以「文化治略」觀點探討一帶一路下的東南亞孔子學院

Abstract

中國自2004年在海外推動成立孔子學院以來即將邁入20年，在孔子學院的發展過程歷經一帶一路大戰略的推動、西方歐美國家對其的疑慮與限制、主責單位由政府機構改為基金會等諸多內外因素的影響。本文除了梳理這些脈絡，更聚焦在東南亞國家的孔子學院，東南亞作為一帶一路倡議的重點區域，這些國家的孔子學院在中國一帶一路的推動下，是否居中為中國的大戰略提供協助，其政策工具與行為者又有哪些，是本研究的分析重點。

本文從Baldwin（1985）的經濟治略理論出發以及Forsberg and Smith（2016）延伸對文化治略的詮釋，進而提出本文對文化治略的操作型定義，包括：（一）是否促進政治經濟戰略意圖；（二）與語文和教育外交有關的政策工具；（三）與語文和教育外交有關的行為者。本文透過檔案分析與次級資料分析法，以官方檔案、成果報告、制度規範與官方媒體報導，論證孔子學院具有促進政治經濟戰略的意圖，並進一步分析行為者與政策工具範疇；本文亦透過深度訪談法，試圖了解文化治略對於當地人民的吸引力為何。

本文認為孔子學院的組織變革並未使其降低官方色彩與促進政治經濟戰略意圖，故仍屬於文化治略範疇，一方面作為政策工具本身，另一方面具「平台」的特性，接軌中國中央或地方政府、海外中資企業及其子公司、國內大學所提供的資源，並發現行為者的樣態非常多樣，包括：政府部門，中國的海外中資企業與銀行、駐外使館。然而，中國在東南亞與各國的領土爭議，會是其在該地區增進政治、經濟、文化影響力的阻礙因素。

China is about to enter 20 years since it promoted the establishment of Confucius Institutes overseas in 2004. The development process of Confucius Institutes has gone through the promotion of the Belt and Road, the doubts and restrictions of Western European and American countries, and the change of the responsible unit from a government agency to a foundation. will be affected by many internal and external factors. In addition to sorting out these contexts, this article also focuses on the Confucius Institutes in Southeast Asian countries. Southeast Asia is a key area of the Belt and Road Initiative. Under the promotion of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, whether the Confucius Institutes in these countries can provide assistance to China’s grand strategy and its policy tools and what are the actors.

This article starts from the economic statecraft of Baldwin (1985) and extends the interpretation of cultural statecraft by Forsberg and Smith (2016), and then proposes an operational definition of cultural strategy in this article, including: (1) Whether to promote political and economic strategic intentions, (2) Policy tools related to language and educational diplomacy, (3) Actors related to language and educational diplomacy. Through document analysis and secondary data analysis, this article uses official archives, achievement reports, institutional norms and official media reports to confirm that the Confucius Institute has the intention to promote political and economic strategies, and further analyzes the policy tools and categories of actors. This article also uses in-depth interviews to understand why Confucius Institutes are or are not attractive to Southeast Asian students who want to learn Chinese.

This article believes that the organizational changes of the Confucius Institute have not reduced its official color and promoted political and economic strategic intentions, so it still belongs to cultural statecraft. On the one hand, it serves as a policy tool itself, and on the other hand, it has the characteristics of a "platform", integrating resources provided by China's central or local governments, overseas Chinese-funded enterprises and their subsidiaries, and domestic universities, and found that the actors are very diverse, including: government departments, China's overseas Chinese-funded enterprises and banks, embassies abroad, and even the local Chinese community also plays an important role. However. China’s territorial disputes with various countries in Southeast Asia will hinder its increase in political, economic, and cultural influence in the region.