Three universities reject detention of Chinese human rights activist before it reaches Galway – The Irish Times

Earlier this month, the Irish Center for Human Rights at the University of Galway unveiled a bronze bust in memory of Chinese human rights activist, poet, philosopher and 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, which was donated to him by Art for Human Rights and human rights in China.

The unveiling itself was a lovely, if quiet, event and may seem like no big deal.

However, due to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) massive and systematic attempts to influence and pressure academic freedom in universities beyond its borders, something as simple as a commemorative bust becomes a very important matter.

Since Liu’s death from liver cancer in July 2017, the CCP has relentlessly sought to erase his memory. He died while serving an 11-year sentence for “suspicion of subverting state power.” When his death was announced, Chinese censors removed images or candle emojis or simple “RIP” messages. Searches on Weibo (Chinese equivalent of X/Twitter) for Liu return the message: “due to applicable regulations and policies, results for ‘Liu Xiaobo’ cannot be displayed.” His wife, Liu Xia, who spent almost seven years under strict house arrest during his imprisonment, was not allowed to bury him; his body was cremated and the ashes were thrown into the sea to prevent family, friends and supporters from having a place to gather to remember him.

What does this have to do with higher education institutions in the West?

Through a combination of pressure tactics – including a global censorship regime, the weaponization of informal Chinese networks, questionable party-state funding, and dependence on “official China” – students and researchers are silenced and higher education institutions are influenced.

At many universities outside China, academic freedom has been threatened by Chinese funding. Depending on the large funds allocated to them, they are more likely to conduct research in line with the CCP agenda. Hong Kong’s recently widely publicized national security law allows for charges to be brought against anyone who questions China’s national unity, regardless of nationality or territory. The Hong Kong National Security Law purports to have extraterritorial effect and is therefore not limited to Chinese nationals or even persons physically present in Hong Kong. This inevitably contributes to an atmosphere of self-censorship among scientists.

( The Hong Kong Security Act was inevitable, but the speed with which it was passed was a surpriseOpens in a new window )

While there is no suggestion of direct Chinese influence in any decisions regarding the placement of Liu’s commemorative busts, it is worth noting that three universities in North America and Europe rejected an offer to donate a cast of Liu’s bust before it was accepted by the Irish Center for Human Rights at the University of Galway.

One university cited “security reasons” for protecting the artwork. Another claimed she did not accept busts of “political figures,” even though there were already several such busts on her campus. A third said there was “no room” for breasts.

Unfortunately, growing authoritarianism, if not actual totalitarianism, in China has reversed the situation in Western universities. Instead of leading China’s liberalization, they have become susceptible to Chinese pressure working in the opposite direction. Their partnerships with Chinese universities have turned into potential liabilities as professors have come under fire for misdeclaring Chinese funding, research grants have been linked to human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and the universities’ technological breakthroughs are being used to improve China’s mass surveillance system.

The truth about China today is that it has a government that monitors and censors all internal communications; suppresses minority cultures in Tibet and Xinjiang; prohibits access to external sources of news and information; it arbitrarily detains not only its own citizens, but increasingly also foreigners, and strictly prohibits the free exercise of religion. Each of these individually would be a cause for concern. Combined, their weight is overwhelming. Non-Chinese universities that accept CCP funding can no longer argue that they are helping reform a liberalizing China. Overall, consciously or unconsciously, they have become apologists for illiberal China.

The Irish Center for Human Rights and the University of Galway were brave in accepting this gift of remembrance for Liu. The declarations of support from the university’s chancellor and the director of the Irish Center for Human Rights are significant. We hope this example will encourage other universities to resist pressure from Chinese money that could threaten their academic freedom.

Liu’s words will outlast those of any tyrant. His memory and legacy will never be forgotten.

In his obituary essay for Nadezda Mandelstam, widow of the poet Osip Mandelstam, who died in Stalin’s gulag in 1938, Joseph Brodsky wrote: “If there is any substitute for love, it is memory. “Remembering, then, means restoring intimacy.”

Bill Shipsey is the founder and executive director of Art for Human Rights (formerly Art for Amnesty). Fengsuo Zhou is the Executive Director of Human Rights in China