policy & reform campusreview. com. au
Best frenemies?
Gauging the perceived threat of Chinese influence in Australian academia.
By Loren Smith
First it was Mao. Then Deng. Now it’ s Xi. The president of the People’ s Republic of China is only the third Chinese leader in history to have his‘ thought’ incorporated into the country’ s constitution.
But as Xi Jinping’ s power grows, so too does anxiety over China’ s influence abroad. Universities – including Australian ones – have felt this unease keenly. They’ ve had to deal with a multitude of issues, including being secretly recorded by Chinese students for perceived affronts to China’ s territorial sovereignty.
The issue of spy students is“ overblown”, says James Leibold, an associate professor of politics and Asian studies at La Trobe University.
According to one source, who did not wish to be named, Chinese students study in Australia because of its academic freedom.
Yet Leibold suggests the issue can be assuaged by greater efforts to integrate these students. A 2014 RMIT study found that Asian international students live in a“ parallel society”, which affects their sense of belonging.
Another, bigger issue is potentially conflicted research, Leibold says. An outspoken critic of possible Chinese government influence on Australian research, he contends that the Chinese Communist Party( CCP) holds different values to those of many Australian academics. Despite this,“ connections … may exist between Australian researchers and different [ arms ] of the CCP”.
“ In fact, there was [ a recent article in The Age ] about researchers here in universities that have direct connections with the People’ s Liberation Army, including one general who’ s actually just been promoted to the central committee of the CCP.”
The anonymous source rejected this idea.“ We don’ t see any evidence of the influence of China,” they said.“ This issue is not ongoing, and is a result of media framing.”
This view is also held by Education Minster Simon Birmingham. He told parliament:“ It’ s unhelpful sometimes when media outlets in particular decide to frame stories in a way that suggests there are profound problems, with little evidence in the stories to back up those suggestions.”
Leibold clearly begs to differ. He contends that CCP links to Australian universities could have a chilling effect on research, especially that of Chinese studies departments. Junior academics with less job security are particularly at risk of conflicts of interest, he says, which could be generated by financial inducements from the CCP.
Dr Mark Harrison, senior lecturer in Chinese studies at UTAS, agrees that there’ s cause for concern. He says the Chinese government is seeking to influence global thought and policy, and that Australian universities aren’ t sufficiently knowledgeable about China to properly address this.
WHAT TO DO? If universities further invested in Asian language and area studies, Leibold thinks they would be less likely to be corrupted by vested interests. In the meantime, he would like to see universities being more transparent about their associations with foreign governments, as well as about how this might affect their research, including the people who could use it.
“[ It ] might even be used by the People’ s Liberation Army and other parts of the security apparatus to promote China’ s interests rather than the interests of Australia,” he said.
He takes particular issue with UTS’ s Australia-China Relations Institute( ACRI), describing it as largely a“ cheerleader” for China. It was founded partly thanks to a $ 2.8 million donation from two Chinese businessmen, following the university’ s defunding of a former China research centre.
James Laurenceson, deputy director of the institute, naturally disagrees. He says Chinese influence in Australian universities has been overstated, and that Leibold may have misinterpreted the institute’ s actions. For instance, according to Laurenceson, the institute’ s support of the Australia- China Free Trade Agreement represents a pro-Australia, not pro-China, stance.
He adds that the institute’ s academics aren’ t reluctant to criticise China if their research warrants it. For example, last year, it commissioned a report on Chinese language media in Australia. The report concluded that media increasingly had pro-Beijing bias.
Even Laurenceson’ s own output, in his view, demonstrates the Institute’ s academic freedom:“ I published an op‐ed … that made the point that Malcolm Turnbull should press the Chinese leaders very hard on the opening of the Chinese economy to Australian businesses.”
Though he assures Campus Review that all ACRI researchers had“ complete
14