Cambridge’s China Centre, a Font of Pro-Beijing Propaganda, Attracts Mild Criticism in Toothless Internal Report
Cambridge University’s China Centre, which is based at Jesus College, has been mildly rebuked for its lack of transparency by an internal College review. As Juliet Samuel points out in her Telegraph column, it’s a little rich of Jesus to have spent £120,000 in an unsuccessful legal battle to remove a plaque commemorating Tobias Rustat because of his links to the slave trade when it has accepted millions of pounds from a totalitarian regime which is currently enslaving close to two million Muslims.
The review makes some long-overdue recommendations, including a policy of transparency about the Centre’s sources of funding and the suggestion that it practises “academic freedom”, rather than simply claiming it does. You could be forgiven for thinking that dons are finally entertaining the thought, trickling uncomfortably through their brains like a stream of iced water, that they may have allowed their college to host a propaganda factory for a genocidal regime. Alas, the review panel’s report stops short of such a conclusion.
Instead, the report is steeped in the delicate art of office politicking. There is lavish praise for the China Centre’s “truly remarkable” seminars and the “exceptionally generous… time, effort and creativity invested” by its director, Peter Nolan – all, remarkably, unpaid.
There is no mention of the fact that Prof. Nolan’s academic work was supported by a £3.7 million donation to the university from the family of Wen Jiabao, China’s former prime minister. Nor does it mention that Prof. Nolan has been recorded telling Cambridge students that the Centre should not hold an event to discuss China’s mass human rights abuses in Xinjiang because it would not be “helpful” and would make it “very difficult to contain… sentiment”. Such facts, you might think, would not make him the most suitable person to run a truly independent centre of study focused on China.
Indeed, as the report points out, the China Centre was notable in its omission of any events on Xinjiang or Hong Kong from its programme, a situation belatedly remedied last year after pressure from students. Even then, its Hong Kong seminar, featuring the Chinese state TV pundit Grenville Cross QC (who has called democracy protesters “terrorists”), happened to run on so long that there was just no time for questions from the audience.
Speakers at its Xinjiang seminar, meanwhile, emphasised “Islamic fundamentalism in Xinjiang”, the effect of Western (yes, Western) “Islamophobia” and the need for a “recognition of the reality of serious violence over many years in Xinjiang”. Nowhere, according to the Centre’s write-up, was Beijing’s incarceration, torture, rape or medical experimentation on more than 1.5 million Uyghurs discussed.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The UK, and England in particular, has sold itself for a mess of pottage to every possible infiltrator, Fifth Columnist country that wishes us nothing well. China is but one of these, and there are many others, but, for some reason (stupidity, greed, perhaps), every aspect of life in this country, from Labour and other politicians, to the universities, the medical establishment et al has been penetrated.
It is beyond belief that any country, let alone ours, should for one moment consider handing any additional power or influence to the Chinese via the UN, WHO and the various spying, propagandising organisations they have now usurped.
People like Nolan are really no better than the Burgesses, Philbys and Macleans of the past, and are likely worse. I think they call such people “bad actors”.
Is there anywhere to post general discussion like we used to have?
Good evening HP.
What is this “general discussion” place you speak of?
Good evening Hugh. Thanks for getting back to me.
Ww used to have “Today’s Update” which had its own very convivial comments section. It was suited to random type postings and I much enjoyed it.
Has it gone completely?
Is this something different from the Daily News Roundup that you mean? I know there were forums (fora?) for discussing various topics, but I barely used them, commenting rather on the various articles posted each day.
Under the old system where there was only one daily update, the single comments section at the time was used for general discussion as well as comment on the various article (ending eventually in the infamous “swamp” rebuff).
I don’t know if they are going to carry on with the more recent system. In any case, the news roundup often comes later than this, so perhaps it is too early even if they are continuing with it. I suppose time will tell.
In any case there was the occasional comment along the lines of “why are you giving us this Groan’ story, so it would perhaps be understandable if they stuck to their own stories, especially as lots of stories are linked in the comments section, which might better represent the interests of comments contributors.
77 Brigade are going to be a bit pissed having to pay to comment.
Lurvley 😀
Do they get it on expenses like our Scotch egg scoffing, duck house owning, moat cleaning politicians?
I look forward to saying to them: “And you paid five pounds to post that?!”…