoting cultural exchange and understanding, difference between other countries’ programs and the reflecting their mission statement. Later that day, Institutes—namely that only China places the Institutes the Global Times addressed the AAUP’s statement by directly within schools—the article did concede that listing several common rebuttals (Global Times, June 20). “entering the education system is seen as the Confucius The article claimed: the Institutes are similar to other Institutes’ opening to ‘enter’ [the host country].” Western programs; all cultural promotion is political; the United States is insecure, adopting a double standard and At the same time, this indicates that the Chinese a “Cold War” mentality; and the United States’ concerns government is aware of the root cause of the criticism— are out of ignorance about China. Two days later, Xinhua the program’s close government ties—but is unwilling published a commentary by a former teacher at an to allow the Institutes to become independent and grow Institute in the United States, who described “the truth on their own. It appears that for all of the importance about U.S. Confucius Institutes” (Xinhua, June 22). The Xi Jinping’s “China Dream” places on China having author asserted that academic freedom was not an issue confidence in itself, the leadership is far from ready to because the author had discussed “Chinese democracy” let the country’s soft power flow from the people, not and “non-Western style democracy” with students at his the Party. Institute. Nathan Beauchamp-Mustafaga is the editor of China Brief. The media’s efforts to couch criticism of the Institutes *** as politically motivated indeed reflect a larger insecurity within the Chinese political system. A May 2012 directive from the U.S. Department of State that addressed visas issued to Chinese teachers at the Institutes was explained as a backlash driven by U.S. “concerns” about the success of the program and political considerations in the run- up to the 2012 presidential election (Department of State, May 17, 2012; Global Times, May 24, 2012).