Written evidence submitted by Don Starr,
Head, Department of East Asian Studies, University of Durham,
and President, British Association for Chinese Studies
I should make clear that the following are my
personal views and do not represent the official views of the
above two institutions.
SUMMARY
— Britain's poor record in studying
the languages and cultures of East Asia is impacting negatively
on our effectiveness, particularly in business. The National Languages
Strategy needs translating into action.
— Relying on native speakers rather
than training British linguists is not the answer.
— The quality of Britain's highly successful
diplomatic representation in East Asia, with its excellent training
in linguistic competence and cultural awareness, appears to be
under threat from FCO policy changes.
— The assumption that the English language
will continue to enjoy its current dominant position, especially
in East Asia, is complacent and unjustified.
— The UK's "students as consumers"
approach with no serious attempt at skills planning and careers
guidance will leave Britain's future workforce disastrously short
of basic skills in a world dominated by Asia.
— We have to work in partnership with
the PRC: they are already prominent in many international bodies,
and this will increase further. The rise of the PRC should not
be seen as a threat to the UK, but it clearly will impact on our
share of global resources and we have to plan for this in an EU
context.
— Japan's long-term orientation is
likely to be towards China rather than the US, perhaps as part
of an East Asian Union. This should not be seen as a threat to
UK interests.
China will continue to see human rights issues
as an internal affair and, for historical reasons, not recognise
the UK's right to criticise its record. Nevertheless, a principled
stand by the UK Government and companies is respected and has
a beneficial impact.
— Taiwan is an extremely sensitive
and potentially very dangerous issue, which Britain must handle
with great care.
— Britain should follow the constructive
lead of East Asian countries in dealing with North Korea, not
the US.
— The EU, with the UK playing a leading
role, is in a position to act as a partner on an equal basis with
the countries of East Asia to help resolve peacefully global conflicts
and environmental threats.
SPEAKING THE
LANGUAGE AND
KNOWING THE
CULTURE
In order to improve our performance in our economic,
scientific, political and cultural relations with East Asia, the
UK needs more people who speak, read and write the languages of
East Asia. The policy of relying on Chinese native speakers is
a mistaken one. They have a function in gaining access to the
best intelligence, but Chinese-speaking Britons are in the best
position to ask the right questions, analyse the data and feed
it into organisational strategy. Of course, it is also important
to train native Britons for tasks such as intelligence, and to
bear in mind that there are loyalty issues in companies relying
solely on Chinese nationals.
Britain's exports to China in 2005 were worth
£2.7 billion against £14 billion in imports, ie exports
were less than one fifth of imports. In the first 11 months of
2005, the EU overtook the US to become China's biggest trade partner
with US$130 billion of imports and US$67 billion in exports, ie
exports were over half the total of imports. Britain's poor performance
compared to the EU average is partly down to Britain's manufacturing
decline, but also to poor marketing by British companies. In addition
to the British Embassy and Consulates, the China Britain Business
Council does an excellent job supporting British companies, but
there is a limit to what these can achieve without the right skills
and attitudes on the part of the companies. UK companies need
better marketing. Marketing is about intelligence, which comes
from understanding the market and needs of your clients, and modifying
your behaviour accordingly.
One of the areas in which Britain has excelled
is the quality of our diplomatic representation, which has been
very successful in East Asia. This has been underpinned by high
quality language education, with two years of full time language
training for relevant diplomats. This system relies on the area
specialist concept `applied in the FCO. However, it is reportedly
planning to abandon this in favour of "parachuting in"
discipline specialists to deal with specific issues on a "one
day China, the next day Brazil" basis. Technical issues require
technical experts, but they need their hands holding by competent
locally based staff who understand the cultures in which they
are operating. It is vital in a "guanxi" (connections)
orientated society that we have staff able to build up connections
with their East Asian counterparts.
We make an assumption that English is the universal
tool of international communication and since we speak English
we do not need to learn other languages. This assumption is not
accepted by the Chinese, who see Mandarin, with far more native
speakers than English, as capable of becoming a world language.
From 2005 the Chinese Government began generously funding its
Confucius Institute initiative to create a global network of Chinese
language and culture programmes. It is not inconceivable that
Chinese will soon come to replace English as the first foreign
language in a number of East Asian countries.
UK language learning is in decline across the
state school sector and in higher education. Languages are much
better learnt young as a skill for life: we are now educating
the 2015-60 work-force. Yet only one in three state school pupils
takes a language beyond the age of 14, and universities are closing
down language courses. This is not the result of low market demand
for language skills: 50% of South and East Asian studies graduates
were in graduate level employment six months after graduating
with average pay of £17,227 pa; the figures for History and
English were 24% and 28% with average salaries of £14,712
and £14,177 respectively. (Source: The Times Higher
27 May 2005:10). So why is language teaching capacity being downgraded?
This is partly because pupils and students as consumers are opting
for easier and more fashionable subjects with little regard for
future employability (in many cases through ignorance), and partly
because institutions are chasing league table places and other
subjects are cheaper and easier to teach. East Asian languages
are more difficult for native English speakers. The FCO allows
two years of full-time study against three months for Italian.
This is a reason to teach these languages while people are in
full-time education, because it is very difficult to spare the
time afterwards. There is a massive hidden cost in not maximising
the learning capacities of young people when they are at their
greatest for acquiring such life-long skills.
British universities have gone from having some
of the most extensive and highest quality East Asian language
and culture programmes in the world to languishing behind other
European countries, the US and Oceania. This reflects the way
governmental bodies charged with overseeing skills needs have
consistently under-rated the importance of language skills and
been unwilling to pay for them. HEFCE, for example, funds the
teaching of ab initio "hard" languages such as Chinese
and Japanese at the same rate as post-A level European languages
such as French or Spanish. At the same time it urges universities
to be more commercial; so they close these languages down. This
attitude applies to HEFCE, the AHRC and ESRC, and the local RDAs
representing the DTI. Durham's local RDA, One NorthEast, for example,
is investing very large sums in the local university science base
but, in spite of the fact that it is specifically targeting East
Asia for investment, sees no need to maintain the language base.
When Durham University consulted ONE before making the decision
to close its Department of East Asian Studies in 2003, ONE expressed
no interest, in spite of the fact that DEAS staff had been involved
in every major Japanese development in the North East from Nissan
onwards. When Durham and Newcastle axed all Korean language capacity
in the fegion in 2004, again ONE took no interest. This attitude,
that language is unimportant, is not shared by business organisations
on the ground, such as the China-Britain Business Council, the
British Chamber of Commerce in China, and the EU, which has manager
training programmes in China.
It is true that other universities are building
up capacity with Nottingham, Bristol and Manchester putting on
new courses in Chinese, but so far they are aiming for lower language
skill levels. We need graduates who can operate in Chinese, Japanese
or Korean working language environments.
For many years the research councils, the ESRC
and AHRC, have supported research projects on topics in East Asian
social sciences and humanities by scholars lacking the necessary
language skills to read original materials. This may severely
compromise the quality of the research, which others then rely
on. The relevant scholarly associations (British Association for
Chinese Studies, British Association for Japanese Studies, British
Association for Korean Studies) have expressed serious concern
over the issue of academic language training. HEFCE, the ESRC
and AHRC have recently acknowledged these concerns and announced
an initiative designed to ensure that more researchers are able
to acquire the necessary language skills.
We need more national recognition of the growing
importance of language skills in a global economic system, and
a willingness by government to ensure students acquire the skills
necessary for their working lives.
THE GROWING
POLITICAL AND
ECONOMIC PROMINENCE
OF THE
PRC IN INTERNATIONAL
AFFAIRS
The Committee document speaks of China's emergence
as a regional power. This understates the influence of China as
a nuclear power and weapons supplier, as a permanent member of
the UN Security Council, as the holder of a huge tranche of US
debt, and as a global trading force in manufactured goods with
extensive interests in all regions, including South America. China
has signalled its willingness to take a more active international
role with its membership of the North Korean 6 Party Talks, by
sending UN peace keeping forces abroad, and of course through
the 2008 Olympic Games and 2010 World Expo. In 2005 China displaced
Britain from fourth place in GDP terms; Japan remains second in
world GDP terms, and Korea 11th (2004 figures). In their shares
of world exports, China is 3rd, Japan 4th, Hong Kong 11th, Korea
12th and Taiwan 15th. These are very important growth economies
that have huge potential. China's growth has been dependent on
exports, but the country is rich in natural resources, and, as
local demand increases with rising living standards, China will
be able to sustain its own development.
China's economic rise, like that of India, will
inevitably put pressure on commodity prices and reduce Britain's
access to cheap resources. We have to accept that Chinese people
will expect similar standards of living to our own and we must
plan our own future consumption patterns on this basis. The UK
government should not give the impression, as the US government
does, that privileged access to global resources can continue
indefinitely. There are technological solutions to some current
global problems, and we should be working with Chinese, as well
as Japanese and Korean, scientists to resolve them. However, this
has to be On the basis of equality, not on the basis that Chinese
living standards can somehow be capped at a lower level than our
own. This means a high level of scientific and technological co-operation
with East Asian countries, and again implies British scientists
will need East Asian language skills.
THE BALANCE
OF SECURITY
IN THE
REGION INCLUDING
RELATIONS WITH
JAPAN AND
THE USA
We are witnessing a high degree of economic
convergence in East Asia with big investments in China by Japan,
Korea and Taiwan. This is not yet reflected in the political sphere
but with Japanese and others looking towards an East Asian version
of the EU, it may well be in the medium term. There is little
doubt that China would dominate such a group. This would impact
on US relations with Japan and Korea, and especially the issue
of US military bases. There must be a question over the long term
future of these bases, which are not popular in either country,
especially if the North Korean issue is resolved. Withdrawal from
these bases would affect US status in the region, and China is
clearly a threat to the status of the USA as the sole global superpower.
There may well be conflicts over the issue of resources as the
US seeks to protect its position; we have seen this in the US
rebutting Chinese attempts to buy US energy companies. However,
it is in Britain's interests to adopt a pragmatic line which seeks
to reconcile the valid interests of both sides.
POLITICAL AND
RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS
AND HUMAN
RIGHTS IN
THE PRC, INCLUDING
THE SITUATION
IN TIBET
AND XINJIANG
As a result of Britain's 19th century history
of aggression against China, Chinese question Britain's right
to criticise her human rights record. At that time Britain went
to war over the right to oblige China to import opium, a banned
drug, and British forces were ordered by their commander to loot
and set fire to one of the world's finest palace complexes at
the Yuanmingyuan. This remains part of the history taught to every
Chinese child. Nevertheless, Britain's commitment to legality
is something respected by the Chinese, and hough on-going human
rights dialogues, Britain and the EU have certainly helped improve
Chinese human rights practice. Posturing does not help at a governmental
level, but Chinese want to be recognised as enlightened and civilised
and we should continue to work behind the scenes on human rights
issues. Some British companies, for example Sainsbury's, have
a very good record in insisting on minimum standards from their
Chinese suppliers.
The issue of religious freedom is a very difficult
one for the UK Government to tackle, though it can support NGOs
and scholars working on this. The Chinese authorities have taken
a particularly hard line in Xinjiang where Muslims have reportedly
been systematically deprived of their passports to prevent them
travelling on the Hajj and have been forced to eat lunch during
Ramadan. This is likely to be counter-productive to the Chinese
in the long run, and this is perhaps the message we should give.
THE DISPUTE
OVER TAIWAN
Great sensitivity over the issue of national
sovereignty is pervasive in China. Mainland Chinese academics
with liberal and enlightened views on other topics are apt to
turn very hard-line over Taiwan and voice their strong support
for armed intervention. The UK recognises one China, but there
is a strong case for Britain supporting the status quo
of de facto but not de jure independence for Taiwan.
Taiwan has made a successful transition to a democratic state,
and we in Britain naturally feel very sympathetic to this. Many
of us would want to support the principle that a democratic society
should be able to determine its own fate. However, we must not
underestimate the PRC's sensitivity over this issue and her willingness
to use military force if pushed. Armed conflict would be a disaster
for all concerned. The level of Taiwanese investment in the PRC
is such that the issue is likely to resolve itself in the long
run, especially if an East Asian version of the EU does develop.
In the meantime the British government should do all it can to
maintain good relationships with Taiwan and facilitate commercial
and cultural exchanges within the present framework, whilst urging
both sides not to take precipitate action if another period of
crisis occurs.
THE QUESTION
OF SECURITY
AND STABILITY
ON THE
KOREAN PENINSULA
Korea is an issue where the hard-line Axis of
Evil approach of the Bush administration has been much less successful
than the more conciliatory approach of the Clinton administration.
We should be under no illusions over the nature of the North Korean
government, but its sabre-rattling is largely the result of paranoia,
and threatening the paranoid is hardly likely to be the most successful
policy. Britain should take its lead from, and support, South
Korea, Japan and China's efforts to develop a dialogue with North
Korea on the basis of peaceful co-existence. There is clearly
an agenda for reunification which is a serious threat to the North
Korean government. It needs reassurance in the form of trade,
aid and cultural links. Britain can help directly by funding bi-lateral
links and being more generous in giving visas to North Koreans
to visit the UK.
THE ROLES
OF THE
UNITED KINGDOM
AND THE
EUROPEAN UNION
IN THE
REGION
The EU is seen as a moderate, pragmatic force,
growing in strength, China's biggest trade partner, and with a
reserve currency offering a realistic alternative to the US dollar.
Britain underestimates the sense in East Asia of the EU as an
entity, a role which has become more important since China's entry
to the WTO. Britain is an active, high profile member of the EU
with a strong presence in the region, and in a position to influence
EU policy. There is also the possibility of the EU becoming a
model for an East Asian confederation, which could bring the two
closer.
CONCLUSION
Britain needs to see East Asians as equal partners.
We have grown accustomed to view the region as technologically,
scientifically, culturally, militarily and economically inferior.
This has not been the case for ome time with Japan, and soon will
not apply to the other countries either. We are competitors, but
this should be in the same way that we compete with Germany and
France: competition within a framework Hof co-operation and commitment
to shared values. We need to think long term and modify our behaviour
ccordingly.
Don Starr
Head, Department of East Asian Studies, University
of Durham, and
President, British Association for Chinese Studies
February 2006
|
