Rectification
A previously published version of this article stated that professor Albert Wagelmans is one of the authors of the letter in which scientists criticised the CSC scholarship. However, it has since become clear that Mr Wagelmans, as a member of the University Council, informed the Council about the letter and forwarded it to the Executive Board. He had nothing to do with the content of the letter. The editors of EM regret that Mr Wagelmans has been called to account over his presumed role in this story and has apologised to him.
A previous version of this article also stated that the Executive Board ‘acknowledges’ the issue with the CSC scholarship. However, that wording is too strong. At this moment in time, the Executive Board is merely developing guidelines for international collaboration to help make an assessment of the best way to address the risks involved. The Executive Board has stated that it will use these guidelines as a basis for considering its position with regard to the CSC programme.
According to critical EUR researchers, the conditions (which are available only in Chinese on the Chinese website of the scholarship programme) for submitting applications to The China Scholarship Council (CSC) are incompatible with the university’s core values. The researchers voiced their concerns in a letter to the Executive Board. University Council member Albert Wagelmans (professor at ESE) informed other Council members about the receipt of that letter on 17 May, and then forwarded the letter to the Executive Board. The critics did not sign the letter and wish to remain anonymous. Mr Wagelmans himself is not one of the researchers who wrote the letter.
According to the conditions of the scholarship, scholarship applicants (mostly Chinese PhD students) must swear allegiance to the Chinese Communist Party, are questioned about their political ideology and are required to return to China after a research project.
“There is every reason to believe that bright young minds from oppressed groups can never get such a scholarship”, the researchers state in the letter to the Executive Board. They see a conflict with Erasmian values such as social commitment, world citizenship and broad-mindedness, and with the university’s objective of achieving ‘positive social impact’.
The letter states that the scholarships are ‘paid by a government which does not share such values, is nondemocratic, and which oppresses individuals as well as whole groups in its population, based on their religion, ethnicity, or political views.’
Checklist
In a reaction, the Executive Board states that it is currently reviewing the scholarship guidelines and partner policy. Among other things, these guidelines deal with the way in which EUR staff members cooperate with foreign universities, research institutes and companies. In October, the university will publish a first version of a checklist for assessing international collaborations and scholarships.
The board also states that although the university greatly values international cooperation, its attention has increasingly been drawn to the risks associated with international collaborations in recent years. Therefore, the EUR follows the agreements of the umbrella organisation of Dutch universities (UNL) and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. UNL and the Ministry have published a Framework for Knowledge Security and a National Guideline for Knowledge Security, containing guidance to help make a careful risk assessment of international collaborations. In the promised checklist, the university will include the Erasmian values, knowledge security, international ranking, education and research themes.
Change of course
If the checklist becomes mandatory for university staff, this will be the first step towards a potentially more critical attitude towards Chinese (and other) partners. The EUR has been cooperating with China since 1979, when Rotterdam became a sister city of Shanghai. In 1998, the Erasmus University China Center was established, which has coordinated the CSC PhD programme ever since.
The university is developing new guidelines in a time in which the ties between Dutch research institutions and China are under increasing pressure. In the past two years, for example, it has been revealed that several research institutes and universities consciously or unconsciously contributed to questionable research objectives of the Chinese government. For instance, researchers from Delft University of Technology helped the Chinese army, and professors from the human rights centre of VU University advocated an alternative vision on human rights in a study financed by China.
Erasmus MC was also criticised for its cooperation with a Chinese researcher, who in addition to an appointment in Rotterdam also worked for a Chinese research institution. The issue was that two of his scientific articles were withdrawn because in his research for the Chinese institution he had allegedly used DNA material obtained in an unethical manner from Uighurs, a group that is heavily oppressed in China.
“According to the conditions of the scholarship, applicants (mostly Chinese PhD students) must swear allegiance to the Chinese Communist Party, are questioned about their political ideology and are required to return to China after a research project.”
As a CSC student, I do not know we have such conditions about our political ideology. I love my country and I myself am not a communist. A lot of CSC students here I know are minorities in China. And it is quite understandable that we are required to return to China after the research project because we are sponsored. Also some exemptions applies, for example, if you want to do a postdoc abroad after the CSC contract, you can do so. Not to mention that this requirement is limited to only two years, after that, you can go anywhere you want. Afterall, it is a contract, if you violate the terms, you need to return the scholarship money back and an extra 30% of the money as default fees. You will not receive any other restrictions or punishments.
I respect the notion on making better cooperation. But I sincerely hope that it is based on true information.
Dear Shirong Zhang, thank you for your reply. The critical EUR-scientists that complained at the University Council have based their information on the terms and conditions of the scholarship programme. Since you are a phd-student in this programme you know what these terms and conditions are. Also these can be read on the CSC site.
We believe that there is a more justice’s environment for public, and a newspaper is basically needed to spread ideas without biases. We also believe that there are more good things behind this cooperation after 3 decades if you interviewed more people who really involved it. We know there are so many different in our cultures, but it is good to negotiate and to understand more to each other, instead of deny all of it without giving more help or respect.
I wonder whether Professor Wagelmans really talked with CSC students who study here. If this funding is cut, how should we ensure the opportunity for Chinese students who couldn’t have afforded to study here themselves. Many universities around the world are cooperating with CSC students or even add their salary to match the minimum wage, though EUR is not doing the same. It is smart to consider whether EUR wants to go that far.
Dear Yayi, thank for your reply. The criticism is based on the terms and conditions for applicants that apply for the CSC-programme, not on personal stories.
Hmmm…It is intereseting to know that CSC funding selects applicants based on religion or ethnicity. However, apparently, our Mongolian nationality, Bai nationality or Hui nationality (and lots of students who are different ethnics as I know) are not excluded from this selection. And Muslim faith, Buddhist faith group are not excluded from this selection.
BTW, what do you mean by oppressed groups?
-Comment from a Mongolian Nationality Chinese Student who just chatted with a Muslim faith Hui natinality Chinese CSC student.
Dear Ben Yu, the criticism of the scientists that filed their complaint at the university council are based on the terms and conditions of the CSC-scholarship programme. These are mentioned in the article and can be found on the CSC-website.
There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people’s eyes. Of course, you can find terms and conditions for applicants on the CSC website. But different people have their own personal perspectives of these terms and conditions (especially after being translated to another language).
Everyone has the right to speak their own opinions. However, as a magazine affiliated with the university, it is your responsibility to publish something that has been officially proved, not personal perspectives.
Dear Peer van Tetterode, as you said, it is very open information that everyone can find on the Internet. But it seems that we have totally different interpretations about CSC terms and conditions. And it seems even I provided my experience as a CSC student and others’ experience, you choose to ignore and feel no need to talk with us to know more about the real conditions and our feelings.
Have you ever considered how this article can influence people’s views on CSC students? It makes me feel that the students who can get the CSC funding must have some kind of political ideology, and are not trustworthy becasue they might work for Chinese government. However, these are NOT true!
Would not your article make a kind of discrimination on us?
Lastly, you said the Uyghurs are the group that is heavily suppressed in China. Have you ever done a cross-check for the conditions of people from Uighurs?
Dear Shirong Zhang,
Regarding your last question, are you aware of the fact that on February 25, 2021, the Netherlands parliament passed a resolution declaring the Chinese government’s actions against the Uyghurs as a genocide? See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide
Mike Appel
I highly recommend to retract this article again. Citing an anonymous letter which contains a lot of falls information and actually discriminates many of the excellent CSC funded scientist and PhD students at our university. Actually, I think this letter and the current article about this actually goes against the Erasmian values such as social commitment, world citizenship and broad-mindedness.
Science should never be mixed with politics or religion. As a professor at this university I strongly oppose against this unsubstantiated demand to end the Chinese scholarship program. I and many other professors are planning to voice against this initiative. I strongly encourage Shirong Zhang, Yifei Ma, Yayi ,and Ben Yu to contact me to discuss this further. ([email protected])
Comments are closed.