INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION
campusreview.com.au
In the
dragon’s
grip
I
Should we be
concerned
about China’s
‘soft power’
approach to higher
education?
By Chris Ziguras
8
t seems that every week brings a new story about
China’s expansion into global higher education.
Having completely transformed its national system
in a generation, China is increasingly looking outward,
seeking to align its educational capacity with its
geostrategic ambitions.
Considering what is taking place in the West, this
could be a pivotal shift.
Under Donald Trump, the US is abdicating its role
as global hegemon, slashing spending on foreign aid
and proposing to decimate longstanding international
education programs that have seen the country
educate far more world leaders than any other.
Europe is preoccupied with Europe. And meanwhile
Australian foreign aid as a percentage of GDP is now
at the lowest level on record, and less than half of our
level of spending in the 1960s.
China is happily filling the void, and backing up
its expanded diplomatic reach with new university
alliances, expanded scholarship programs for
incoming students, new overseas branch campuses,
language schools and cultural promotion institutes.
So, what does this mean for Australia?
China is our largest trading partner and has long
been the largest source of international students, but
it is now also the second most popular destination
for Australian students learning abroad. So, more
than any other country, how China thinks about
international education matters to us.
We should not lose sight of the fact that despite
China’s ambitions, the primary objective of its
international engagement is still to enhance its
own global integration. As is the case for most
countries, internationalisation of higher education is
for China first and foremost a means of promoting
opportunities to harness the social and economic
opportunities afforded by globalisation, and at the
same time enhancing the international competence
and competitiveness of the national workforce.
Nevertheless, the projection of soft power is
becoming over time a more significant driver of
China’s international education strategies, as it seeks
to develop its political capital and actively shape its
national brand abroad through educational linkages of
various kinds. And China’s capacity to exert influence
through international education is growing steadily.
It is no accident that an American, Joseph Nye,
coined the term ‘soft power’ to describe the ways
in which states seek to shape their international
environment through the powers of attraction and
agenda-setting, in contrast to ‘hard’ forms of power
such as coercion and inducements that rely on
military and economic strength.
The US, as the largest provider of cross-border
education, has always been clear that one key benefit
has been its capacity to shape ideas, values and
cultures in support of its perceived global interests.
Until Trump, that is, who appears to care very little
what the world thin