Global Times on censorship: Don’t like our rules? Then don’t engage us

SHANGHAI — Western institutions that do not like China’s censorship of hundreds of academic papers from a prominent journal can leave the country, the state-run Global Times newspaper said in an editorial yesterday.

The editorial appeared after news that Cambridge University Press (CUP) had blocked access on its site in China to a list of some 300 papers and book reviews from the China Quarterly that the Chinese government had asked to be removed.

CUP said it complied so that the larger body of its academic and educational materials could remain available in China.

But critics argue that the publisher had undermined the principles of academic freedom and independence, and lent its name to China’s censorship efforts.

The articles and book reviews touched on subjects deemed sensitive by the Chinese government, including the 1989 pro-democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square, the 1965-75 Cultural Revolution, Taiwan, Xinjiang and Tibet.

“Western institutions have the freedom to choose. If they don’t like the Chinese way, they can stop engaging with us,” said the editorial in the nationalistic tabloid under the Communist Party’s official People’s Daily newspaper.

“If they think China’s Internet market is so important that they can’t miss out, they need to respect Chinese law and adapt to the Chinese way.”

The Chinese version of the editorial characterised the clash of principles as a “contest of power”.

“Time will tell who’s right and who’s wrong,” it said.

News about the decision by CUP, the centuries-old publishing arm of Cambridge University, set off a torrent of criticism including from overseas scholars of Chinese affairs.

In an open letter posted on Medium, Dr James A Millward, a history professor at Georgetown University, said the decision was “a craven, shameful and destructive concession to (China’s) growing censorship regime” and a violation of academic independence.

Others are petitioning CUP to restore the articles, with a three-day-old petition on change.org garnering more than 200 signatures by yesterday.

The petition say academics and universities reserve the right to boycott CUP and related journals if it gives into the Chinese government’s demands.

Dr Christopher Balding, an associate professor in economics at Peking University HSBC Business School in Shenzhen, said he started the petition to bring pressure on not just CUP, but also universities and academics who interact with China as well as Chinese universities and academics “to stand up to’’ censorship by the Chinese government.

With Chinese universities increasingly hiring internationally, Beijing is concerned “that these universities are not going to have the ideological adherence to what Beijing wants them to say’’, Dr Balding said.

“The fundamental driver of this ... is simply to exercise control, to try to impose what they think is the correct way of thinking.’’

Dr Chen Daoyin, a political scientist at Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, said that scholars in China self-censor anyway, and do not work on politically sensitive topics, such as the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square crackdown.

“Most of the young generations in China don’t know about June 4,’’ Prof Chen said. “And this is what the Chinese authorities are doing now, working for the future.’’ AGENCIES