Six major universities in Australia have shut down their Confucius Institutes, once promoted as cultural and language exchange centers backed by the Chinese government. Although the closures were done quietly, the message is clear: these programs, which have long been accused of pushing propaganda and suppressing academic freedom, are no longer welcome on many Australian campuses.
This shift comes at a time when Australia’s federal government is tightening policies around foreign influence in education, especially from China. Critics say Confucius Institutes serve as soft power tools for the Chinese Communist Party, allowing Beijing to monitor students, spread favorable narratives, and discourage discussion on controversial topics such as Tibet, Taiwan, and the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.
What Are Confucius Institutes?
Confucius Institutes, or CIs, were designed to promote Chinese language and culture in countries around the world. The name comes from the ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius, known for his teachings on morality and social harmony. However, modern Confucius Institutes are far more political in nature than their namesake suggests.
They are usually set up through partnerships between foreign universities and a Chinese university, with funding and teachers provided by Hanban, an agency once under China’s Ministry of Education. Hanban typically offers $100,000 annually for operating expenses, along with teaching materials and staff. In exchange, the host university supplies office space, a director, and access to students.
While the institutes offer classes on Mandarin, calligraphy, and Chinese cooking, critics say they avoid topics that paint China in a negative light. A study cited in the ABC reported that “sensitive topics such as the Tiananmen Square massacre or the issue of Tibet were ignored.” Human Rights Watch added in a 2019 report that these centers are “extensions of the Chinese government” and that they censor discussions of issues that Beijing considers politically sensitive.
Which Universities Have Closed Their Institutes?
The Confucius Institutes have now been closed at the following universities:
- University of Melbourne
- University of Queensland (UQ)
- University of Western Australia (UWA)
- University of New South Wales (UNSW)
- Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT)
- University of Adelaide (closure unconfirmed but suspected due to inactivity)
These closures account for nearly half of all Confucius Institutes operating at Australian universities. According to a report from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), only seven remain open.
The University of Melbourne ended its partnership with Nanjing University in August 2024, after 17 years of operating the CI. A university spokesperson explained, “The Confucius Institute was only one of the many ways the University of Melbourne continues to deepen its understanding of China and capacity to engage with Chinese institutions.” The school also stated it had “no additional need to renew the agreement.”
The University of Queensland allowed its contract with Tianjin University to expire at the end of 2024. A spokesperson noted, “UQ continues to foster relationships with leading institutions around the world, including in China, in the areas of student mobility, joint degree programs and research,” but made no indication of plans to continue the CI.
At UNSW, the contract was allowed to lapse in 2022. A university spokesperson said the program ended due to disruptions caused by COVID-19 and stated, “The university is developing its own program in Chinese studies, including language and literacy. UNSW is committed to thought leadership and encouraging open dialogue in the China–Australia bilateral relationship.”
The University of Western Australia also cited the impact of the pandemic and border closures as the reason for its closure in 2023. “The University recognizes the importance of Asian language skills,” a UWA representative stated, adding that the university had “expanded its Chinese studies program to meet demand for language education.”
RMIT shut down its Confucius Institute back in 2021, also referencing the COVID-19 pandemic. As for the University of Adelaide, ABC News was unable to reach anyone at the institute. An automatic email reply said the center would “reopen on Monday 29 January 2024,” suggesting it had not been active for some time. A university spokesperson would not confirm the closure but said the institution remains committed to “fostering connections with other countries, including China.”
A Growing Concern Over Foreign Influence
Although universities have cited reasons like the pandemic and internal curriculum changes, government scrutiny and public pressure have clearly played a major role in the closures. In recent years, Australia has adopted a stricter stance on foreign influence in its academic sector. The Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme, introduced by the federal government, requires institutions to register organizations that may be acting on behalf of a foreign power.
In 2019, ABC reported that applicants for teaching positions in Confucius Institutes had to show “political loyalty to the Chinese government.” That same year, Human Rights Watch described the institutes as “extensions of the Chinese government” that pose a threat to free speech.
The Australian government has made its concerns known to the university sector. A spokesperson for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) said, “The foreign minister has been clear in conveying her expectation to the university sector that Australian universities should not establish any new Confucius Institutes.” A separate government source told ABC that officials had made it “crystal clear” that these institutes are a “problem” that must be “carefully managed.”
Still, officials deny that they ordered any universities to shut the programs down. Instead, the trend appears to reflect a growing unease in academic leadership over potential risks of continuing such partnerships.
Expert Perspectives on the Closures
Dr. Jeffrey Gil from Flinders University, who has studied Confucius Institutes extensively, said he was “not surprised” by the wave of closures. He explained, “There have been long-standing concerns about Confucius Institutes in Australia, which have intensified with the deterioration of Australia–China relations in recent years.”
He believes government concerns about foreign interference were “likely to be one factor” influencing the universities’ decisions. He also noted that U.S. institutions that continue to host Confucius Institutes have faced reduced funding from the American government. “It’s possible universities may think something like this could also happen in Australia,” he said. “I also think that universities simply want to avoid the controversy that’s attached to hosting a Confucius Institute.”
However, Dr. Gil does not believe that these institutes had much real influence. “Based on my research, Confucius Institutes’ teaching and cultural activities focus on non-political, non-controversial aspects of China and Chinese culture,” he said. “It is more a matter of avoiding negative or controversial issues regarding China than pushing a pro-Beijing narrative.”
China’s Response and Remaining Institutes
China continues to defend the role of Confucius Institutes worldwide. According to Hanban, the purpose of the centers is to “become a platform for cultural exchanges between China and the world as well as a bridge reinforcing friendship and cooperation.” Beijing has denied all allegations of interference, insisting the programs are only about education and mutual understanding.
In response to international criticism, China moved oversight of the institutes in 2020 from the Ministry of Education to a newly formed nonprofit group, the China Foundation for International Chinese Language Education. The move was seen as an attempt to downplay government involvement.
Despite the closures, several Australian universities still maintain their CIs. The University of Newcastle has kept its institute open and has registered it under the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme. The University of Sydney also continues to operate its CI but clarified that it no longer receives funding from China.
Queensland University of Technology (QUT) has kept its institute running for now, but a spokesperson stated that the current contract is due to expire in 2025 and that “all agreements are reviewed in line with Australian government policy.”
Griffith University, La Trobe University, Victoria University, and Charles Darwin University also continue to host their institutes.
The steady closures of Confucius Institutes reflect a deeper shift in how Australia views its academic relationships with China. While some universities may still see value in cultural exchanges, the risks of foreign political influence are now under serious examination.
ACZ Editor: As China becomes more belligerent in the South China Sea and other places (including recently islands near Australia), we believe a tolerance for organizations like this will wane. These are nothing less than spy and propaganda stations, likely populated, at least in part, by Chinese intelligence officers.