Kurt Campbell, who deputises Anthony Blinken at the State Department, said at a Council on Foreign Relations event in late June that he would like to see “more Chinese students coming to the US to study humanities and social sciences” – and not “particle physics”.

Campbell also noted during the conversation at the CFR that the US needed to recruit more STEM students, but from India instead of China.

The remarks were picked up by multiple Chinese news outlets, with the Global Times – an English-language publication operating under the auspices of the CCP – even accusing the deputy secretary of “revealing US racism”.

“I think the remarks were made more casually; however, any person that high in the State department should know there’s really no such thing as an unofficial set of remarks.

“I do not think it’s a formal change of policy,” Fox Hollow Advisory’s Brad Farnsworth told The PIE News.

The sentiment was echoed by AIRC’s executive director, Clay Harmon, who also noted that Campbell’s statement is “reverberating across the international education world in ways he perhaps did not anticipate”.

“I have seen multiple headlines suggesting that his comments indicate some policy shift by the US government toward tighter restrictions on Chinese student mobility, although I do not believe this was his intention,” Harmon remarked, speaking with The PIE.

Any person that high in the State department should know there’s really no such thing as an unofficial set of remarks

Brad Farnsworth, Fox Hollow Advisory

The comments come as China was recently surpassed by India as the biggest sending country to the US – although China still sent over 289,000 students in 2023, numbers have been on the wane.

Harmon argued the international education and exchange aspect of the US-China relationship had been a “bright spot” in recent years, despite Campbell’s comments that “China has made it difficult” for such activities, due to China’s “significant commitment to and investment attracting US students to the country.

“In this light, Deputy Secretary Campbell’s comments are unfortunate; however, I have seen minimal reaction from China so far,” Harmon added. No official public response has been made by the Chinese government at the time of writing.

While Harmon is hopeful that reaction from China is muted and the comments aren’t taken seriously, Farnsworth noted that a “whole ecosystem of advisory services in China” including recruiters, advisors and students are “hanging on every word” that the US government says.

“I was disappointed to see those remarks; I think they’re shortsighted, and I don’t know if the deputy secretary has considered the consequences,” he posited.

Campbell, while also noting the need for more Indian students in STEM, said that US institutions were being “careful about the labs” and “some of the activities of Chinese students”.

There have been instances in multiple countries of Chinese students being found conducting “undemocratic” activities, with rare cases involving spying – one student in Canada was denied entry to the country over “concerns he could be coerced into spying”.

The China Scholarship Council has had questions loom over its conduct as some students had to sign “loyalty pledges” in Sweden, and one dissident in the US described some students “ripping down” pro-democracy protest posters put up on California’s USC campus.

Despite these sporadic incidents, stakeholders, including Harmon’s predecessor Brian Whalen, said legislation pitted against exchange between the US and China on an international education level could have a “chilling effect” on relations between the countries.

“While [Campbell] used the broad phrase ‘STEM’ in his comments, he also provided a very specific example of a highly sensitive field of study – particle physics.

“This leads me to assume that the deputy secretary was thinking about national security and industrial espionage,” Harmon explained.

While AIRC recognises that the US government has “legitimate concerns in these areas” regarding China – and that there is room for reasonable limitations – the confusion perhaps stemmed from Campbell “conflating sensitive fields of study with all STEM”.

Deputy Secretary Campbell’s comments are unfortunate; however, I have seen minimal reaction from China so far

Clay Harmon, AIRC

However, Farnsworth called the comments slightly ‘disingenuous”  due to the reality that it’s not US institutions “unilaterally taking these steps” of caution.

“They’re doing it because the US government is telling them to.

“There are US institutions that are receiving a lot of government research funding, and that’s almost everybody – they’ve become very cautious about what access these Chinese students have.

“So to say US universities are being more careful… a more accurate sentence would have been US institutions are reacting to US government policy,” Farnsworth added.

Harmon, nevertheless, said that the remarks should not particularly dent any progress made.

“I am hopeful that the remarks will have little impact on the greater project of increased educational exchange between the two countries,” he added.