news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

【text/observer network columnist zhou deyu】

in the past two days, republicans in the u.s. house of representatives have come up with something called "china week", which means to put together a bunch of anti-china bill proposals for intensive voting and passage in one week, hoping to build an anti-china consensus between the two parties in the united states and jointly focus on the chinese threat.

although there are some interesting things in this pile of proposals, most of them are clichés and weird talk such as "confucius institutes and tiktok are poisoning american youth" and "china is stealing american genes." and then, not surprisingly, because it was proposed by republicans, it was the democrats' turn to accuse republicans of being too soft on china.

at the same time, the wall street journal published an article two days ago, lamenting that it is becoming increasingly difficult for american scholars to study china. a small part of the article complained about the hostility of the united states, while a large part of the article blamed the hostility of china for hindering research. there is a sense of anxiety between the lines: the more the united states faces the threat of china, the fewer people who understand china there are?

coincidentally, some people in the united states are anxious that no one understands china, and some people in china are also anxious. for example, a few days ago, a media outlet published a special report titled "searching for kissinger", discussing whether there is anyone in the united states who can understand china and have policy influence like kissinger, and who can stabilize sino-us relations.

but from the anti-china performances during the past two days of "china week", we should know that americans do not want to understand china, nor do they need to understand china. from the perspective of the chinese, perhaps there has never been such a thing as a "china expert", and there is no need to care about such a thing.

the so-called "china experts" and figures like kissinger are just historical exceptions and will no longer appear.

so, what is a "china expert"? this term is now generally used to refer to people who understand china. sometimes it refers specifically to those politicians who know and are friendly to china, such as kissinger; sometimes it also includes those china experts who have influence on policies, such as david shambaugh; and sometimes we refer to all private individuals who understand china, such as stephen schwarzman.

to be honest, the vast majority of people who are called "china experts" probably don't understand china as well as many ordinary chinese understand the united states.

many so-called “china experts” do not speak chinese very well and have never lived in china for a long time. their information comes entirely from translated materials and their own cursory experience… if they can be called “china experts”, then there are so many people in china who are fluent in english and have studied and worked in the united states, but no one calls them “america experts”.

this double standard is not without reason. after all, whether you are an expert on china depends on who you are comparing yourself with. when americans are generally ignorant, if you know a little about china, you will appear to be an expert on china.

of course, this is not surprising. most americans view china in the same way that many chinese view asian, african and latin american countries, with all kinds of stereotypes: middle eastern people are stupid and have a lot of money, latin americans are lazy and gluttonous, and africa is poor and chaotic... in short, they don't understand the local language, culture and social status, and have no interest in understanding them.

in the final analysis, there are not that many people in american society who understand chinese and care about what is happening in china. politicians shout about the china threat theory and the china collapse theory every day just to use it as a tool, and americans believe in the china threat theory and the china collapse theory every day just to satisfy their own emotions. the imagined china is everywhere, but no one cares about the real china.

under this general environment, the information americans can obtain about china, their ability and efficiency in obtaining this information, and the number of talents truly willing to study china are all subject to natural bottlenecks. it is easy to imagine how high the level of china research in the united states can be.

until recent years, the united states has had some projects dedicated to translating chinese materials, such as the "interpret: china" project of the center for strategic and international studies (csis), a us think tank, in 2022. some people may want to brag that americans know more about china, but the emergence of such projects can only indicate two problems: first, why did they think of such basic things now? second, if translating some official chinese documents and speeches is a big deal, how scarce was the research on china in the united states before?

of course, this is also related to the current environment of social science research in the u.s. as i mentioned in my previous article, regional studies are a discipline sewer, and china studies are no exception. although it seems to be a popular subject on the surface, in fact, not many people are willing to touch it.

what's more important is that these people who study china never aim to understand china, but to study whatever is most fruitful. so ethnicity, gender, religion, these are the hot topics in china research. just come to china to send out questionnaires and do interviews, and you will get research results. and you can also cater to the various stereotypes of china in the united states. why not?

for example, the wall street journal article mentioned a detail that an american scholar complained that she was researching xinjiang issues, but the chinese government did not allow her to enter the country. i find it funny. what her so-called research is about is obvious with her toes. who is treating who as a fool?

just like most american social science research, american china studies cannot be said to be all garbage, but most of them are of no help in understanding china. the quality of so-called china studies and china knowledge is entirely supported by the older generation of researchers and a few geniuses. the results of those famous people you occasionally hear about are almost the only things you can see. as for the new generation, you can't expect anything.

therefore, for those who always use american china studies as an excuse, i can only say that they neither understand china nor the united states. however, as long as there are still a group of people in chinese academia and media who rely on american leftovers to understand the world, there will always be people who flatter these americans.

after all, whether in the united states or china, online or offline, the reputation of social science research and scholars often does not depend on their actual level, but only on whether there are people who like to listen to what they say.

of course, as i said before, understanding is relative and depends on peer comparison. even if we look down on these american experts who study china, compared with the vast majority of americans, we have to say that they understand china.

moreover, even this kind of china studies and china experts may not be many in the future.

after all, these days, "having contact with china" is a negative label in the united states. at the very least, it will lead to investigation or even arrest. freedom cannot be placed above national security. you see, the fbi arrested a chinese woman and her husband a few days ago, accusing the former new york governor's assistant of being a chinese spy. the evidence even included that she had received a few nanjing salted ducks.

on the one hand, they say they want to seriously study how to respond to threats from china, and on the other hand, they persecute people who have contact with china on the pretext of responding to threats. isn't this like wanting the horse to run without eating grass?

therefore, when the general political environment in the united states is hostile to china, "china experts" have no room to survive and no motivation to develop.

but this is normal. after all, the so-called "china experts" are the product of a special historical period.

most of the time, we use the term "china expert" in a positive sense, referring to those who can promote sino-us friendship. the most typical example is kissinger, who is not only an expert on china, but also an "old friend of the chinese people". it is impossible for kissinger to be a special case again. as i said in my previous article "american strategic masters are just like the masters of the republic of china. you have heard more than you have seen", in the context of the current ideology in the united states and the vulgarization of social science research, people like kissinger may not be cultivated by schools, let alone climb to high positions.

kissinger is a rare american who understands why the pacific ocean is big enough. he is an extremely realistic person who focuses on american interests, but he knows that even if china becomes strong, the united states should not confront it. for most americans, being strong means being a robber, and the concept of "peaceful rise" is beyond their understanding.

for the vast majority of the remaining "china experts", their advocacy of friendship with china is based on the assumption that china will not rise. in a certain historical period, there was a so-called "engagement" in the us's china strategy. they believed that as long as the us and china maintained exchanges, china would sooner or later be peacefully evolved and incorporated into the us vassal system, and be subordinate to the us in culture, economy, and politics - just like their arrangement with russia after the cold war.

in the eyes of these "china experts", china is not a threat simply because china is not strong enough and will never become strong.

objectively, these people have indeed made contributions to promoting sino-us friendship and world peace. but subjectively, do they really understand china? how much of their understanding of china is true, and how much is arrogant stereotype? it is hard to say.

at least these people cannot imagine that the united states will even engage in a trade war with china over technology products many years later. they subconsciously feel that china is simply not capable of developing to this point.

therefore, the soil in which these china experts exist is very special. they can only live in the era when china traded shirts for airplanes, and in the era when the united states fantasized that it could change china's color through engagement policy. but such an era will never come again.

times have changed, and these "china experts" are inevitably marginalized in the united states. this is because they really do not understand why china has not been peacefully evolved by the united states, nor why the united states cannot tolerate china's strength.

of course, these american "china experts" have also cultivated a group of chinese "america experts". the premise of these america experts advocating friendship with the united states is the same, that is, they also believe that china will not be strong and is not worthy of being a rival of the united states. these people who neither understand china nor the united states should also be eliminated by the times.

it’s not that we should be as anti-american as americans are anti-china, which is not good. but the era of “thinking too highly of you” should have passed long ago.

this article is an exclusive article of guancha.com. the content of the article is purely the author's personal opinion and does not represent the platform's opinion. it cannot be reproduced without authorization, otherwise legal liability will be pursued. follow guancha.com wechat guanchacn to read interesting articles every day.