Confucius Institutes (CI; Chinese: 孔子学院; pinyin: Kǒngzǐ Xuéyuàn) are public educational and cultural promotion programs of the state of China.

[6][7] Officials from China have compared Confucius Institutes to language and culture promotion organizations such as Britain's British Council, France's Alliance Française, Spain's Instituto Cervantes.

[9] Confucius Institutes have been accused of being used as a form of "soft power" by the Chinese government, which spends approximately $10 billion a year on CIs and related programs to exercise these initiatives.

[11] There have been concerns about potential censorship regarding certain content, including discussions on individual freedoms and democracy, the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre, Taiwan independence, human rights in Tibet, Falun Gong, and persecution of Uyghurs in China.

But by borrowing the name Confucius, it created a brand that was instantly recognized as a symbol of Chinese culture, radically different from the image of the Communist Party.

[18]: 138  The director of the CI program, Xu Lin, stated that CIs were started to cater to the sudden uptick in interest of the Chinese language around the world.

[14]: 174 Confucius Institutes were previously under Hanban, a non-profit government organization[35] affiliated with the Ministry of Education and operated by a committee of party-state officials.

[42][43] The Chinese Government shares the burden of funding Confucius Institutes with host universities, and takes a hands-off approach to management.

[14]: 172 School officials, researchers, and other people interviewed by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) offered mixed experiences in their autonomy over the curriculum.

Criticisms of the institutes have included administrative concerns about finance, academic viability, legal issues, and relations with the Chinese partner university, as well as broader concerns about improper influence over teaching and research, industrial and military espionage,[53][54] surveillance of Chinese abroad, and undermining Taiwanese influence.

[40][71][73] Underlying such opposition is concern by professors and students that a Confucius Institute would interfere with academic freedom and be able to pressure the university to censor speech on topics the CCP objects to.

[46] After interviewing China scholars, journalists and CI directors, a writer for The Diplomat, a publication covering politics, society, and culture in the Indo-Pacific region, also found little support for the concern that CIs would serve as propaganda vehicles, though some of her sources did note that they would face constraints in their curriculum on matters such as Tibet and human rights.

[75] An article in The New York Times quotes Arthur Waldron, a professor of international relations at the University of Pennsylvania, saying that the key issue is academic independence.

"Once you have a Confucius Institute on campus, you have a second source of opinions and authority that is ultimately answerable to the Chinese Communist Party and which is not subject to scholarly review.

[82][83][84][85] Two months later, in August 2014, Xu Lin, Director-General of the Hanban and Chief Executive of the CIs worldwide, became embroiled in an incident in Braga, Portugal, when Xu ordered her staff to rip pages referring to Taiwanese academic institutions from the published program for the European Association for Chinese Studies conference in Braga, claiming the materials were "contrary to Chinese regulations".

[86] When Roger Greatrex, president of the EACS, learned of this censorship, he ordered that 500 copies of the original program immediately be printed and distributed to participants.

[87][failed verification] He later wrote, "The seizure of the materials in such an unauthorized manner, after the conference had already begun, was extremely injudicious, and has promoted a negative view of the Confucius Institute Headquarters".

[64][90] The Business Spectator concludes that the Xu Lin's hardline behavior highlights one of the biggest problems for Beijing's charm offensive.

[95] On 5 December 2014, PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Hua Chunying denied the House testimony and said "We have assisted with supplying teachers and textbooks at the request of the U.S. side but have never interfered with academic freedom.

[118][119] On 8 March 2021, the U.S. Senate passed a bill that would restrict colleges hosting Confucius Institutes from receiving some federal funding.

The Youth League promoted a motion on the grounds that the Confucius Institute is under the control of the CCP and "is aimed at strengthening the propaganda of Beijing's totalitarian ideology and exerting harmful influence on German universities".

[122] On 4 August 2021, the Human Rights Foundation published a report stating that Confucius Institutes "cultivated a climate of intimidation and surveillance within American classrooms" and "Both information censorship and self-censorship are especially prevalent, as educators, researchers, administrators, and students alike are steered away from learning and critically thinking about topics that may be deemed sensitive to the Chinese government such as democracy, 'the three T's', Hong Kong, the Uyghur genocide, and the CCP's other prevailing human rights infringements.

"[123] The United States National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 withheld federal research funds from colleges and universities that had Confucius Institutes.

[126] In 2024, Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council banned its citizens from working at Confucius Institutes due to national security concerns.

[128]: 63 Retired British diplomat and China expert Roger Garside concludes in his submission to the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission that academic freedom is "inherently compromised by permitting a state agency controlled by the Communist Party of China to establish a teaching operation in any school or university".

[129] While Chinese authorities have been cautious not to have CIs act as direct promoters of the party's political viewpoints, a few critics suggest that the Confucius Institutes function in this way.

[51] Peng Ming-min, a Taiwan independence activist and politician, claims that colleges and universities where a Confucius Institute is established have to sign a contract in which they declare their support for Beijing's "One China" policy.

[135] Marci Hamilton, Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law at Yeshiva University, called this policy "unethical and illegal in the free world".

[137] Sonia Zhang, a former Confucius Institute teacher at McMaster University who quit after one year and since become a whistleblower, said she "had to sign a contract that excluded Falun Gong practitioners and was trained to give Beijing's line if asked by students about Tibet and other sensitive topics".