Page 1 of
2 The language of Chinese soft power
in the US By Will Wachter
NEW YORK - The main entrance to the China
Institute in New York City looks like most other
brownstones on the Upper East Side, distinguished
only by its imposing red door. These days this
door is open to welcome visitors down a short
hallway that leads to two small galleries of
Chinese art, currently exhibiting a collection of
various teapots and Chinese calligraphy.
Sometimes, a stumbling chant like "Lao shi jiao
wo men shuo zhong guo hua" ("The teacher
teaches us Chinese") can be heard on the
way.
Founded in 1926 as the product of a
partnership between American John Dewey
(1859-1952) and Chinese Hu Shi (Hu Shih,
1891-1962), both noted educational philosophers
and scholars, the China Institute has long served
as the paragon of educational cooperation between
the United States and China. From its galleries to
its cultural exchanges on literature and business
practices, the China Institute has been a primary
facilitator in the exposure of Americans to
Chinese history and tradition.
Since last
year, the China Institute has also been home to
one of the first Confucius Institutes in the US.
To the Western ear, the difference between China
and Confucius is merely semantic. However, the
establishment of this Confucius Institute and
others like it reflects a sea change in China's
foreign policy toward not only the US, but also to
the rest of the world.
With the stated
goal of "enhancing the understanding of the
Chinese language and culture among world Chinese
learners", the Chinese National Office for
Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language (Hanban)
has, since late 2004, established Confucius
Institutes in South Korea, Germany, Sweden and
Africa, in addition to the US.
Nevertheless, the long-term effects of the
Confucius Institutes remain to be seen. Most are
limited to a small number of classes and a
restricted budget, and many are still trying to
get on their feet. While the institutes have been
funded with an initial grant of US$100,000, the
Hanban expects that its institutes will become
self-sufficient within five years.
Rebecca
McGinnis, coordinator of the Confucius Institute
at the University of Maryland, said, "As with
anything that's new, you want things to move
forward. We're trying to get our momentum going."
While classes in Maryland have been
steadily growing, they still only have about a
dozen students. McGinnis attributes this slow
growth to the existence of so many other options
in Chinese-language training in the area, making
it more difficult to attract students to the
Confucius Institute. She is optimistic, though,
hoping eventually to be able to offer
certification for teaching Mandarin as a foreign
language.
According to James Cui, a
teacher at the Maryland Confucius Institute,
"American students who visit the institute are
very interested in Chinese; they do not come here
for credit, only to enjoy Chinese language and
Chinese culture."
This interest is
reflected in the diversity of students who attend
language classes - military people, business
people, and people with Chinese spouses. However,
these language classes remain separate from the
university's Chinese-language programs, and
students are segregated between the two.
Considering the Confucius Institutes in
the context of China's soft power - the term
coined by Harvard professor and co-founder of
neo-liberalism Joseph Nye to describe "the ability
to get what you want through attraction rather
than coercion or payments" - some have viewed
their rise with skepticism.
Although "soft
power" was first applied in reference to the US in
Nye's Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of
American Power, the changing nature of
international relations has meant that soft power
is becoming an increasingly important tool to such
countries as China that wish to exert their
influence abroad using non-military, non-economic
means.
The choice of Confucius as the
figurehead of this bold new policy would seem
surprising to most scholars of recent Chinese
history. One of the great ironies of the peaceful
co-existence of the Confucius Institute and the
China Institute is that at the beginning of the
20th century, Hu Shi believed that "the way of
Confucianism is unsuitable to modern life".
In the 1960s and 1970s, China repressed
much of Confucian culture as part of its Cultural
Revolution, burning temples and smashing artifacts
in an attempt to purge the country of traditional
influence. Fears persist that the Chinese
government may attempt to exert a coercive
influence through its Confucius Institutes, and
some universities have refused to accept them as
part of their educational programs.
However, in the decades since the death of
Mao Zedong, the Chinese Communist Party has come
to re-embrace Confucian values, at least in name.
Chinese President Hu Jintao has recently advocated
the Confucian notion of a "harmonious society".
Confucian morals are likewise experiencing a
revival
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
