The following is a translation of an article published online by Radio Taiwan International (RTI), on January 13 this year. RTI based their article on coverage by United Daily News (聯合報), the Liberty Times (自由時報, sister to the English-language Taipei Times), and Associated Press (AP).
I haven’t checked upon mainland coverage of these issues yet (RTI mentions Huanqiu Shibao, for example), but might do so next week.
As for Astrid Soderbergh Widding, the Stockholm University vice-chancellor quoted by RTI, the South China Morning Post quoted her in January as saying that “establishing institutes that are funded by another nation, within the framework of a university, is rather a questionable practice”.
Links within blockquotes added during translation.
Related Tag:
Confucius Institute
Mainland China’s Huanqiu Shibao reported on January 12 that Stockholm University has announced the termination, by the end of June, of its cooperation with the Confucius Institute in Stockholm – the first Confucius Institute founded in Europe, in 2005. The reason was that given the expansion of bilateral cooperation, this form of co0peration was no longer in step with the times. Before that, two American universities also said that they would not renew their contracts with the Confucius Institutes. These decisions reflect the concerns that the role of Confucius Institutes in the respective countries have caused.
大陸環球時報12日報導，瑞典斯德哥爾摩大學宣布，將在今年6月底關閉於2005年開辦的歐洲地區第一所孔子學院，理由是，隨著雙邊關係的拓展，這項合作已不符合時宜。在此之前，美國也有2所大學表示不再與孔子學院續約。歐美學府的這些決定反映出孔子學院的角色已在相關國家引發關切。
To alleviate doubts, Beijing promotes soft power
◎消除疑慮 北京推軟實力
Supported by its economic power, mainland China’s international political status has risen, Beijing’s rise received high global attention, and it also led to some doubts: to highlight China’s rise as a peaceful one, and to strengthen mainland China’s international influence, Beijing set out from the cultural level to actively promote soft power, and the establishment of Confucius Institutes abroad was what caught most attention among the promotional measures.
在經濟實力的支撐下，中國大陸的國際政治地位水漲船高，北京的崛起受到國際高度重視，也引發了一些疑慮；為了凸顯中國大陸是和平崛起，並強化大陸的國際影響力，北京從文化層面著手，積極推展軟實力，其中最受矚目的就是在境外設立孔子學院。
In November 2004, the first Confucius Institute put up its name plate in Seoul, and since, Confucius Institutes have also been established in countries in Asia, America, Europe, and Africa.
2004年11月，第一座孔子學院在南韓首都首爾掛牌；後來，亞洲、美洲、歐洲、非洲等許多國家也分別設立孔子學院。
By September 2014, 123 countries worldwide cooperated with mainland China, having set up 465 Confucius Institutes and 173 Confucius Classrooms. In America alone, 100 universities took part in such programs.
截至2014年9月，全球已有123個國家與大陸合作，開辦了465所孔子學院和713個孔子課堂，單單美國就有100所大學參與相關計畫。
Confucius Institutes lead in funding
◎主導經費教材 孔子學院惹爭議
The Confucius Institutes are usually set up right within the foreign universities that sign contracts with Beijing, but the [central] government in Beijing provides funding, chooses the staff that teaches abroad, and specifies the teaching material. This has caused quite some controversy.
這些孔子學院通常是直接設立在與北京簽約的外國學府裡，但卻由北京政府提供經費、選派教師並指定教材。此舉引發相當大的爭議。
It is [sometimes] said that Confucius Institutes operating within universities have some influence on the curricula of those schools and could endanger the schools’ integrity. These commentators believe that Confucius Institutes pose a threat to academic freedom.
有評論表示，孔子學院在大學內運作，對這些學校的課程具有一定的影響力，可能危及該校的完整性。批評者認為，孔子學院對學術自由構成威脅。
Stockholm University vice-chancellor Astrid Söderbergh Widding says that when institutions within universities are funded by governments of other countries, the approach does indeed pose problems.
斯德哥爾摩大學副校長維丁(Astrid Soderbergh Widding)就表示，大學內設立的機構是由另一個國家政府提供經費，這種作法的確有問題。
The ways Confucius Institutes operate have also attracted the attention of foreign governments. Indian and Japanese officials have questioned that Confucius Institutes only teach the Chinese language – [suggesting that] they also spread ideological attitued, and deliberately influence countries’ assessments of mainland China.
孔子學院的運作模式也受到外國政府的關注。印度和日本的官員曾經質疑，孔子學院不僅教授中文，也傳輸意識形態，意圖影響各國對中國大陸的評價。
A report published in October 2013 by American think tank “Project 2049 Research Institute” pointed out that while teaching Chinese, Confucius Institutes also inculcate ideological attitudes, thus influencing foreign circles’ judgment of Beijing.
美國華盛頓智庫「2049計畫研究所」就曾於2013年10月公布一份報告指出，孔子學院在教授中文的同時，也在灌輸意識形態，藉此影響外界對北京的評斷。
To promote academic independence, American scholars demand end to cooperation
◎維護學術獨立 美學者促停止合作
Nevertheless, Beijing’s strategy of promoting soft power by the establishment of Confucius Institues in numerous countries worldwide has seen growing resistance in recent years. Besides Stockholm University, universities and schools in America and Canada have terminated or suspended cooperation with Confucius Institutes.
不過，北京在世界許多國家設立孔子學院推廣軟實力的策略近年來遭遇越來越多的阻力。除了近日的斯德哥爾摩大學外，美國和加拿大去年都有大學院校終止或暫緩與孔子學院合作。
When the University of Chicago established a Confucius Institute in 2009, 174 professors of the university jointly opposed. Last year in April, 108 University of Chicago professors jointly demanded that after the cooperation term expire, cooperation with Beijing should be terminated, and the Confucius Institute no longer be allowed on the campus. They believed that the lecturers employed by Beijing had received special training to avoid or neglect politically sensitive topics such as “June 4” or Taiwan. They believed that with Beijing’s control of the lecturers employment and training would earn the University of Chicago’s academic program political mainland official management and control of political speech and influence on freedom of religion.
芝加哥大學於2009年設立孔子學院時，該校就曾有174位教授聯名反對。去年4月，108位芝加哥大學教授聯名要求校方於合約到期後，終止與北京的合作，不再讓孔子學院進駐校園。他們認為，北京方面聘用的講師都受過特別培訓，在課堂上會規避或忽略例如「六四」及台灣等政治敏感議題；這些教授認為，由北京控制教師的聘用和培訓，將導致芝加哥大學的學術計畫受到大陸官方管控的政治言論及信仰自由所左右。
On September 25 last year, the University of Chicago announced that the five years of cooperation with the Confucius Institute would not be renewed after September 29.
去年9月25日，芝加哥大學宣布，與孔子學院的5年合約於該月29日到期後，不再續約。
Shortly afterwards, on October 1 2014, the Pennsylvania State University announced that they would terminate their five years of cooperation with the Confucius Institute.
緊接著，美國賓夕法尼亞州立大學也於去年10月1日宣布，終止與孔子學院的5年合作關係。
Beijing’s method of transmitting ideology needs to be corrected
◎傳輸意識形態 北京作法待修正
American paper Wall Street Journal wrote that the professors’ dissatisfaction with the Confucius Institutes came from lacking teaching skills and a refusal to accept some negative chapters in Chinese history*).
美國華爾街日報曾說，這些大學對孔子學院的不滿來自於「無法教授技能和拒絕接受一些中國歷史負面內容的篇章」。
In June last year, the American Association of University Professors called for 100 U.S. universities cancel or renegotiate their contracts with the Confucius Institutes, because the Confucius Institutes were propaganda branches of mainland Chinese, particularly dissimenating the mainland authorities ideological attitudes, in violation of academic freedom.
去年6月，美國大學教授協會呼籲美國的100所大學，取消或重啟與北京的孔子學院談判協議，因認為孔子學院是大陸當局的宣傳分支，主要在傳播大陸當局的意識形態，此舉違反學術自由。
Even earlier, in June 2013, the Canadian Association of University Teachers called on Canada’s universities and schools to terminate relations with the Confucius Institute, because allowing governments of totalitarian states to guide curricula content, teaching material and the topics in classroom dialogue would harm the integrity of all universities.
加拿大大學教師協會則早在2013年6月即已呼籲加拿大的大學院校與孔子學院斷絕關係，理由是如果允許極權國家的政府機構主導課程內容、教材及課堂上的討論話題，將損及各大學的誠信。
The University of Manitoba, and the Toronto District School Board refused or suspended the establishment of Confucius Institutes last year, their main concern being that Confucius Institutes could interfere with academic freedom at the schools.
加拿大曼尼托巴大學(University of Manitoba)和多倫多教育局已於去年先後拒絕或暫停設立孔子學院，主要的顧慮就是孔子學院會干涉學校的學術自由。
But is the gradual termination of cooperation with Confucius Institutes by European and American countries purely based on concern about academic freedom, or does it represent an outbreak of fear of mainland China? Future developments will be worth continued observation.
然而，歐美國家紛紛停止與孔子學院的合作，純粹只是對學術自由發展感到憂慮，還是代表歐美國家對大陸的另一種恐中發作？後續發展還值得繼續觀察。
____________
Note
*) If RTI referred to this WSJ blogpost, hiring practice rather than lacking skills were the source of dissatisfaction: the institutes’ hiring practices and refusal to acknowledge unflattering chapters of Chinese history.
____________
Related
» Unobtrusive and Imperceptible Moral Influence, Jan 7, 2012
____________
Justrecently's Weblog 
[…] temporary, too, just as they are at Argentine Radio and TV, and disputes over journalistic content don’t appear to…