A recent study by the group UK-China Transparency claims that “interference” from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is “undermining academic freedom” and endangering staff and students, especially those of Chinese origin.
Officially titled Cold Crisis: Academic freedom and interference in China studies in the UK, the report details a “systemic distortion” that disincentivises certain topics of research and “shapes careers”. This is not limited to external pressure from Chinese officials. According to the study, there are even cases of “administrators and management” at UK universities “actively involved in the repression of academic freedom” related to topics that “might be negatively perceived by the CCP”.
Academics studying issues that are politically sensitive for Beijing testify that they have been subjected to harassment from colleagues and pressure from administrators concerned over the potential financial consequences of angering the CCP. The findings are based on responses from 50 UK-based China scholars, who on condition of anonymity shared their experiences of political interference in their work.
Of the academics surveyed, 19 (or 38 per cent) agreed that the concerns of administrators regarding the university’s relationship with the Chinese government had “made it more difficult to study or conduct original investigative research on sensitive issues”. The phrase “sensitive issues” is noteworthy because it can often be hard for scholars to know which topics are going to annoy officials in Beijing.
Of course, certain issues are almost guaranteed to garner criticism, such as the three Ts (Taiwan, Tibet and Tiananmen Square) or the treatment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang, but occasionally it can be a less obvious topic that angers the CCP. This uncertainty is a key part of the mechanism of repression. As Professor Gregory Lee of Weaton College has put it: “The effectiveness of censorship is not making explicit the criteria for its imposition”.
The difficulty in knowing where the line is incentivises a certain degree of self-censorship among researchers. Incurring the ire of the Chinese regime can have serious consequences of one’s career. These do not need to take the form of direct threats or funding cuts, but can be as simple as a denied visa or restricted access to Chinese sources. Such impositions can severely hamper an academic’s ability to do their work.
One respondent quoted in the report explained that forced “disengagement with China has very negative consequences in the quality of our research. A scholar of French studies would never think of disengaging from French academia or cease visiting France. You can’t honestly present yourself as a scholar of French Studies if you don’t engage with French people. The same goes for China.” The CCP holds immense power over researchers simply through its ability to deny them access to the key sources of their studies.
The regime does not shy away from wielding this power. According to the report, a majority of respondents confirmed that “a history of researching, teaching or speaking publicly on highly sensitive issues make it difficult for China studies practitioners to get a visa to visit China”. Moreover, 50 per cent also mentioned that they had either personally been denied a visa or knew of another academic who had. A 2020 survey of over 500 China scholars, published in China Quarterly, found that about 5 per cent reported difficulties in obtaining a visa. As many people studying China do not deal with controversial topics, it is difficult to know how likely an academic is to be blacklisted after criticising the CCP. Nevertheless, the knowledge that it is very much a possibility surely plays a part in creating a chilling effect among scholars.
More troubling still are the testimonies that researchers may even incur direct career penalties in the UK by being too critical of Beijing. According to the UKCT report, 28 per cent of the academics surveyed said that engaging in sensitive topics could make it harder to obtain “promotions, invitations to important events, or grant funding” at their own institutions. Another 38 per cent demurred from answering the question directly, perhaps indicating that many respondents are unsure of the CCP influence on such decisions.
The pressure faced by some China scholars become clearer from the qualitative data in the report. Several respondents highlighted the role played by ethics reviews in making the approval of studies on sensitive issues much harder to obtain. One scholar also gave evidence of a “faculty opposition to a sensitive event”, while another described a research project being cancelled due to pressure from Chinese officials. The study contains several more examples of researchers being blocked in one way or another when attempting to study or teach about certain controversial topics related to the China.
A particularly interesting comment came from one respondent, who suggested that the pressure comes more from middle management from than senior leadership. This sentiment is indirectly echoed by several other academics quoted in the report. They describe an “implicit pressure from administrators”, based on what they perceive as “mistaken or inflated assumptions about the severity of ramifications” of sensitive research. This suggests that direct pressure from the CCP is quite rare, but that the financial ties between UK universities and Beijing, combined with the occasional threat, have conditioned administrators to err on the side of caution and avoid the “sensitive issues”.
The report goes on to detail several other disturbing trends in British academia. Some respondents talk of students being afraid to contribute in class, a majority believe that Chinese nationals at their institutions are afraid of the CCP monitoring their work, and a number testify to instances of colleagues or students of Chinese origin receiving warnings from CCP-related groups. The UKCT findings are troubling and indicate an underappreciated threat to academic freedom in the UK. This is not the first report to highlight these issues, and unless serious actions are taken to protect China scholars in the UK against these pressures, it almost certainly will not be the last.