China has criticised the United States for designating Confucius Institutes as a national security threat, deepening tensions between the two countries over education, foreign influence and research security.
China has accused the United States of smearing its cultural and educational programmes after the Pentagon designated Confucius Institutes operating at American universities as organisations posing a threat to US national security.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun expressed Beijing’s opposition on Monday, October 26, describing the American action as an attempt to stigmatise the institutes.
Guo defended educational cooperation between China and the United States, arguing that academic and cultural exchanges help promote mutual understanding between the two countries.
The dispute intensified after US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth announced the Pentagon’s decision on Friday, October 23.
Why the US Is Targeting Confucius Institutes
Confucius Institutes are Chinese-funded centres established in partnership with educational institutions overseas. Their stated purpose is to promote Chinese language learning and cultural understanding.
However, US officials have long raised concerns that the centres could serve as channels for the Chinese government’s influence within American universities.
In a video announcement, Hegseth alleged that organisations associated with Confucius Institutes had reappeared at 30 universities under different names and legal arrangements.
He claimed that approximately 80 organisations had emerged with the same alleged objective of stealing intellectual property and influencing American students.
Hegseth described the organisations as propaganda operations and said the Pentagon had systematically dismantled them over the preceding two months.
These claims form part of Washington’s broader effort to scrutinise foreign partnerships involving American universities, particularly those connected to China.
China Rejects Washington’s Allegations
Beijing has rejected the characterisation of its cultural institutes as security threats.
Chinese officials maintain that educational exchanges and cultural programmes can benefit both countries and should not be undermined by political disagreements.
China’s state news agency, Xinhua, also criticised the US designation, arguing that it reflected an excessive approach to national security and could encourage anti-China sentiment.
The Chinese government has repeatedly opposed American restrictions affecting Chinese educational and research institutions.
Intellectual Property Concerns Remain Central
Washington’s concerns extend beyond language classes and cultural activities.
US authorities have increasingly scrutinised foreign funding, research partnerships and institutional relationships that they believe could create risks involving sensitive technology or intellectual property.
The Pentagon’s latest action follows research-security reviews involving 30 American universities. The department said those reviews resulted in more than 80 actions to terminate or otherwise address relationships with entities identified as security concerns.
However, the number of actions does not, by itself, establish that every affected partnership involved espionage, intellectual property theft or unlawful activity.
In his public announcement, Hegseth did not identify a specific instance of intellectual property theft by a Confucius Institute.
The distinction is important because security concerns and allegations of misconduct are not necessarily proof that a particular organisation committed an offence.
A Wider US-China Rivalry
The controversy reflects the increasingly complicated relationship between Washington and Beijing.
The two countries continue to compete over advanced technology, scientific research, economic influence and international partnerships.
American officials argue that universities must protect sensitive research and prevent foreign governments from exploiting academic relationships.
China, meanwhile, says restrictions on its institutions unfairly target Chinese organisations and undermine legitimate educational cooperation.
The latest dispute therefore raises a difficult question for universities: how can institutions protect research security while preserving international academic exchanges?
For now, Washington’s designation and Beijing’s response underscore how education has become another contested area in the broader US-China rivalry.
Editorial note: Allegations made by US officials are presented as claims, not independently established findings of wrongdoing by every Confucius Institute or university partnership.
