The extinction of panda diplomacy: A new era for China-US relations
How relevant is panda diplomacy today? Not as much as it used to be, says US professor Wu Guo. He argues that traditional methods of soft power are quickly becoming obsolete in the face of growing American hostility towards China, and as globalisation increases access to China.
With US President-elect Donald Trump taking office, China-US relations will undoubtedly move towards a historic turning point, marked by ongoing global competition. Both countries will also be forced to engage with each other in entirely new ways. I think that what I have termed the “visits-plus-pandas” diplomacy model will become unsustainable — pundits and observers really need not keep pulling these outdated approaches from their toolbox, as the times have changed.
I am reminded of the late Chinese writer Lu Xun’s poignant remark during his 1927 speech in Hong Kong: “The old tune has been sung to its end.” He said that “all things old and outdated have already come to an end”. In the same way, I would also like to take this opportunity to remind those interested in China-US relations not to be fixated on the old ways anymore.
The origins of panda diplomacy
In specific historical periods — especially when China was isolated from the world and faced a combination of hostility, misunderstanding and curiosity from the West — pandas successfully became a symbol of China’s soft power, with their charming and adorable image. For instance, they played an indispensable and positive role in China-US diplomacy and people-to-people exchanges, and also facilitated emotional connections between the Chinese and Japanese people.
However, in the five decades that have passed since the height of panda diplomacy, the pandas’ symbolic political significance as representatives of China has weakened. Although the pandas remain esteemed guests in the zoos that have them, their value lies increasingly in their commercial appeal to tourists, especially children.
The negative attitudes toward China reflected in various public opinion polls in the US today are shaped by multiple factors — they can no longer be changed by a few pandas.
One reason why the diplomatic and symbolic value of pandas has diminished is globalisation and increased interconnectedness. Today, people can gain various experiences and information about China through travel, overseas study and the internet. The negative attitudes toward China reflected in various public opinion polls in the US today are shaped by multiple factors — they can no longer be changed by a few pandas.
Abuse of pandas?
The advancement of the internet has also led to various negative interpretations from the Chinese public regarding the treatment and fate of pandas outside of China. In the 1980s and 1990s when I grew up, the Chinese likely never imagined that the pandas sent abroad by the Chinese government — cherished by foreign governments, research institutions and the tourism industry — could potentially be “abused” by local zoos.
However, I am inclined to take such allegations with a pinch of salt. I still believe that every recipient or lessee will handle the giant pandas from Sichuan with a high level of professionalism and that there will likely not be any issue of “abuse”. It does not make sense, even from a commercial perspective. After all, how would a zoo benefit from mistreating a rare animal that costs money to bring in and generates commercial benefits? I thus find the frequently sensationalised narratives on the Chinese internet about pandas being mistreated abroad to be quite baffling.
Changing times
However, the issue is not only about how pandas are treated but also that their cultural value has significantly diminished and is even openly questioned. Barbara Bodine, a professor of diplomacy at Georgetown University and former ambassador, had said in an interview that the two new pandas, Bao Li and Qing Bao, sent to the US in 2024 are merely a tool that China uses for cultural diplomacy, which she thinks is still “government policy with an agenda behind it”. According to Bodine, therefore, there is no need to read much into its positive significance. She even sarcastically remarked, “I cannot help but… admire China’s dedication to pandas as a symbol.”
... pandas no longer hold much significance for the current generation of scholars as they have become more detached and pragmatic.
From the attitude of this scholar, who spans both the political and academic spheres, one can discern a new trend in mutual perceptions between the US and China. As I previously pointed out, the current generation of middle-aged American experts on China lack the emotional connections and personal networks with China that some of the older generation had.
They also lack the curiosity and admiration of the leftist academic youth during the Cold War era. These PhD candidates viewed mainland China from the Universities Service Centre in Hong Kong’s New Territories and successfully visited China themselves in the early 1970s. Therefore, pandas no longer hold much significance for the current generation of scholars as they have become more detached and pragmatic.
... today, these figures are all gone. American scholars who have maintained close ties with Chinese higher-ups like David Lampton have also retired and stepped away from platforms where they could exert influence.
A lack of prominent figures who could facilitate communication
At the same time, some of the figures who used to facilitate communication between China and the US are hard to find today. Though I believe that some Chinese academics tend to wilfully overlook the controversies surrounding Henry Kissinger in world history and exaggerate his contributions, it is indisputable — from a communication perspective — that his long-term efforts, writings and countless discussions have indeed fostered understanding between China and the US.
On the other hand there were also unique 20th-century historical figures like Anna Chennault, who were able to navigate and facilitate communication between mainland China, Taiwan, and the US, thereby contributing to the efforts of overseas Chinese.
But today, these figures are all gone. American scholars who have maintained close ties with Chinese higher-ups like David Lampton have also retired and stepped away from platforms where they could exert influence.
Another previously influential figure is Chas W. Freeman Jr., who was born in 1943 and served as American interpreter for US President Richard Nixon. Though he holds goodwill towards China, he no longer has an influence on policy. Earlier this year, he accurately predicted Trump’s victory but also warned that many among Trump’s cabinet will be anti-China, making this a dangerous time. Freeman was right, and we are currently witnessing the fulfilment of his prediction.
Some have also realised that Trump’s cabinet is filled with members from the post-80s generation or even younger. I want to point out that the emotions and perceptions these Americans have towards China differ significantly from those of the older generation of China experts, and this is something China must deal with directly.
With the de facto end of engagement with China, China now faces an extremely distrustful and highly hostile US Congress. At this time, some pundits are returning to the old “toolbox” approach, thinking that inviting politicians and congressmen to visit China can somehow alleviate hostility. However, this assumption is still based on past circumstances when Americans had very few opportunities to visit China and had limited access to firsthand information about the country.
... US politicians today need not experience Chinese advancement in order to develop a favourable impression of China. In fact, it is precisely this “advancement” that triggers their fear and suspicion...
Panda diplomacy dying out
At present, reports on China, including its various technological advancements and its soft power initiatives in South America, appear daily in mainstream American media. Even if US congressmen visited China, witnessed the country’s “achievements”, ate Peking duck, toured historical sites and partook in banquets, they would not be prevented from being “anti-China”.
It is important to note that US politicians today need not experience Chinese advancement in order to develop a favourable impression of China. In fact, it is precisely this “advancement” that triggers their fear and suspicion, not to mention that firsthand experiences might also reveal negative and underdeveloped aspects previously unknown to them — something that has happened to American students I have taught who visited China.
While I may not have a perfect solution for improving exchanges, I believe that China-US relations have entered a new and unprecedented era, in terms of structure, balance of power, generational change, and mutual understanding. It would be naive or even outdated to continue to believe that the “old tune” — leasing pandas, making visits to China, and hosting banquets and tours — is still relevant in the present day.
This article was first published in Lianhe Zaobao as “访问 + 熊猫？中美关系“老调子已唱完””.
