Australia ‘should pre-empt Chinese education boycott’

Education is the “logical” next target in Beijing’s trade war against Australia, and Canberra should pre-empt an enduring loss of Chinese students by emulating UK efforts in educational diplomacy, a new paper argues.

Australian National University (ANU) geopolitics researchers say the foreign affairs department should establish an “Office for Education Trade Diversification” and engage an ambassador for Australian education modelled on the UK’s international education champion.

The new office would pursue a “whole-of-government market diversification agenda”, coordinating promotional efforts currently “spread thinly” across government agencies with “limited funding”. The office would corral deliberations around key aspects of the international education “offering” – such as visas, work rights and student experience – which are “poorly coordinated and siloed”.

The ambassador would lead delegations of university leaders and prominent academics to “target markets” in the Indo-Pacific and Africa, while the office would put together a “special visits programme” for “political leaders, celebrities and social media influencers”.

In a policy options paper published by ANU’s National Security College, the researchers warn that a Chinese government crackdown on Australian universities is “plausible” and could inflict more damage on the sector than Covid-19.

The paper says a halving of Chinese enrolments could mean tens of thousands of jobs lost in universities and colleges, potentially dwarfing the 17,300 permanent and fixed-term positions universities are estimated to have relinquished last year because of coronavirus.

Education is one of four Australian exports that earn more than A$10 billion (£5.5 billion) annually from China, the paper says. But coal has already been restricted by Beijing, while China cannot go elsewhere for “similarly reliable” iron ore supplies and Australia could find alternate markets for its gas. “There is no easy alternate market for Australian education,” the paper warns.

It says China could disrupt student flows by refusing to recognise Australian qualifications or by directing state and state-owned agencies not to employ people with Australian credentials. Beijing could also escalate measures such as issuing safety warnings and instructing local education agents to deter clients from Australia.

China has already demonstrated its willingness to upset its own middle class by clamping down on popular Australian products like meat and wine. “No one knows what Beijing is thinking,” said lead author Dirk van der Kley. “But clearly they’re unhappy, and education would be an obvious target.

“Even if nothing happens in the short term, there are so many potential tensions in the relationship. One could easily imagine this happening with some future unforeseen issues.”

Dr van der Kley said the paper’s recommendations could help universities and colleges “find inroads into other markets”, irrespective of developments with China.

The paper says the promotional agency Austrade should establish “country-specific” teams touting Australian education in large countries like India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, the Philippines and Vietnam.

New offices should be established in centres like Ahmedabad in India, Chittagong in Bangladesh, Lagos in Nigeria and Karachi and Lahore in Pakistan. If necessary, the costs could be covered by “closing and consolidating” offices in smaller markets such as Chile, the Czech Republic, Peru and Poland.

The paper also advocates removing universities from the Foreign Relations Act, which gives the foreign affairs minister veto powers over many of their international agreements. While the act’s unstated target is China, “uncertainty” around how it operates has already discouraged efforts to boost ties with Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com