Angry Chinese Blogger
 |
 |
Angry Chinese Blogger:
The news and views about China that the big media can't, or won't, tell you The is no single truth Menu: Home |
|
Entries By Country
   |
We don’t teach it, so you can’t: State censorship raises some nasty questions for China’s international schools
«
H E
»
News and Politics :: Sino-Japanese :: Human rights and personal freedoms :: News and Perspectives ::
email
posted Friday, 1 July 2005
While complaints over textbooks are nothing new in what remains of the Sino-Japanese relationship, and are now routinely ignored by those who have actually taken the time to read an average Japanese textbook, a new argument with potentially wide reaching implications has arisen with the announcement that Beijing intercepted and seized a shipment of Japanese textbooks, bound for a international school in China, because they did not implicitly agree with the state line.
According to the Chinese foreign ministry, the textbooks, which contained supplementary material for history and civics lessons, were destined for a Japanese international school in the city of Dalian, and were seized because they contained maps that used different colors to represent Mainland China and Chinese-Taiwan, leading Beijing to fear that the maps might ‘give the impression’ that the island is a separate entity from the mainland. However, skeptics in Japan and elsewhere have raised some awkward questions regarding the incident, and the possibility that Beijing might have wider reaching motives.
|
|
"The Japanese textbooks showed China and Taiwan in different colors" |
|
Unlike diplomatic missions, international schools do not usually have special immunities or protections and neither do the materials that they use. Documents that are sent to and from an international school can be searched or seizure and the materials used in their curriculum can be forcibly removed if they do not match up with local demands.
It is not known if this particular book shipment was specifically targeted for seizure prior to being searched on a general pretext or if it was seized after being searched, but the difficult relationship between Japan and China make it highly conceivable that the shipment would have received ‘extra attention’ once it was ascertained that the books contained Japanese history texts.
Notably, the books were not seized based on their historic contents.
Using an A-bomb to Peal an Orange
Though seizure of the school textbooks based on their Sino-Taiwanese content may seem extreme, it falls within the expected behavioral bounds of the Chinese Government.
Beijing is well known for acting disproportionately to prevent the importation or dissemination of any material that material that may suggest that any distinction or separation exists between Mainland China and Chinese-Taiwan, which Beijing regards as being a rebellious, as is any material that refers to the two entities as being two entities. Even material containing discussion of why island residents might wish to maintain a separate existence from the mainland is prohibited in China is prohibited unless written according to the state line. Those possessing, publishing, or disseminating such material risk imprisonment for on charges of sedition or incitement.
|
|
"The 'one-China principle' is paramount, so it is legitimate for
China's customs to handle this [the confiscation of textbooks]
according to the [Chinese] law." |
|
In a previous incident, Beijing acted to criminalize the ownership of a computer game that showed Taipei as having its own team soccer team, and has often threatens to launch military action against the island if it conducts any activities that resemble precursors to a formal declaration of independence from the mainland.
Ulterior Motives
Despite the Chinese Foreign Ministry statement on the reasons behind the confiscation of the books, a reading their contents does points to an additional, and possibly overriding, reason for their seizure.
While the books do use different colors to represent Mainland China and Chinese-Taiwan they do not contain any text to indicate that the two territories are separate, they however do contain sections naming territory that is currently under dispute as being Japanese territory in direct contradiction to Beijing’s state line.
The disputed territory, known as the Senkaku islands, are a part of Okinawa prefecture and form part of the outer islands of Japanese-Okinawa, but are claimed by both Beijing and the de facto Taiwanese Government in Taipei, with both Chinese factions teaching that that the islands belong to their respective Governments under historic mandate.
Despite Chinese and Taiwanese claims, historic records from both sides either exclude the islands all together or recognize their existence without making a claim of ownership. International law recognizes the islands as belonging to Japan.
China is currently, or has recently been, involved with similar disputes with a significant proportion of its neighbors based on accounts of China’s historic borders which are often vague or which have been superceded.
The islands were unclaimed by any nation at the time of their inclusion into Japan and were not taken by force. The issue of ownership of the Japanese-Senkakus did not rise in any substantive form until survey ships discovered signs that the area might contain deposits of natural gasses in the area.
Despite observations made about the textbooks, and the other potentially inflammatory elements contained within them, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hosoda Hiroyuki; one of Japan’s most senior Government figures, held to the Chinese explanation on the reasons for the books seizure and did not press the issue further when addressing the media.
Censorship and Brainwashing in Unexpected Places
Though international schools in China often purport themselves to be independent of the curriculum restrictions placed on state and private schools for native Chinese, this latest incident has served to highlight some of the fears held by expatriates raising children in China, and to raised a number of awkward questions about the integrity of the education given by international schools in the country.
While most international schools around the world exist to provide native language education, and to allow children to continue their education using a curriculum that is similar to that in their native countries, many expatriate families living in China, particularly those from Japan and western countries, also opt to send their children to international schools to ensure that they are taught to an internationally recognized standard for accuracy using material that is not subject to the ‘blank spaces’ and ‘manipulated’ versions of events that are found in ordinary Chinese schools.
Many parents also choose to send their children to international schools minimize their exposure to the propaganda that is distributed through the Chinese education system; a discernable proportion of which many observers feel should be classified as brainwashing aimed at promoting the blanket acceptance of the state line while discouraging free thinking that may lead people to challenge or question what they are taught in order to reduce the chances of them questioning the state line.
If it were found, or even feared, that Chinese censors routinely indict or otherwise ‘recommend’ educational material for international schools, or that international schools engaged in self censorship to mitigate the impact of state censorship, it could not only cause parents to questions whether their children were being taught correct values and versions of events, but it could also cause other institutions to question whether potential students, who had been educated in Chinese international schools, should be considered on the same grounds as domestic students given the fear that Beijing may have come between them and a complete education as recognized in their own country.
Where it to be publicly revealed, for example, that some US international schools were not teaching their students to value democracy and freedom of speech in the same way as US based schools, because of Beijing’s desire to remove it from the curriculum, it could prove highly damaging, not only to the schools involved, but also to the entire international school system, not to mention those who went through it.
Similarly, damage could be done if it were found or feared that students in international schools in China were being taught using Beijing’s ‘modified’ social, political and historical perspectives rather than those of their own country, which the most parents consider international schools as being duty bound to promote.
‘One China’, One Convenient Fiction
Despite the pledges of most substantive world governments, to respect the ‘One China’ agreement and to reframe for recognizing Chinese-Taiwan as being independent, many of the agreement’s signatories treat China and Chinese-Taiwan as being two separate entities with two separate governments, though most reframe from engaging in direct Government to government relations with the island in order to preserve their diplomatic and economic relationships with the Mainland China.
Many ‘One China’ signatories routinely regarding the island as being a sovereign state in all but name when it comes to policy making, by maintaining separate visa/border regulations for Mainland China and Chinese-Taiwan, as well as having separate tariffs and economic policies, and distinct trade and tourism policies. Chinese-Taiwan is also routinely regarded as being a separate entity from the mainland, for statistical and categorization purposes, by world bodies that include the World Bank, the WHO, and the United Nations.
Neither the US nor mainland China, the treaties architects, actually full adheres to the treaty either with both camps placing substantial invisible barriers between the two territories in terms of travel, trade, investment, and information freedoms. Example of these barriers are travel and investments restrictions places on Mainland and island bound Chinese by Beijing, and technology export restrictions put in place by Washington that apply to Beijing but not Taipei.
A similar, but less pronounced situation exists for the former European concessions of Hong Kong and Macau; which are historically Chinese, though not for the formerly sovereign Tibet: which is currently under direct military occupation by China.
As ever, inconsistencies abound in most aspects of Chinese-Taiwanese-international relationships.
Notes
In addition to the confiscation, Chinese customs authorities demanded that the school pay a $US120 fine and provide an explanation as to why the maps used different colors for the two territories.
The textbook seizure is reported to have taken place in April, the start of the Japanese school year, and news sources disagree on the number of books seized, with some stating that 128 books were seized and others placing the number as high as 180 books.
View Comments/Add a Comment (1)
1. myrick left...
Friday, 1 July 2005 7:14 pm :: http://www.asiapundit.com
Nice analysis as usual. One small quibble... expatriate not ex-patriot.
I've been outside of Canada for close to a decade. While I am an expat, I
remain a patriot.